← The Jim Acosta Show
The Jim Acosta Show
AFT's Randi Weingarten on Refusing to Fear Fascists, Adam Parkhomenko on New Epstein Documents plus Nick Valencia on ICE Gone Wild.
00:58:12
Loading summary
Transcript98 lines
- [00:00]
A
Foreign welcome to the Jim Acosta show. And Donald Trump's attacks on the Constitution continue. He is defending the Justice Department's indictment of his perceived enemy, former FBI Director James Comey. And here to talk about America's slide into authoritarianism. And that is no overstatement at this, folk, at this point, folks, is something of an expert on the subject. It is Randy Weingarten who comes back to the program. She is the president of the American Federation of Teachers, and she has a brand new book out. It is called why Fascists Fear Teachers, Public Education, and the Future of Democracy. Randy, it's great to see you. Thank you so much for coming on.
- [00:46]
B
Oh, my God. It's my, it is always my honor. I always look forward to talking to you, Jim, and what, and what you're doing right now is just so, so, so important. So thank you.
- [01:00]
A
Thank you. And thanks for writing this incredible book. And, you know, before we jump into the book, and I definitely want to do that, I know you are someone who cares deeply about American democracy. Your thoughts on the indictment of James Comey. He put out a video and said, my heart is broken for the Department of Justice, but I have great confidence in, in the federal judicial system. I'm innocent, so let's have a trial. This hit a lot of people in the gut last night as just a very disturbing moment for our country. What, what were your thoughts?
- [01:36]
B
So I felt for him, I felt for his family, because this is the kind of fear that. Well, let me take a step back. This is not about justice. This is about creating fear and being retaliatory to people you believe have not been on bended knee, and that's what Trump is doing. Comey, I mean, if the irony here is that many people believe that Comey's actions are the reason that Trump was president in the first place.
- [02:20]
A
Right.
- [02:23]
B
But it's so ironic that Comey, who has quite the independent streak which you have to have if you are the head of the FBI or the CIA, if you're going to be basically a servant of the people as opposed to a servant of an authoritarian. And what has happened here is it seems completely bogus what they have charged him with, but it is intended to create fear and trepidation and to stop people from taking the streets or from actually speaking up on freedom's behalf or on their own behalf. And that's what it's intended to. It's not just a retaliation tour by the president. It's not just an abuse of power. It's not just a Violation of law. I'm not saying that in any way to undermine those things, but it is about sending a message to the rest of us that we should shut up. And I think that the most important thing we do is to actually then be out on the streets in force on no Kings Day. Because if just like what happened in June when people across the country, 5 to 7 million, went out and said no, no, no, no, our founders said no Kings, and we say no Kings, I think it's important to send the president and his acolytes a message that regardless of what your ideological beliefs are, America believes in freedom. And we believe in the rule of law. And we believe that people should have free speech as long as it's not violent and not insightful. And we believe in justice and in basic humanity and dignity and basic opportunity and liberty. And I think this is that moment that we need to, every one of us needs to stand up and say it if we're able.
- [04:44]
A
No, I agree with you 100%. And kings don't like folks out there, you know, speaking out against, against the throne. And neither do fascists and, and you and fascists. I mean, this is a hallmark of fascism. Going after one's political enemies and, and using whatever cockamamie kangaroo court system you can come up with to punish people who speak out against you. And, and you have this very important new book. It made the New York Times bestsellers list. Why Fascists Fear Teachers, Public Education and the Future of Democracy. And Randy, I have to read an excerpt from the book because it is, it is just so wonderful and it's so perfect for this moment. It has something to do with something I see on your jacket right now, which I'll get to. But it's book starts off with a bang. It says, among the first to protest the Nazi takeover of Norway were the country's teachers. And since pins and badges with the likeness of the exiled king were now illegal and teachers and students used a clever, subtle signal to show their resistance. They wore paper clips, as Randy is showing right there. When teachers wore them on their lapels, it signified that they remain united, bound together like a stack of papers against Nazi rule. The protest spread. Eventually, students took to wearing whole chains of paper clips, like necklaces. And I hate to think that we're in a moment like this now. We're obviously not as far down the road as the Norwegians felt back then. But why is the paperclip and this anecdote important to you?
- [06:23]
B
So the reason I use this anecdote Is that. And I've now seen other people through a whole different way of being. Eugene Carroll, who I saw after I saw her on Joyce Vest Vance's podcast, I texted her, I said, oh, my God, I use this story in my book. But this is what the story does. It says the two things that are really, really important, I think, in actually believing in community and actually believing in a society and that our future can be better than our past is community and education. And what the paperclip story said to me is that in the darkest hour of these. Of Norway, because it was Nazi occupation. Yes. It wasn't what happened in Poland. It wasn't what happened in Ukraine, where there was. Where there was tremendous devastation, where whole cities were burned down. In Norway, the Nazis just occupied, but they then also took away every freedom, including education. They tried to force every teacher to be in their Nazi group that they were starting. And what teachers basically said is, no. And instead, that they were bound up together with each other and with their kids. And so it created a sense that education was really important and a sense that community was really important. And even in the darkest moments, 12,000 of the 14,000 teachers in Norway wore these paper clips. And I heard this story from Norwegian teachers literally about 10 years ago. And it always stuck with me as a way of saying, how do you bind people together? And look, it was for Norwegian teachers to wear it at that point. It's not as if it was nothing.
- [08:38]
A
Right.
- [08:39]
B
But it's not like it takes a lot to wear a paperclip. And so it was a symbol of being together, of opposing tyranny, of opposing fascism, of opposing that kind of government control of who they were and the fact that their kids did it and the fact that all of them did it, and then the fact that parents did it and the fact that they did it after schools were closed, and they still kept teaching and they still kept wearing the paper clips. I thought it was a very prophetic story, and I wanted to raise it. And I wrote. I use the word fascist very purposely. And.
- [09:25]
A
Yeah, I was going to ask you. Yes.
- [09:27]
B
Yeah. Many people have asked me this week if I regret it. And I often say. And I'll say to you what I've said to them. No, of course not. I was intentional about it because it's a warning. And the people who have raised whether I should have used it, like one of the people who are close to the guy who just said I should be executed, Jeremy Cobb, I mean, I'm like, are you going after the people on Your side who actually use vile language. I wrote it and used the term because it's a warning. And why? Because I watched. I mean, I'm sure you did, too. I watched the end of the election cycle in 2024 and saw just how people had no idea what fascism is. And I'm a high school social studies teacher. I'm to blame, too, that people don't know what fascism is, what authoritarianism is, that we don't have enough time in curriculum to actually teach comparative government. We teach about American history, and frankly, we never got close to. To, you know, fascistic government in America. We, you know, there was. There were bits and pieces in the 30s, but we never got close. And so people don't know it. And when General Kelly tried to create a warning at the end of the, you know, last October, November, people dismissed it as political as opposed to, we need to take this seriously now. I hope we never get there. But if you don't actually understand what fascistic behavior is, then you don't understand what happens when there's this demonization to dehumanization of people so that you no longer not just not like your enemies or your opponents, but you do something like, you know, the president said at Charlie Kirk's funeral when he said to, you know, Kirk's wife, well, I'm glad that you can forgive people, but I can't forgive my enemies. I hate my enemies. And then. Or I hate my opponents. And then look what he just did to Jim Comey.
- [12:00]
A
Exactly. And let's not forget, during the campaign, he used fascistic language. He talked about the enemy from within. And people say, oh, how can you say that? That's over the top. You're. You're bloviating, you're engaging in hyperbole. That, that it is by definition fascistic language.
- [12:18]
B
Right.
- [12:18]
A
And to have it come from a presidential candidate, we. We just have not ever really had that happen in this country, Randy. And I think it's an excellent point that I don't think people are educated enough to understand that it was just staring them right in the face.
- [12:31]
B
And if you don't, I'm a. I mean, this will sound a little silly. I'm a big believer in education. And if you don't, if you don't educate about what the behavior is, if people can't recognize. If they don't recognize the behavior because they've never been taught about it and they just don't believe. How many people can't grok that we could ever lose our democracy. And look you know, how many times did we hear, first Trump term, the guardrail stood, they stood. But look what's happening right now. The disappearing just this week, the disappearing of people, the going after, not for profits, the going after entities that fund democratic causes.
- [13:22]
A
Because you think he's talking about going after Soros.
- [13:25]
B
Going after Soros. I mean, all of this, the saying that Comey is not the last, basically firing of a U.S. attorney because he said that, no, there's no case against Letitia James. I mean, the language that Stephen Miller and J.D. vance used, the fact that after the assassination, that two superintendents, state superintendents of schools, instead of actually saying to teachers all across America, wow, we just all saw this really horrible thing. And in the next couple of days, virtually all of you have done the right thing to try to combination down. What did they do? They didn't put guidance out, the combination down. Two of them put a memo out saying, snitch on your colleagues. And all of this is not just democratic backsliding. It is a sense that the freedoms that we have enjoyed as Americans are really at risk, and that's fascistic behavior.
- [14:47]
A
Yeah. And, and Randy, I have to ask you about something else that I saw in the headlines. The American Federation for Teachers was mentioned and in stories as they, as they relate to Jimmy Kimmel, I saw something Rolling Stone saying that attorneys representing two groups of Disney shareholders are demanding records related to the company's decision to suspend Jimmy Kimmel over at abc. And I believe AFT was one of those. Am I getting that wrong there?
- [15:13]
B
No, no, you're not getting it.
- [15:15]
A
What did you think about that? Because that was. You are a teacher, you obviously believe in free expression, free speech. What happened to Kimmel was a very disturbing.
- [15:23]
B
It was very example.
- [15:25]
A
Yes.
- [15:26]
B
Just like what happened to Colbert was very disturbing. I mean, Tim Snyder says when you get rid of the comedians, when you stop being able to laugh at yourselves, that is a very dangerous, not just a dangerous backsliding of democracy, it's a dangerous backsliding of freedom. Of freedom. And, and, and, and, you know, he uses what happened in Russia when they drove out all of the comedians. So, you know, I mean, separate and apart from. We need a little bit of laughter in our lives, and we need to laugh every now and then. But the, but, but the reason we, you know, we, our members, you know, are, you know, they have retiree assets and they are in pension funds up and down, you know, America. And we are very active in engaging in making sure that our assets are not used for despicable Purposes, you know, we have to be very careful about our fiduciary duty. And look, I give Disney a lot of credit for putting Jimmy Kimmel back on. I think that that was important and I give them credit. But I think that there is a backstory here about what the pressure was on corporate America. I mean, it's, you know, the fact that the United States government now owns a portion of intel, the fact that there's such consolidation in the media industry. There's probably a backstory here. And just like there are people who are saying, release the Epstein files, release the Holman files. You know, on behalf of shareholders of Disney, we, we said, let's get the books and records so that we understand what the decision making process was.
- [17:15]
A
Release the Kimmel files is what it sounds like you're saying.
- [17:17]
B
Exactly, exactly.
- [17:18]
A
Well, we would like to see that. And I have to mention, I mean, there's so much. It's like sipping from a fire hose, as usual with Trump. One of the things I wanted to ask you about, and I don't want to hold you up too long, is that the Education Department really is getting decimated in this country and school systems are being targeted by the Trump Education Department. Apparently in New York City, in Chicago, Fairfax county, the Trump administration is going after funding for those school systems, trying to dictate how they teach, how they care for kids and so on. And again, it feels, I mean, I remember the day, Randy, you've been involved in politics for some time. Conservatives used to say, you know, get the federal government out of local schools, right? This, this administration wants to be hyper involved in local schools and they want to dictate what goes on.
- [18:10]
B
Well, this administration is trying to have it both ways. So first they say over and over again there shouldn't be a federal Department of Education because states should control education. But guess what? States do control education. They've always controlled education. Until Brown versus Board of Education, the Constitution was never interpreted to mean that separate but equal was illegal under the Constitution. Until the Brown case, what we essentially had was 50 and then territories, so say 55 separate ways of doing education around the country. And, and frankly, most of us believe that that should be what happens, that education needs to be locally based. There are many local school boards that are, you know, they're elected, they run the education of our youth in the country, states and localities. So when the Trump administration says it should go back there, it's there already. What, what the federal government does. And I use this story about Lyndon Johnson in my book, not as President, but as a teacher from the Hill Country. And why did he focus so much on civil rights? His lived experience teaching Mexican American kids who were so poor they did not wear shoes to school. And title one, the money that goes for the 25 million kids in America who are poor under the poverty line, that money is to level the playing field so that if you give kids an opportunity to soar at young ages, then they become the innovators of America. And that's why you have the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act. That's why you have the Title one. That's why you have these acts that are run from the Department of Education that are supposed to level the playing field so a poor community that doesn't have the tax base can still actually have funding for their kids. So their kids can have computers or lower class size or sports or things like that. So what the department, what she's really doing, what Trump is really doing, is they're taking away the funding and firing people that anchor opportunity. So we thought, I'll give you one example and talk about what's going on in New York and Chicago right now. Take the issue around student debt. 45 million people in America have some kind of student debt. During the Obama administration, because of that recession, it was all moved from Sallie Mae and Freddie Mac to the Department of Education. We have spent a lot of time trying to make it more affordable, trying to make sure that people who are entitled to various different student debt programs get it. So what has happened since Linda McMahon has been secretary, all those programs are basically stopped. There's thousands of people who can't get an answer to their question. When they have Mohela as a loan servicer about whether they should pay X or Y. And now when they can't, when they don't pay their loan on time, what did Linda McMahon do? Sent them to debt collectors so they can't get their questions answered and she sends them to debt collectors. How is that opportunity in America when the way a lot of kids get opportunity? Look, I believe in career tech ed, and I think we have to have different kind of pathways, but a lot of kids, to get to Opportunity America, you gotta go to college and you don't have the money to go to college and they're basically just throttled, the whole thing. And here in this, in this, what they just did in New York, look, we won a lawsuit that basically said they can't rewrite the civil rights laws. So we won that lawsuit in August with, by the way, a judge appointed by Donald Trump. Yeah, but now what they're doing is they're taking these voluntary grants that they could actually pull, and they're pulling the voluntary grants, the regular formula funding we won. They can't pull that because what they're trying to do today in New York City, in Chicago is just rewrite the civil rights laws. And you can't. That's Congress. It takes Congress.
- [23:07]
A
Exactly.
- [23:07]
B
To actually rewrite the civil rights laws.
- [23:10]
A
Yeah, well, he wants to do everything through Edict these days. And we have to remember how important public schools are in this country. I'm a product of the Fairfax county public school system. I'm the product of student loans. I had student loans to go to a state university in Virginia. I'm very proud of that. Went to James Madison. And none of that would be possible without the commitment that we have to public education in this country. My dad is a Cuban refugee. I mean, what are we supposed to do? Randy, your book is incredible. I'm so glad that you, you know, took the fearless route here. You could have, along with your publisher and your representatives and so on. Kind of, you know, was down the title there to avoid controversy and so on. But I love the fact that you're taking on the controversy and still taking on those battles. Randy, it's so great to talk to you.
- [24:00]
B
Thank you, Jim. I really, really appreciate it. And look, I hope people read it, and I hope people see not only the warning and heed the warning, but see the hope. And that's who school teachers in America are. They are nation builders and they are hope agents. And I hope people see it.
- [24:21]
A
I will. And. And I can't wait to put on my paperclip. I'm going to go put one on after the show is over. So great to see you, Randy. Thanks a lot. We're all going to get out of paperclips. Take care. Safe travels. The wonderful Randy Weingarten from the American Federation of Teachers. I hadn't heard of release the Kimbell files as a potential hashtag yet, but I think Randy came up with it. Let's bring in Adam Parkomenko, Democratic strategist. He might have a few thoughts on Kimmel and so on. Hey, Adam. Great to see you. Adam runs the media substack, and my man, you and I have been talking about doing this for some time. I'm glad we finally made this happen.
- [24:59]
C
Yeah, thanks for having me. And I love the fact that, first of all, Randy is the best. I've known her for 20 years. She has an incredible new book and I love that you can just keep going on an interview and not have to worry about a commercial. Commercial break or a deadline here.
- [25:12]
A
Exactly. This is independent media. We, we don't deal with that corporate, you know, we don't have, you know, nervous executives wringing their hands in a, in a boardroom or an office saying, oh, gosh, Jim and Adam there. We got to make sure they don't say anything controversial. You know, we got to make sure.
- [25:28]
C
Exactly. And we were, we were texting before and I knew that Randy was going a little long, so I figured I had enough time to take a shower after all of today's news.
- [25:35]
A
So we all need a shower after this week, I think. Adam, I'm sure you saw the Epstein new Epstein file documents came out. Let's talk about this. The House Oversight Dems put out some new documents this afternoon. And one of the documents, I'm sure people are starting to come to grips with this at this moment, but one of the documents shows apparently Elon Musk was slated or scheduled at some point to go to the Epstein Island. It says back in December of 2014.
- [26:07]
C
And as soon as I saw this come through, I saw there was a Reed Weingarten and an Adam P. And so I had to look a little closer here just to make, you know, but these are not Randy Weingarten or.
- [26:17]
A
No, no, nor Adam Parkamenko. But it also mentions Prince Andrew is mentioned here. Steve Bannon is mentioned in these documents. Peter Thiel is mentioned in one of these documents. Bill Clinton, I think, is also mentioned and, and Larry Summers. So, I mean, the, the House Oversight Dem said, hey, you know what, we're putting out documents. Doesn't matter if it's Republicans or Democrats. But the, I mean, what's amazing about this, Adam, is, you know, earlier over the summer, you know, was Elon Musk who said, yeah, Donald Trump won't release the Epstein files because he's in the Epstein files. I guess Elon Musk had some authority in this subject.
- [26:54]
C
Yeah, I mean, what's so interesting to me is, you know, when there was sort of that at least first or second temporary breakup between Elon and Donald, we saw that sort of famous tweet, you know, from Elon talking about Trump being in the Epstein files. And I think this was a little bit of a surprise for a lot of people, you know, for a long time. We've hear, you know, we've heard Steve Bannon wanted to build a wall and, and Elon Musk wants to build on Mars, but turns out that those were both excuses for just hanging out with Jeffrey Epstein.
- [27:30]
A
I mean, it's something weird. And I guess we're starting to peel back the layers of the onion. But this is why Donald Trump does not want to release the Epstein files. His buddies are in there, his donors are in there. I mean, it's starting to make a little more sense. I mean, he's in there, obviously.
- [27:51]
C
I think the weird. One of the weirdest things from like a political consultant standpoint is why would you spend so much time during a campaign talking about getting to the bottom of the Jeffrey Epstein list and getting an office and releasing the Epstein list and so forth, ultimately, to have your FBI director come out and of all people, be asked by Senator Kennedy, right, You know, you know, is there an Epstein list who's on it? And his response was, there was only one person who trafficked women and girls on this list, and that was Jeffrey Epstein. Putting aside the fact that, you know, Maxwell is where she is, but the idea that these individuals not only ran a campaign on this, but are allegedly, and I say this as somebody who spent 15 years working for the Clintons, the Republicans are spending all their time right now protecting. Protecting Bill Gates and Clinton. I mean, it's just very strange.
- [28:44]
A
Yeah, exactly. And I mean, they're the ones who were saying all along, oh, the Clintons are going to be there, and all these Democratic figures are going to be in there. And then I think as soon as Pam Bondi and Cash Patel had those FBI agents, you know, go through the files and say, oh, there's. There's Peter Thiel's in here, Elon Musk is in here. We better shut this. We better shut.
- [29:05]
C
And you're bringing up. You're bringing up a different point probably that we should. We should touch on, but the fact that we are where we are right now, you know, first of all, the Wall Street Journal, when they reported the letters in the birthday book, one of the letters that was in the Wall Street Journal for comparison, is a letter that I own. And I started working for Hillary back in 2003, and there was a bunch of crap that they were getting rid of. And at the time, I was like, this is kind of cool letter from Donald Trump to Hillary Clinton congratulating her on her win, you know, not knowing very little about him. But ultimately, that signature was identical to the one in the book. And I think Republicans are very good at using, you know, there's a difference between conspiracy theories and criminal conspiracies. Republicans are very good at using conspiracy theories to cover from and hide the criminal conspiracies that they are, in fact, involved in. What is a little strange to me here is that Elon would have put out the tweet that he did at the time, which ultimately I think was probably one of the few accurate things he's. He said on Donald Trump, given the fact that we learned what we did today. But with that said, it also makes sense why, you know, putting aside the business and the money that Elon wants to make, being involved with Donald Trump, that that relationship and breakup has continued to, you know, bounce back and forth like a pendulum. Seeing the two of them together in Arizona at the, the Charlie Kirk funeral, which, again, Charlie Kirk should have never been killed. But to me, you know, it wouldn't have been a funeral without fireworks, obviously, with Donald Trump.
- [30:42]
A
No, of course. Yeah. And, and Adam, one of the things you and I talk about from time to time is just how lame the, the media coverage is of a lot of this stuff. And during Trump 2.0, it's about as lame. It's the lamest I've ever seen it. It's. It's beyond lame. It's. It's tragically awful and just completely not meeting the moment that we're in right now. Your thoughts on, on how the press has been covering this, this Trump 2.0?
- [31:11]
C
It's a, it's a great question, and I think it's something that we all probably, you too, on this end struggle with on a daily basis, because we, we speak about entities and legacy media as an umbrella, and when we hold those entities accountable for the lack of reporting or the lack of real questions or, you know, exactly what your, the premise of your question is. Unfortunately, when somebody like me attacks that entity, it takes away from people like you at the time who are at CNN doing good work. Right. And so it's always, it's always a tough balance. I mean, NBC's had a couple really incredible reporters go over there recently and same thing. Washington Post has recently lost an incredible reporter to NBC. I think legacy media as a whole is failing from the top down. Things are very draconian. I often say that if the sort of older generation here is able to figure out how to put YouTube on their TV and get it in other ways, that'll be the end of it. Because survey after survey that we see shows that, you know, YouTube and things like Substack and beyond is where people are getting their, their news. But with that said, it's sad to see because there's folks that have put in their entire career like you and many of other good friends, mutual friends of ours that sort of get folded into that, who are trying to do their best.
- [32:37]
A
Yeah, no, and I like being an independent media now. I've enjoyed it. It's been great. I get to do what I want. I get to drop some F bombs here and there. It's, you know, I do what I want. It's great. There's. There could be a government shutdown coming up in a few days as a demo, putting your Democratic consultant hat back on. What should the Democrats do? I wrote a piece for Substack earlier in the day that I, you know, they're talking about, you know, Dems are saying, okay, we'll play ball with you guys. If you can give us some, some Obamacare subsidies to extend Obamacare subsidies, which is a, which is a great idea. That's totally fine. To me, I would say that we need to halt on ICE operations in this country for Democrats to go along with the Republicans and keeping the government running. What's happening with these ICE raids and the way that they're body slamming people and beating the shit out of people, it's totally out of control. But your thoughts on what the Democrats should do in this moment, that's just my two cents.
- [33:36]
C
Yeah. No, and just for my two cents, I totally agree with you because I spent 15 years as a reserve curve with D.C. police and it's, it's really sad to see. I used to think that there was like one or two bad apples. Now I think that there's probably more than that that are emboldened by what's going on. But in terms of the shutdown, my first response would probably be, hey, we need to play like Mitch McConnell. But the one thing I know about Mitch McConnell is he didn't really like shutdowns. So with that said, I think in general, Democrats need new leadership. Right. I think this is. People are always sort of surprised to hear this from me, having spent and sort of been branded as a Clinton person. But I think we've got two people from New York who are just not meeting the moment. On the Democratic side when you've got a mayor's race and somebody follows the process and does what they're supposed to do and they don't receive the endorsement of the leaders. And the leaders, at least one leader on the House side decides that they're going to vote for a Charlie Kirk resolution before they endorse the guy who went through the process and won the.
- [34:38]
A
Democratic nomination, Mayor Jeffrey's not supporting.
- [34:41]
C
Yeah, Hakeem, it's a problem. Same thing with Jay Jacobs, who is a longtime friend of mine. But Jay Jacobs should not be the state party chair. You know, he's been a great bundler. Great, great donor. But if you're gonna not endorse that, you shouldn't be there. With that said, putting that aside. And I think Hakeem's done a good job holding the caucus together. I think that we should shut the government down. And it's not going to be us. It's going to be the Republicans. We need to step up and play like them. It's the same thing I've said for years about Citizens United. You can be against Citizens United, but it's here to stay. It's not going anywhere. We cannot unilaterally, you know, unilaterally disarm as Democrats anymore. We have to fight fire with fire. I've been saying it for six years. A lot of people used to give me a ton of shit about it. And we are. We are, you know, where we are today. And I think it's time that Democrats really step up. There's been polls recently that have come out that show that people look to folks like AOC as leaders. You know, our party spends more time trying to minimize the voices of people like Jasmine Crockett than they do lifting them up. And one thing that Bill Clinton told me back in 2002 that has always stuck with me is, you know, winning is about addition, not subtraction. And I think that this party spends more time focused on what we can do to silence important voices and. Or play by the rules like they existed when we had, you know, people like our law and order friend from Tennessee in the Senate and John McCain and others. Craig Smith of Wyoming, you know, a U.S. senate where you used to be able to name all hundred senators and you had respect no matter who they were. Lindsey Graham, who at the time, when I worked for Hillary, used to do Bible study every Sunday with Hillary Clinton. That's not where we are today. And we need to.
- [36:24]
A
It's been ripped to shreds. Yeah.
- [36:26]
C
Been ripped to shreds. And we need to. We need to fight back. We need to. We need to stop this. But we also need to look ahead and assuming there are going to be elections, we need to prepare to make sure we have the right leadership so that if we do take things back, we don't play like we've been playing year after year after year.
- [36:44]
A
Yeah, well. And people forget. I mean, Bill Clinton was Hardly the establishment choice. Back in 1992, when he became the Democratic nominee and then went on, won the presidency, he took the country by storm. He didn't really build a movement, I guess, in the way that Barack Obama, Bernie Sanders built a movement. He just outsmarted and out hustled a lot of establishment politicians at that time. And so people forget that he was a bit of an upstart back in the day.
- [37:08]
C
That's such a good point that you make. Most people don't realize, and I think, you know, Craig Smith from. From Arkansas back in the day, what they did was. I think it was November or December, but they got in in 1991 right at the end. And it was something that Hillary Clinton always wished that she could do was have a very short campaign when she ran against Donald Trump. That wasn't the case based on what he got in. But, you know, Barack Obama was something very special in the Coming back from, obviously, when he gave that critical speech in 2004 at John Kerry's convention.
- [37:39]
A
Yeah. And Barack Obama was not the establishment choice. Hillary Clinton was the establishment choice in 2008. And Barack Obama, Kennedy, David Axelrod, and those guys said, well, you know, hey, we're just gonna. We're gonna elbow you out of the way. And this is. This is gonna be us. And. And I think that's how Democratic politics work. And it's. And. And it's a little surprising to me to see the leaders sort of kind of hold Mom, Donnie, you know, by the wayside there and. And not give him the chance that he's. That he's earned. I mean, he's earned this chance in New York.
- [38:08]
C
Yeah. To me. To me, it's shocking. I mean, to go back and I've been very critical of my party on a couple New York. I've said we have a New York problem in New York and in D.C. that being when things started happening with Eric Adams, our leaders refused to say anything. And at the time, Hochul was in the same spot. I mean, to me, this was a layup. If anybody has somehow learned from that lesson, it was the governor of New York who, despite the fact that, you know, she came out and triangulated a little bit in her endorsement, she still made the endorsement.
- [38:43]
A
She did it.
- [38:43]
C
And she did, in a way. Yeah. That I think people were comfortable with.
- [38:48]
A
Yeah. I have to say, I. There are times when I'm. I'm very impressed by Kathy Hogle, and I. People might want to throw a shoe at me for saying that, but I think you know, she settled things down in New York, and it's, you know, it's not Andrew Cuomo. It's not. It's not been a show, at least not yet. At least we hope not. But.
- [39:05]
C
And I'll say, Jim, the other thing, too, to me, that was a little surprising, knowing Bill Clinton as well as I do, is when he got behind Cuomo in that primary, if you go back to his administration, there were two people that he never was really a fan of in the administration, and that was Bill Richardson and Andrew Cuomo. So when I saw Bill Clinton come out and endorse Andrew Cuomo, to me that was like, all right, they're all in. Throughout the party. Yeah, you know, whatever they can to stop this guy. And I think the guy carried pretty much everything except for maybe, you know, Nadler's district, which will be an interesting congressional race. That will be interesting considering that Cuomo outperformed him there. But again, people in New York, even in that race, need to remember that you're going to have people who voted for Andrew Cuomo, and you're going to have people that voted for Zoran that might be interested in you. So, once again, you know, be about addition, not subtraction.
- [39:56]
A
And I think the Dems are just a little bit in the wilderness right now. This happens when you're out of power and you kind of don't know what you're doing and you're fumbling around, you're in the forest. And I was started to write about this, and then I got pissed off about the ice raid, so I wrote about that. But I. I really enjoyed the excerpt from Kamala Harris's book where she outs Gavin Newsom for going hiking and not calling her back. When she was in this. In this pickle, you know, after Joe Biden had that disaster debate performance, and she was like, what do I do? Should I jump in? How should I do this? She reached out to Gavin Newsom, and he texted back, gone hiking. And then she wrote, you know, he never got back to me, or something like that. And I just thought for a moment there, I was like, okay, that we need more of that, where she just said, you know what? Fuck it. I'm just going to put it in my book. And, you know, and I just. There's a little. There's sort of an authenticity deficit in the Democratic Party right now. And whenever we see glimmers of it, I think the folks at home are saying, aha, that's it. I want that. It's like that meme of Leo DiCaprio. And once upon a time in Hollywood, they're pointing at the TV and saying, that's it. I want.
- [41:02]
C
It's like the two. You know what I mean, we have right now. Yeah, look, I think that that. Look, first of all, that's so true. It's something that. That people wanted to see more of from Hillary. Right. And Hillary is. You know, I've. I've basically spent my entire adult life one way or another, working with her, and I. And she's a thousand times smarter, so I will never be in a position to criticize her thinking and all that. However, you know, the Hillary that I know is the Hillary, you know, that when we had our. Our. Our baby and we had an issue, she was the first person there, and she got us a night nurse for a month. And. And she talks exactly the way that you were just talking. And so Hillary has said this before, and. And so is Kamala. But the higher that women. Hillary's words reach, the more their negatives go down or negatives go up, the more they're hated and so forth.
- [41:53]
A
Yeah.
- [41:53]
C
I think what we saw from Kamala is her truth, her story, something that not only she deserves to tell, but we've. We've gone basically nine, ten months with people telling her story for her. And the Gavin piece, I think, goes twofold. One, there's a history between the two of them. You know, when she. When. When he was, you know, running for governor, Senator, a pause sort of, you know, who's going to run for what. Kind of the same thing we see in Ohio right now with Sherrod Brown and whether, you know, Tim Ryan's ultimately going to run for governor. But at the same time, she'll probably be the first to say that, you know, Gavin was one of the best communicators and. And surrogates that was out there after that. But to me, yeah, on his part, that was. That was political malpractice. And. But. But she also owned it at the start. She said that she wishes that she had stepped up and said something where they're. There was just sort of this assumption that Joe Biden was running again. You know, Joe Biden was the perfect candidate, the perfect time to bring this country together, win and heal this country. He was not who we should have had and for reelection. And it just sort of moves so quickly. There was never a conversation about it.
- [43:02]
A
Yeah. Yeah. We should do this again, Adam, because I want. I want to talk about this stuff further. And when you get rolling on Democratic politics, it's really fun because the other thing I was going to say is I think Kamala Harris should have picked Pete Buttigieg.
- [43:16]
C
I do, too. And I had a whole conversation with Waj Ali about this the other day. Again, I think that would have brought out a lot more people than it.
- [43:24]
A
Would have energized things. Yeah. Yeah.
- [43:27]
C
Our party is always too afraid of our base and republic. I always say, Republicans don't win elections. Democrats lose them. And they speak to their base, and it is time to that. We listen to our base, we bring them together, and we do these things that are risky, but, you know, high risk, high reward.
- [43:45]
A
Totally. Absolutely. Great to see you, man. Great to see Adam. Let's do it again. All right. Good to see you. Take care. I want to quickly go to my buddy Nick Valencia, because I woke up. Nick Valencia. How are you, man? Good to see you.
- [44:01]
D
Hey, Jim. So thankful you invited me on. Thanks, man.
- [44:03]
A
No, no, no. Of course.
- [44:04]
D
Course.
- [44:04]
A
I woke up this morning, and I, you know, as we all do, pick up my phone. I start going through my socials. I'm looking at my. The videos that are in there and stuff, and there must have been three or four crazy, batshit crazy videos of ICE agents, you know, tackling people, body slamming people, wrestling them to the ground. Men, women, legally in the country, undocumented, you name it. And I. I guess we have some video. There's one in Iowa, right? We can show the one in Iowa. Iowa City. This is the one right here.
- [44:41]
D
Yeah.
- [44:46]
C
I'm a combat bat.
- [44:48]
B
No, I'm a combat vet.
- [44:50]
A
Look at this.
- [44:55]
B
Are you a cop?
- [44:56]
C
So when you eye for a cop, hey.
- [44:59]
A
This goes on for several minutes, and one of the officers pulls out a taser. It looks like he wanted to tase him at one point. Nick, you've been covering this stuff extensively. It feels like it's. It's. It's getting worse. What we're seeing, you know, and these.
- [45:12]
D
Are the kinds of videos that we saw very early on out of Los Angeles when the Trump deportation army hit the streets of la. When. When ice, you know, was the siege of Los Angeles in those first weeks of June. This is a direct result of the hiring spree and the fast tracking of unqualified people. You know, you have the bonuses, you're lowering the requirements and the standards. And now, Jim, what you're getting. What we're all seeing now, what we're waking up to is videos of these incidents, which are already very traumatic to begin with. They're already, you know, when you go and basically this is family separation 2.0. You know, you're going to expect to encounter some resistance with these family members, especially now. And what we're seeing in these videos is exactly what you talked about. We're not seeing a de escalation of the situation. We're not seeing, you know, these animated feelings, these big feelings, be tempered down. We're seeing these ICE agents who are responsible for, you know, keeping things safe out there really, while they're doing their job and they're making things worse. And I bring that up, what we talked about or what we saw in Los Angeles, you know, there was a lot of people that were very concerned early on about these men basically being on the streets in mass, unidentified, not wearing badges. And that's exactly what we saw in the Des Moines video that you're playing there. Two men playing clothes. Who knows who they are, you know.
- [46:30]
A
And here's another one in Hyattsville, Maryland, this guy was tackled in the middle of the street. Channel 4 in Washington played this one. This is just right outside D.C. and the ICE agent here, the ICE, the ON officer here is pulling, pulls out his gun at one point and starts waving it around at the bystanders who are videotaping this.
- [46:48]
D
Yeah, it's really crazy here. It's like clearly he's, you know, it's like the Keystone Cops here, such a clumsy detention. His gun, you'll see here, he reaches for it, it drops to the ground. It appears as though the man that's being taken into custody may have pushed it away. But then this is what's really crazy here. He's draws his weapon and then he points it at the bystanders. You know, and this is the fear that people have had is who are these individuals who are on the streets? What kind of qualifications do they have? And it really gets into some of our reporting that we got out earlier. You know, we heard some of these cities were going to start checking the IDs of these suspected federal agents. We heard that happen in Los Angeles. You know, we filed an open records request, a California open records request. In Los Angeles, there was really dramatic press conference in late late June. The city was a powder keg. And the cops came out and said, look, these videos that you see, these really dramatic detentions where people are in mass. We're going to start verifying people. So we waited three months and in good faith we put in an open records request. Jim, we got the records back. Either they've not done it at all and just, it was really just sort of, you know, performance to try to get the city to calm down, or it's been a haphazard way of keeping records. But the fear is really what we're seeing now is this hiring spree of ICE agents under qualified people that are fanned out across the country and are ratcheting up these arrests and these detentions. Someone's going to get hurt. It's only a matter of time.
- [48:13]
A
Yeah. And we have to say, I mean, I'll just say it, that what took place in Dallas earlier this week was unconscionable. It was an attack on, it appears, ICE agents. We don't have the full results of the investigation. The shooter ended up killing two migrants, it appears. All of that is just absolutely awful. But it's happening in the middle of what has become a very intense climate of fear in this country surrounding these ICE operations. And it seems to me somebody's got to call the timeout here and put the pause button in place on these operations, because it just seems out of control. I noticed that National Public Radio did a. A piece on this just recently where they went to an ICE recruitment event, and they found a lot of people who are signing up to become ICE agents are Trump supporters. They're. They're people who say they love Trump and are attracted to what they see on, say, Stephen Miller's social media feed and so on.
- [49:09]
C
It's.
- [49:09]
A
It's. I mean, this is part of the reason why you're seeing these things take place.
- [49:13]
D
And we're see. We're seeing a lack of humanity, a lack of empathy and compassion, and we're seeing it becoming sort of one of the talking points in the Republicans in this Trump 2.0 era. And I am, you know, I'm 42. I'm still old enough to remember the era of the compassionate conservative. And that seems to have been wiped away. And it's. And it's sort of like selective compassion.
- [49:32]
C
Right?
- [49:33]
D
You know, be compassionate for Charlie Kirk. Be compassionate for the ICE agents who were targeted. No mention of the actual detainee who was shot and killed by our DHS secretary. When they talk about these incidents, it's like what you're saying is unkind. And our attacks on ICE is the result of the rhetoric being spread out, unwilling to even acknowledge that the same rhetoric is coming out of their party. And so it's not in good faith. And what we're seeing right now is what we've been seeing for the last three months, you know, sort of emerge from Los Angeles and spread across the country. Is the federal government not moving in good faith and not following the rules, basically. And now this is the chaos on the streets. Cruelty is the point where you have, you know, thousands basically, of unqualified, untrained Keystone Cops out there in charge of Immigration Customs Enforcement. And it's resulting in these crazy videos that we're seeing.
- [50:27]
A
That's right. And they're not just doing it to migrants or undocumented people. They did it to a woman who is running for Congress in Illinois. I believe we have that video, too. She's running for Congress in Illinois. She was protesting outside of throwing me.
- [50:41]
B
To the ground, but essentially over a fellow. And so I went to check on that person, and that was all the justification an officer needed to pick me up and throw me to the ground despite being half his size.
- [50:56]
A
And I'm sure, Nick, you saw that one, too.
- [50:58]
D
Yeah, I saw that one, too. And anyone can get it right now. And we know that, you know, the activists, the people, the. The lawmakers that go to these detention facilities who have been denied access or have been roughed up like this. Like this representative here.
- [51:11]
A
Yeah, you know, Gazella, she's running for Congress in Illinois. Go. I'm sorry.
- [51:15]
D
Go ahead. And Tom Homan has made himself clear that, you know, anyone can get it. And so this goes back to my point. It's like, it's not this selective with a scalpel going after just the bad actors, those that are violent criminals. Look, Jim, no one wants pedophiles living next door to them. No one wants violent criminals, murderers. I think everyone, you know, the left gets painted with this broad stroke that we want everyone in that like it just open borders. No one wants violent criminals here. The fact is, though, that the administration is not just going after the criminals. They're going after the cooks. They're going after anyone that gets in the way. And again, I know I keep bringing up California, but that was the testing ground early on. We're seeing activists targeted. We saw the. The state attorney there, basically Trump up charges. You get this headline of them going after and being tough on the activists, and. And then very quietly, these charges are dismissed. So they get the headline of acting tough on the activists and overcharging effectively, and then quietly, the charges are dismissed. So it's like you said, the representative, it's the undocumented immigrant. It's the American citizen. Anyone can get it in Trump's America.
- [52:22]
A
No question about it. Nick Valencia, great to see you as always, my man. Let's pass before the next time. Absolutely. Well, this you covered it so closely, and this is not ending. And until somebody figures out a way to slow Trump's role when it comes to this mass deportation operation that we're seeing in this country right now, we're going to see more abuses like this. And I think, Nick, you're absolutely right. We're going to get to a point where you're going to see a lot of people get hurt and possibly die because of this kind of activity. And it's just not who we are as a country.
- [52:55]
D
No, not at all. I really appreciate you highlighting this and continue to come back to this issue. Jim. We're focused on it at Nick Valencia News. If you guys want to know more about what's going on with immigration on a daily basis, we've got exclusive reporting. They're constantly getting scoops. Thank you so much for having us on.
- [53:09]
A
You got it, Nick. Great reporting as always. We'll check you out there. Thanks, Nick. Have a great weekend. And I just. I want to end very quickly. I don't have a whole closing monologue, except to say that I want to remember a friend of mine who passed away. The legendary Washington attorney, book agent. You name it, he's done it all. Bob Barnett. There he is right there. He passed away at the age of 79 years old. Bob was an attorney of mine for several years. But, you know, listen, I'm. I was one of the little fish in Bob's pond. Speaking of Bill Clinton, I was on the phone with Bob one time, and, uh, Bob says, jim, can you hold on a second? And he came back. He goes, jim, I've got President Clinton on the other line. I've got to go. I said, bob, I think you better take that call. You go right ahead. But that's kind of who Bob Barnett was. He was an attorney to just the absolute biggest movers and shakers in Washington, D.C. in the media world, in politics. He told me that he had represented Jesse Watters over at Fox in addition to yours truly. So Bob had clients all over the place. But the. The thing that made Bob so special is the way he would pass on his wise counsel. There would be times when I would get frustrated and flustered over this, that or the other thing and my daily work. And he would just say, jim, just let it go. Just let it go. You know. You know, he. He had a way of. He had a grandfatherly and fatherly way of just putting his hand on your shoulder and talking some sense to you. And, you know, the reason I had him on my show back at my old place. And one of the reasons I had him on is because Bob was a legendary debate prep professional. He was the person that you would turn to to prepare for presidential debates. He helped Bill Clinton prepare for his debates, and obviously he aced those tests. He helped prepare Geraldine Ferraro when she was Walter Mondale's running mate back in 1984, and so on. And so Bob was just one of those institutions in Washington. You could walk into a famous D.C. restaurant like the Occidental and see Bob there meeting with some big mover and shaker and having some important conversation that you wish you could listen in on because you knew that something very important was being talked about. But Bob is also, I think, a reflection of a different Washington that used to exist where Democrats and Republicans could sit around the same lunch table or dinner table, break bread with one another and put aside their differences and just have a martini, have a steak, get to know one another a little bit better. And I do. I do mourn Bob's passing. I send on my condolences to his wife, Rita Braver, the legendary CBS News correspondent. But I also mourn what Bob represented, and that is a Washington that is no longer with us, at least not right now, where both sides could have a civil dialogue. Both sides could engage in a civil debate over the issues. And Bob was a master preparing his side for those debates. And I suspect he's handing out debate tips wherever he is right now. So Bob Barnett, the legendary icon of Washington politics and lawyering, he has passed away at the age of 79. Rest in peace, Bob. Thanks so much. And thanks to all of you for watching this week. Still reporting from Washington, I'm Jim Acosta. Have a great weekend. Sa.