← The Jim Acosta Show
The Jim Acosta Show
ICE Pepper Sprays Sen. Andy Kim Who Joins Jim plus Glenn Kirschner and FL Dem for Governor David Jolly
01:01:35
Loading summary
Transcript65 lines
- [00:00]
A
Foreign.
- [00:06]
B
Welcome to the Jim Acosta show. And it's another day that ends in Y and Donald Trump's war on the truth in America. The latest case in point, the Justice Department is now removing hundreds of its own news releases on January 6th prosecutions. Let's discuss with former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner, the host of Justice Matters on substack and YouTube. Glenn, great to see you.
- [00:28]
A
Hey, good to be with you, Jim.
- [00:30]
B
And, you know, I saw this story and I know there's a lot going on, but, you know, this pisses me off. And, you know, it's, it's been reported in lots of different places. Now, Time magazine saying that DOJ has removed hundreds of news releases related to criminal prosecutions connected to the January 20 or January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol from its website characterizing the records as, quote, partisan propaganda. The DOJ actually put out a statement saying that they're proud to reverse the DOJ's weaponization under the Biden administration. They go on to say, we'll do everything in our power to make whole those who were persecuted for political purposes. I mean, this goes right, this is right in line with the BS weaponization fund. Glenn, your thoughts on all of this? Because, you know, this, this, I'm infuriated over this. And I know this is an everyday occurrence, but this is outrageous, Jim.
- [01:28]
A
This, this is like adding insult to injury to injustice. And I think it's a real miscalculation on Todd Blanche's part because I see it as potentially feeding into a criminal conspiracy to commit theft of government property, our tax dollars. Now, first of all, as a career prosecutor, you know, when you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail. So when you're a prosecutor, everything looks like it needs a criminal investigation. And this does. And I hope it will be investigated beginning on what, 12:01pm January 20, 2029, when the rule of law comes back into the light of day. But here's the thing, Jim, what we know, this horrific slush fund, which is illegal and unconstitutional and corrupt and immoral, right? Donald Trump not only told these folks, the people who I assume will be applying for a payout from the slush fund, the insurrectionists, he not only told them to go attack the Capitol, fight like hell, or you won't have a country anymore. Now go stop the certification, stop the steal. And they did. He pardoned them and now he wants to pay them. So what's clear is that Donald Trump doesn't back the blue. Donald Trump backs those who, who beat the Blue first with pardons and now with payoffs. I believe these, the three court cases that are now pending will probably, you know, bring the slush fund to a screeching halt with first temporary injunctions and then first temporary restraining orders and then preliminary injunctions. That's my hope. But to go, to go to your point, what has Todd Blanche done? There was a one place to go to easily see the evidence that supports the prosecutions of the January 6th insurrectionists. And Jim, it's evidence that was collected and easily accessed on DOJ's website. That would do what? It would prove that the J6 insurrectionists should not get payouts from this $1.7 $1.8 billion slush fund. So what has Todd Blanche done? He is erased. Try to erase evidence that would inform the public about the corruption. And I see that as part and parcel of an ongoing conspiracy against rights, the rights of the American people, a conspiracy to commit theft of taxpayer money. And Todd Blanche is, I think, creating incriminating evidence that will be used against who Todd Blanch in the future. That's the way I Obviously they're trying to George Orwell this thing and turn the Department of Justice into the Ministry of Truth and try to whitewash history. They can't whitewash history, Jim. These records still exist in the federal court system, but they're not easily accessed. And you know, somebody can't just go on what's called pacer, which will allow them to access all court records and begin to put this stuff together the way they could have seen it on DOJ's website. So I see Todd Blanche as corruptly facilitating slush money payments for people who don't deserve them.
- [04:49]
B
Interesting. So you see, this is all connected going back to this corrupt government weaponization fund, this slush fund for coup plotters. And you know the other thing that's interesting about this, Glenn, you were just mentioning a few moments ago, it sounds as though that a case and just this is my characterization, I'm saying this on the fly, so feel free to correct me. It sounds as though you're saying is that a criminal case could potentially be made on the. The theft of government money, of money from the treasury to. To create this government weaponization fund. I also wonder if, and maybe this is outside of your purview, but feel free to weigh in whether the case is being made for an impeachment and removal proceeding for the acting Attorney General or for members of the administration, perhaps when the Democrats take control of the Congress as it relates to this fund, it sounds as though there are multiple levels to this.
- [05:47]
A
Yeah, I think there are. And I think if Congress is in the control of the Democrats after the midterms, I think we're going to see not only really rigorous, aggressive investigations, but probably articles of impeachment for any number of folks. And that will be a good thing. You know, and some people will jump right to the end game and say, well, they'll never be convicted by the Senate and removed. To which I say, that doesn't matter. What matters is you do the right thing every step of the way if the evidence supports it and you let the chips fall. Imagine if I as a career prosecutor, said, well, I don't know that a conviction is certain once we get to a jury trial, so I'm not going to investigate and indict people. That's not the way good law enforcement or good government works. But I see all of this as connected. The other thing that I haven't seen, a lot of people put these data points together, but, Jim, there are three motions to dismiss pending in federal court right now, one for Steve Bannon, but the other two are for the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys for their seditious conspiracy convictions, which are over. Those cases are over and done. There's really nothing to dismiss. But Jeanine Pirro filed motions saying, we are moving to dismiss these convictions in the interests of justice. First of all, that's laughable. Nothing could be further from the truth. But, okay, you know what I'm doing. If I'm the three trial court judges who now have these motions before them, Judge Amit Mehta in the Oath Keepers case and then two Trump appointees, Judge Carl Nichols in the Bannon case and Judge Tim Kelly in the Proud Boys case, I would say, fine. Jeanine, I am ordering you to come into my courtroom, take the stand, take the oath, and you're going to present evidence to me. You're going to prove to me that this is in the interests of justice, as you wrote in your motion to dismiss. And guess what, Jim? She'll fall flat on her face. She can't prove it up. And then, as the judge, I would say, motion denied. We will not dismiss these convictions. You want to appeal me, appeal me. But here is what they're doing. They're trying to use the court to be sort of tacitly complicit, because if the judges sign those motions to dismiss in the interest of justice, the Oath Keepers, the Proud Boys and Bannon will hold them up and say, look, I got a court ruling here that dismissed My prosecution in the interest of justice. So now I need a payout from the slush fund. This is all connected. It's all dirty, it's all nefarious and it's all immoral and much of it, I believe is illegal.
- [08:22]
B
Yeah, and talk about the Todd Blanch aspect of this a bit more, Glenn. I mean, Todd Blanche is, is the architect of this. He has made himself, he has exposed himself, it seems to me, to a great degree. And every time he goes out there and talks about it, he's exposed even more. He's sounding like Donald Trump's personal attorney on a, on a daily basis. And, you know, to, to create this kind of slush run and put his name all over it. It just says to me, you know, he's gonna have to, he's gonna, he's gonna have to be hauled in to testify at hearings when the Dem. If control, I assume, of the House and perhaps the Senate come next year.
- [09:03]
A
And even more importantly, from this old prosecutor's perspective, he'll need to be criminally investigated beginning in January of 2029. I mean, the minute I heard him say, if Donald Trump fired me, I would say, thank you, sir, I love you. You can't make that up. And why would any self respecting government official say that? And then when I saw him bring the completely baseless 8647 case, the great Comey Seashell caper, when I saw him authorize that prosecution, Jim, that is absolute insanity. Because James Comey committed no crime and it will be dismissed on the motion. It won't make it to a jury trial. But that showed me he was willing to do anything and everything to try to keep his job. Because it looks like maybe Pam Bondi wasn't aggressive enough in abusing the rule of law and the constitutional rights of targets of Donald Trump's wrath. So he ratcheted it up. But let me just add, I am less concerned with the numbers 86, 47, and I'm really focused on the numbers 48 and 30 these days. You know, when, when Richard Nixon had his government officials and his executive branch officials, his criminal associates committing crimes with him and for his benefit, I'll bet they all felt untouchable.
- [10:20]
B
I'll bet that they felt like, yes,
- [10:22]
A
no way, the rule of law is coming for us. And what happened, 48 of them were criminally convicted and 30 of them went to prison. That is what awaits, I believe, Todd Blanche and the rest of Trump's cabinet. So we'll put 8,647 aside. And we'll focus on 4,830, because that is the accountability to come.
- [10:42]
B
And what about, because I can just hear the comments from, from subscribers and viewers and so on. What about Trump pardoning all these folks? What about, what about Trump giving Todd Blanche a pardon and so on?
- [10:52]
A
Yeah, I hate to sound like Elizabeth Warren, but I could sound like, you know, people a lot worse. I think there's a plan for that. I think there's a plan for that. So, yes, the Supreme Court has tried to, you know, shower all kinds of immunity against prosecution on Donald Trump. But I think what we have to do is we have to challenge in court every corruptly delivered pardon. Can you imagine if Donald Trump told his DOJ officials or his military members, I'm going to need you to back the truck up to Fort Knox. I'm going to need you to unload all of the United States wealth, and I'm going to need you to deliver it to me and my friends and my family, and then I will pardon all of you. That is sort of a variation on what Donald Trump has been doing and perhaps intends to do if he delivers these pardons to the people who have been doing his criminal bidding, his dirty work. We have to take those to court and challenge them. Win, lose or draw. Let federal judges start to say, yes, this is what the Constitution envisioned. This is what the framers of the Constitution aspired our federal government to be and a chief executive to be. They wanted him to have this kind of power to steal everything from the United States treasury and then pardon everybody so they would get away with it. Jim, Supreme Court precedent changes over time, and usually it takes a long time, and it usually changes for the better. Right. That arc of the moral universe typically bends toward justice, but they've tried to reverse the arc. The Supreme Court, the six, you know what I call the six compromise Supreme Court justice majority. So we have to challenge those pardons win, lose or draw. I happen to believe the public outcry will be so severe against these corruptly delivered pardons. Not that the judiciary is supposed to respond to public pressure, but they do. They listen to it. I think there's a chance we can actually cut back on presidential immunity and the pardon power. I don't think that's Pollyanna. It's a fight we have to take on.
- [12:59]
B
I think you're absolutely right. And I think that what we're seeing right now is, is corruption on a massive scale that we've never seen before in this country. And the weaponization fund, I think has, I think, surprised people inside the Trump administration and Donald Trump himself, maybe, because it has crystallized and made it so clear to people how corrupt this government is right now. And you're right, I think people are going to be clamoring. The public is going to be clamoring for accountability when this is all said and done. But the question to me, Glenn, is how much damage has been done to the institution over at the Justice Department. You and I have had lots of conversations about this, but there's a New York Times story just out today about how the Justice Department is having trouble with grand juries and judges. And it says here that under Donald Trump, the Justice Department has had serious difficulties presenting cases to grand juries, running into problems that would have seemed unthinkable a year ago. In the past several months, prosecutors have repeatedly failed to persuade grand juries that the cases they have brought warrant criminal charges. And if it were not unusual enough, they've also been admonished at least three times since last November by federal judges who have accused them of misconduct. And so it sounds as though they've written off so many people at the DOJ that they've got a lot of people in there who shouldn't be trying cases. And the judges and the grand juries are just not buying what they're bringing into court.
- [14:26]
A
Yeah. Whether it's a product of incompetence by these new lawyers that. That are willing to compromise their ethics and go to Todd Blanch's and Donald Trump's Department of Justice, whether it's incompetence or nefariousness or some combination thereof, I want to first give a shout out to the grand jurors in courts from coast to coast. They are, first of all, they're just regular folk. They're not government officials. They're not government employees. They're just regular people who happen to get a summons from the court saying, congratulations, come on down, you've been selected to do grand jury duty. And, Jim, they're sitting as the conscience of the community, and they're a bulwark against executive branch abuse and overreach in a way I wish Congress would be. But God bless the grand jurors who are standing up and saying no. So much for that old saying, a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich if the prosecutors tell them to. No. These grand juries are standing up and demanding good, reliable evidence if they are going to convict, and they're saying no. Thank goodness for the grand jurors and the trial jurors. Who are reaching not guilty verdicts based on these, you know, pathetic cases that Jeanine Pirro, at least in D.C. has presented to them. But to answer your first question, yeah, DOJ is in dire straits. It's in dire straits now. I believe we can rebuild, and I believe we must rebuild. I'm talking to my fellow former career feds who are now retired. Every day I'm going to go back to government in 2029 to be part of the cleanup and accountability mission. I think we can rebuild. And unlike Trump, I don't think we go in on day one and just clear house from anybody who was hired during the Trump years. I think, you know, we assess on a case by case basis whether people have been up to the job of enforcing the law apolitically and competently, and then they can continue on. I think we'll be able to rebuild. We'll be able to attract quality ethical candidates. I think winning back the public's perception of the legitimacy of the Department of Justice and winning back the respectability of the court. So the presumption of regularity, which just means that judges believe federal prosecutors when they make a representation in court, that's going to take some time to win back. But at its core, Jim, we have to go on the accountability mission. We have to. We Blew it in 74 with Nixon. We blew it in 2021 with Trump. I believe if we blow the accountability mission again in 2029, we probably lose our republic, and I don't know that we deserve to keep it.
- [17:09]
B
I agree with you wholeheartedly. I mean, I'll just say this until I'm blue in the face. And, you know, I know there are folks who don't want to beat up on Merrick Garland. I'm not one of them. I think that that was, it was just a major miscalculation, a historic blunder in 2021 to sit on those January 6th cases for as long as that we saw because of what took place. I mean, yes, maybe it would have expedited going to the Supreme Court and getting that immun decision sooner, but we don't know that. And I just think that, I think you're absolutely dead on, Glenn, that, that if the accountability does not come this third time around, it may be three strikes and you're out.
- [17:50]
A
And Jim, can I add real quickly the Merrick Garland piece? And maybe we would have had to have gotten an immunity ruling sooner. People should remember that the classified documents case does not involve presidential immunity because he committed those crimes down in Florida after He. He left the presidency. So that case should be rebrought. It was dismissed without prejudice. It was in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. It would have been reversed and sent back to the trial court for trial. Has to be rebrought come January 2029. And then the D.C. case, which, you know, they were in the process of litigating Judge Tanya Chutkan, was whether the four felony charges that Donald Trump stood indicted on survived the presidential immunity decision. And they did, because he wasn't acting, you know, in his core constitutional function or his official governmental duties. He was acting as a candidate trying to steal an election. So we have to re bring Those prosecutions come 2029 and move forward, win, lose or draw.
- [18:49]
B
I agree. One final thing, though, Glenn, before we go, is that, that the judicial system is also being stocked with people. I mean, it's not just the Justice Department. The judicial system is being stocked with people who are not reliable defenders of the republic. We're seeing Trump judicial nominees going before confirmation hearings and not being able to answer the question whether Joe Biden won the 2020 election. That does scare me a little bit, Glenn. That scares me because that's what impeachment
- [19:14]
A
is for, and that is what investigating people. If they made false statements to Congress under oath in their zeal to be confirmed as judges, you investigate them. And if they lied, well, then you prosecute them, you impeach them, you remove them from office. We have to take both gloves off and we have to take on these righteous fights, even though they're going to be hard. But don't forget just today, Jim, to Trump appointees in the Alabama case ruled against, obviously what Trump would have wanted the outcome to be. So all is not lost when it comes to Trump appointees. But I share your concern.
- [19:50]
B
Yeah. All right, Glenn, great to see you, my man. Thank you so much. Glad we jumped on and did this.
- [19:55]
A
Great seeing you, Jim.
- [19:56]
B
All right. Good to see you. Thanks so much. I want to switch quickly now to what I think is a surprising political story. And that is, you know, what is. Yes, there is a big primary happening today in Texas. Let me back up for a second. There's a big primary happening in Texas today. Ken Paxton against John Cornyn. Donald Trump going against the incumbent John Cornyn in that Republican primary for the Texas Senate nomination and backing Ken Paxton, who, of course, is sort of like the Donald Trump of Texas. And so that'll be interesting to watch. But there's a. Folks, I think there'll be a lot of surprises in these 2026 midterms in this cycle. And some of those surprises, I know people are going to say, oh, Jim, come on, some of those surprises might happen in Florida. Let's bring in our next guest, David Jolly, who is running for the Democratic nomination for governor of the state of Florida. David, great to see you as always.
- [20:50]
C
Hey, Jim, great to be with you.
- [20:52]
B
And I, I, I, you know, I tell people, never say never. And folks used to talk about Texas as being fool's gold and there's no way Democrats can go in there and, and when in Texas anymore. And, and people saying the same thing about Florida now. But people don't understand that this, you could see a momentum shift that is such a, a massive, you know, sea change in this country that Florida could get swept up in this too. And David, I just, before you get going here, I just want to mention, and I know folks will say, oh, polls are, polls are polls, but there was a poll that came out. This is one reason why I wanted to bring you on something called change polls, which I think is a bit Democratic aligned, but a lot of people in Florida put stock in it, had you ahead of Byron Donalds, who is expected to be the Republican nominee for governor of Florida. So, David, you're in this fight, man. What do you think about all this?
- [21:43]
C
Yeah, Jim, if the election were tonight, I believe we'd win the Florida governorship. And, and I mean that as an analyst, more than just an aspirational candidate. Importantly, what the change poll is doing is it is showing a continued trend. Understand this is polls are snapshots. But the interesting thing is each poll we see continues to get stronger for Democratic candidates in Florida. And so if the election were denied, I do believe that that change poll reflects the current conditions. You know, that poll had us, I believe, up by four. But then when you move to an informed electorate, right. Once voters are paying attention and they're paying attention to Byron Donalds and they're paying attention to David Jolly, we actually move to a seven point lead. And so part of what we have to do is defeat a little bit of the armchair quarterback. Oh, Florida's out of reach. Texas is out of reach. The most important way to think about this, Jim, is that every cycle is so different. Right? The most important thing in an election often isn't the candidate, it's the cycle. And this is a cycle where people are screaming for change. We're in the midst of an economic crisis in Florida. We're gripped by a culture war and people are asking for a reasonable return to how do we invest in housing and healthcare and education. And frankly, I make the old school Republican argument about ending culture wars by just keeping government out of your life, out of your doctor's office, out of your bedroom, out of your business. And so we're in a place where maybe Republicans have gone too long, where Donald Trump is in the sixth year of a presidency. People feel the anxiety about economy, about an unsettled world, and they're looking for change. The last thing I'll tell you, Jim, one of the experiences I've had, look, I'm a proud Florida Democrat, not a reluctant one, and I talk about the values of the party, fighting for an economy that works for everyone, government improving our lives and ending the culture wars by protecting everyone's rights. But we are not, as Democrats, registering more Democratic voters. And that we need to acknowledge that. I'm not, I'm not sure yet we've won hearts and minds, but we are winning votes. And as we win votes, we have the opportunity to demonstrate we're worthy of that trust. So between now and November, we've got to continue to win votes and then prove ourselves worthy of leading the state and the country in a new direction.
- [23:58]
B
Well, and the other thing too is, I mean, in the words of Joe Biden, don't compare me to the Almighty, compare me to the alternative. Byron Donalds has really, he's tethered himself to Donald Trump. He, he, he is, you know, he's maga, he's, he's Trump all the way. And Trump is in the low to mid-30s, depending on the poll that you're looking at right now, David. And people are not. And you talk about, you know, issues that cross partisan lines and, and issues that people can all agree on no matter what side of the political spectrum they're on. People do not like this war in Iran and they don't like what's happened to the gas prices. And they've made the connection, whether Donald Trump likes it or not, they've made the connection. They're paying more for the price at the pump, they're paying more at the grocery store as a result of this war in Iran. It's just the way it is. And that's not good for Byron. Donald's. It would seem to me if you're just, you know, looking at this from a cold political lens.
- [24:53]
C
Yeah, Jim, Byron Donalds is known for one thing. He's Donald Trump's guy and he returns the favor to Donald Trump. That is why he is in this race as the front runner, because Donald Trump Pushed him in before Donald's even announced a year ago. And not only has Donald tied himself, he's spending money on air reminding Florida voters that he's Donald Trump's guy. He was just asked what grade he would give the Trump economy and he said an A. He was asked about the slush fund for the J6ers, the weaponization fund, and he said it was a very generous move by Donald Trump. He has defended the Iran war and has defended covering up the Epstein files. He does not have a solution on the economy because he suggests that what we need is more of the same, that we don't actually have a crisis, that people just need to spend more time focused on how great Donald Trump is. And so, you know, Republicans in Florida have a primary on their side. They have Donald Trump's guy and Byron Donald's. They have DeSantis, Lieutenant Governor. They have Tucker Carlson's guy, a guy who continues to drop racist, anti Semitic tropes across the state. And then they kind of have the new version of Jeb Bush. It's the four iterations of Republicanism, and they're like four snakes in a bag. And they are just all tagging, tagging, tagging. Byron Donalds on his fitness by bringing up his past, by bringing up some questionable history, whether it was in Congress with insider trading or some of his past run ins with the law. And our campaign is going to remain focused on housing, healthcare and the economy. But the reality is we're probably going to face a very wounded Republican nominee in Byron Donald when he emerges from the primary.
- [26:32]
B
Yeah, and David, I mean, you mentioned the weaponization fund. How are folks reacting to that? And, you know, because I, it seems to me, I don't, you know, Trump can try to pull the wool over people's eyes, but people know what happened on January 6th, and they probably don't like the idea of those guys getting money from the federal government. I mean, just, you know, it just, it just strikes me as wrong to a lot of people. What are you picking up on down there as you're running?
- [27:01]
C
I don't think cop beaters need a bailout, particularly not in the midst of an economic crisis. Why are we bailing out cop beaters? We shouldn't have pardoned them. Byron Donald supported the pardons there as well. We know several have been arrested again, including for child sex crimes. This is Donald Trump's legacy, and it's Byron Donald's legacy as well. You know, I got a question from a law enforcement group recently. As a Republican, I was endorsed statewide by some of the law enforcement groups. My position hasn't changed. I continue to not only back the blue, but I trust the blue where I think too many of my colleagues like Byron Donald won't trust the blue. And they said, listen, Jolly, if you're elected a Democrat, how do we know you're not going to become one of those crazy Democrats? And what I wanted to say was, well, I could ask the same question about Republicans because it's the Republicans that their president that they rally behind pardoned cop beaters. They have basically institutionalized grift, graft and corruption. If you have enough money, you can commit any white collar crime you want, provided you give a share of that to the president. And this is the President that Byron Donalds has hitched his wagon to. So I welcome conversations about criminal justice, about safe communities, about law and order. I think if you move then into the space of, of what this president and our current governor are doing on crime, you know, most days they're not fighting crime, they're fighting communities. They're fighting the undocumented immigrant with no history of a property or violent crime. But they're letting real violent criminals go and corrupt politicians get a pass. I welcome these conversations. You know, Jim, here's the bottom line. I've been a Republican and independent. I'm a proud Democrat, but I'm in a very post partisan, post ideological space. We have big problems that need big solutions. If Byron Donalds or any Republican nominee thinks that this is a normal election cycle where you get to use the labels and the framing that worked for Republicans in the past, bring it on. Please do that because voters have wised up to this. It's why Trump's numbers are in the 30s and it's why Byron Donalds is in trouble.
- [29:01]
B
And David, you mentioned public safety and so on. I mean, the other question that I have is how to handle immigration. And Trump has really tried to strong arm governors. People like Stephen Miller, they've really tried to strong arm governors. And it looks like it's not working out too well for Ron DeSantis and alligator Alcatraz. They've, they've indicated that that facility is going to close. Do you think that's a good idea?
- [29:27]
C
It should be shut down and I'll start shutting it down on day one, if it's still open. Now listen, we need detention centers for people who have engaged in property or violent crimes. We will have sufficient capacity, but we're not going to glorify detention centers and we're certainly not Going to round up people that don't have so much as a speeding ticket over the last decade, they've just been showing up at the job site to put food on the table. That person deserves a pathway to legal status and work. And when my Republican colleagues come at me on it, I say, look, I hold the position that Marco Rubio held 10 years ago. I hold the position that Republicans held before Donald Trump came on the scene. And so I don't think the greatest threat to our state or our country as the undocumented immigrant who's contributing to our culture and economy every day. I think it's the person who engages in a property or violent crime regardless of where they were born, or a politician who continues to engage in outright corruption. So we'll be tough on crime. We'll be tough on crime, but that doesn't mean going after the undocumented immigrant who is part of the fabric of our state.
- [30:27]
B
Yeah. And I wonder what the impact of all of this has been in places like South Florida where, you know, Democrats used to do okay back in the day of Bill Clinton and Al Gore, but just have not done that well, you know, that well since maybe, maybe during Barack Obama, I suppose. But, you know, the question is, you know, how is the Cuban community holding up these days, the Venezuelan community? Trump has tried to make inroads with those communities. Now he's, you know, they keep saber rattling over toppling the Castro regime in Cuba. I, you know, I'll believe that when it happens. You know, as a Cuban son of a Cuban refugee, I'm a Cuban American myself. I'll believe that when they, they actually try to pull that off. I sort of wonder if there's other stuff going on with all of that. But I, you know, it seems to me that the Cuban American community down there is rattled by ice. The Venezuelan community down there has been rattled by ice. This is, this has been a very unsettling and, and disturbing experience for folks in South Florida as it relates to ice.
- [31:28]
C
Yeah, Jim, everyone understands cruelty and broken promises, right? Two years ago, four years ago, we were using language like racism, xenophobia, anti immigrant, all defensible. I use that language as well, but it didn't work among certain communities. But people understand cruelty. Rounding up someone, taking a baby from a mother's arms, they understand broken promises. I didn't think you meant my tps. Even the top Lane Maduro in Venezuela just led to us giving the imprint to his successor. The conditions haven't changed. The Venezuelan American community isn't rushing back home because they still have the same fears they did before. And if you move to Cuba, even if Trump moves to try to topple the regime, there's not a Delsey to follow. I'm not sure there is a plan. He floated the idea of allowing Americans to invest in Cuba, not realizing that that's the last thing the Cuban community wants is to enrich the regiment in Cuba. And he had to backpedal that. Broadly speaking, you know, the Hispanic community is not monolithic by any stretch, but we are seeing Hispanic numbers in pre2016 numbers. For Donald Trump, he's lost all of his ground. And for Byron Donalds, he trails Donald Trump by 10 points among those communities. And here's the bottom line. I think politicians of all stripes, all parties, often get wrong. We sometimes think reflexively. Immigrants must only care about immigration. It's not true. Everyone cares about the economy, housing, health care and education. How are they going to raise a family? If we're Democrats who have answers on that, we'll be just fine among all communities in the state of Florida.
- [33:01]
B
Yeah, no question about it. And just to put your analyst hat back on for a second, I mean, what does it say to you as a former Republican that Donald Trump has come out and I know this is outside of Florida politics, and endorsed Ken Paxton over John Cornyn, a sitting United States senator.
- [33:19]
C
I'm not surprised whatsoever. That's the direction of the party. Right. I left the party because my politics and my policies, my ideology continued to change as I served. Mine is a story of change. I don't blame the Republican Party for my leaving it. I chose to leave it. But we also know this is the new Republican Party. Donald Trump crushed the legacy party, created a new one in his image that includes Ken Paxton. It includes Byron Donalds as well. Listen, that's on the ballot, Jim. I think we're in a post Watergate 1974 environment where General election voters are saying burn the ships. I don't care about voter registration. We're going in a new direction. I'd be worried to be Ken Paxton in the state of Texas tonight, just like I'd be worried to be Byron Donalds in the state of Florida.
- [34:04]
B
Florida, yeah. No, no question about it. And it seems to me a lot of this is riding on the economy. Affordability is a major issue. Housing affordability is, is one of the undercovered issues. What's the, what's the jolly economic plan just to kind of wrap things up for Floridians?
- [34:24]
C
Housing, healthcare and education for homeowners? We Need a state catastrophic fund to cut insurance by 60 to 70%. For renters, we need public private partnerships, a historic investment that delivers more units. For health care, we need to invest in the direct delivery of primary health care, improving outcomes, reducing hospital costs. And for education, we need a 10 year renaissance in public education. And if we're going to keep choice schools, they should have to teach your kid to read and provide the same services and offerings that our public schools do. People's personal economy is defined around housing, health care and education. Republicans have attacked all three. We're going to make wise, responsible, lean investments in those areas to improve people's lives.
- [35:06]
B
All right, David Jolly, great to see you. Thanks so much. Good luck out on the campaign trail. Let's do it again before things get really busy down there. You got it.
- [35:14]
C
Thanks, Jim. Good to be with you.
- [35:15]
B
All right. Good to be with you. Thanks, David. And, you know, we were talking about ice, we were talking about immigration, and, you know, there's. If there's one Democrat in the country right now who, who understands this issue perhaps more than anybody at this moment, at this very second, it's. It may be New Jersey Senator Andy Kim, and he joins me now. Senator Kim, great to see you. Can you hear. Can you hear me, sir? Oh, he might not be able to hear me. Senator Kim, can you hear me? Let me just. Looks like Senator Kim cannot hear me. We're gonna have to try to get him to jump off and jump back on. If he can jump back off and jump back on, have him. Have him jump back in. Well, let me just show you what happened with Senator Kim over the weekend. Senator Kim, as I was saying, very much understanding where this issue is right now. He was pepper sprayed by federal agents on Memorial Day during a protest at a New Jersey detention facility. Video of this went viral. And there's Senator Kim now. Senator Kim, can you hear me now?
- [36:24]
D
I can hear you now.
- [36:25]
B
Hey, thank you so much. Really appreciate it. Great to have you on.
- [36:29]
D
Yeah, thanks for having me.
- [36:30]
B
And I know you're making the rounds. You're doing a lot of interviews today because, my goodness, things got pretty, pretty crazy for you yesterday. You were, I guess, part of this protest outside the Delaney hall facility in Newark. And feel free to, you know, correct me if I'm getting anything wrong here. There were detainees staging a hunger strike and so on. And then things got a little wild. Can you fill us in?
- [36:57]
D
Yeah, that's right. I mean, look, I was actually inside the detention facility first and foremost. The guards at the facility denied my Entry I actually had to end up calling Secretary Mark Wayne Mullen just to get access to. Even though I was already approved to get in. Just shows you just the continued lawlessness on that action. But when I came out from the detention facility, that's when I was informed that, that this kind of showed it, this kind of standoff was happening where there was a, a line of armed ICE agents and an armored vehicle and a line of protesters. So I was someone that, that tried to try to de escalate. Honestly, I was trying to prevent this from turning into a really nightmarish situation. You know, I had seen what happened in Minnesota and elsewhere. I was really worried about what could happen right here in my home state. So I actually tried to de escalate and. But at some point, ICE just told me that they're gonna just move their vehicles through, right through the crowd. And I told them, you cannot just plow through this crowd of civilians. And I tried to come up with an agreement that could make this be done peacefully, but they didn't give me time to try to arrange that. So they ended up just plowing through the crowd. I did my best to try to stand between the ICE agents and the crowd, try to keep people separate and safe, but it still ended in an absolute catastrophe and a real chaotic mess.
- [38:22]
B
Yeah. And Senator, I think we have a photograph, a still photograph of you sort of putting your arms out, trying to keep things calm, trying to de escalate, as you were saying. And you can see these militarized officers behind you. You have your arms spread out. What was happening in that moment just then?
- [38:39]
D
Yeah, and you can see that that one ICE agent right there at the back by the door is holding onto the pepper ball gun that ended up shooting towards me and towards others. In just a few seconds after this, they were. Again, this was a moment where they were plowing through, through this crowd. I was trying to tell the crowd not to throw objects, not to do things that would further provoke as, as I, I really worried again, I was trying to keep them separate. I was worried that if they really came into kind of hand to hand confrontation, that we could potentially see even greater levels of, of chaos and even violence. But I was also turned around right after that. I turned around to the, to the ICE agents and, and I, and I, I tried to tell them, no, like do not engage. But it was all happening so fast. And look, it, it was a horrific circumstance, but, you know, no, no major injuries, no arrests. But the sad thing though, Jim, is if you ask me now you know, could this happen again today? Could this happen again tomorrow? The answer is yes, because all the conditions are still there. You know, just the continued treatment, inhumane treatment of the detainees there. I mean, I met a pregnant woman that said she's not getting the medical care that she needs. I met yesterday a man with stage three lung cancer who's not getting medical attention. Someone handed me a carton of milk and I looked at it and it was just congealed solid on the inside. I mean, it was absolutely disgusting. And while Trump is telling you these are the worst of the worst, these are the dangerous people, the people that I met was like this 18 year old high school senior. She was, she just told me she all she wants to do is go to her prom and graduate, but instead she's there separated from her family. I saw her mother outside. Can you imagine being that mom of an 18 year old girl as she's stuck inside by herself in this detention facility? Like, that's what I want the American people to see. That's where your money is going right now. You know, like, and we're doing this all in the context of the fact that in a few days I will go back to the Capitol and the Republicans are trying to push forward this reconciliation bill right now that would give tens of billions of dollars more to ICE with no accountability, no reforms since what happened in Minnesota, as we now see in Newark, New Jersey, and we'll see continuing elsewhere in this country. We have to stop this. You know, the, the lawlessness has to stop.
- [41:16]
B
Right. And Senator Kim, you bring a couple, a couple of good points there, but one thing that I wanted to get into is that after that moment where you're trying to de escalate things and you have your arms spread out. It was after that, if I'm, if I'm not mistaken, is that when the ICE officer fired the pepper ball in the, in your direction, in, in the direction of the other protesters and it exploded and it caused that chemical dispersant to go up in your face. And I guess we have some video of folks trying to pour water on your face to get that off of you. But can you tell just a little bit about what happened then?
- [41:51]
D
Yeah. So after that photo, as that vehicle turned again, I was trying to keep that distance, but I just remember, just immediately some, like, just some pepper ball shots were right at my feet, just right alongside me. And just, I felt a few just kind of whiz by me. And we also saw some dispersing of pepper spray. So I don't know what it was, if it was, you know, some of the dust up from the ground or something else. But yeah, I started immediately trying to help others that were injured, for the physical injuries or from the pepper spray. But then just like, I kind of, I think the adrenaline kind of wore off and I realized that I myself was having trouble kind of seeing and that my throat was, was what felt like it was on fire. So I went over to the medical area and just had someone try to flesh flush out my eyes just to, just to try to get rid of some of that, that irritation there. But it just, you know, again, I'm grateful there weren't any more serious injuries, but I don't have the reassurance that this is not going to happen again. And, and that's just what, you know, that's what all of us unfortunately live in. Like, the way I've been thinking about it is like it shouldn't be this easy to have violence start in our streets. Like the, the, the ease and the inevitability of what it felt like yesterday. Like when I saw that, that convoy moving, like, I, I, I could feel it, it was just inevitable. And, and it just became so easy to see it. And sadly, it felt very familiar because we see these scenes on social media and the news all the time. And then I now see it unfolding between before my eyes that I'm now immersed within this. Yeah, Jim, it was just, it was really sad to see how easy it is for violence to just erupt in the streets in America these days.
- [43:49]
B
And do you think that they knew that you were a United States senator when they absolutely dispersed it? Okay.
- [43:54]
D
And they absolutely did.
- [43:55]
B
Because that's outrageous, isn't it? I mean, they should be holding back, it seems, I mean, if there are any American citizens, undoubtedly, yes, of course, but a United States Senator? I mean, that just seems nuts.
- [44:06]
D
Look, I spent quite some time trying to mediate. I was the, you know, I'm the only person that was able to go through the ice line of officers to talk to their leadership to try to see if there's any plan. I was going back and forth. I was on a bullhorn trying to calm the situation down. They all knew who I was. No one else shows up in a suit and tie, you know, standing there with my arms raised as they're holding up and pointing a pepper ball gun in my direction. I, you know, I even put my arms out to try to widen, you know, widen my stance to try to prevent them from, from shooting past. But look, you know, it was, it just shows, again, the ease with which these types of actions. And I told you that it wasn't. It shouldn't have been inevitable. I was trying to find an agreement that could, could make this be done. I'm not guarantee I could have done it, but I just, I asked them for more time, but they just revved the engines and, and started.
- [45:06]
B
And Senator, one of the things that I, We've noticed is that, is that the Department of Homeland Security tried to make the case that there was some sort of rioting that was going on there and that this is why they did this and so on, and this will not be tolerated. Is that, does that jive with the facts?
- [45:29]
D
Well, here's what I'll say is, you know, two. Two days earlier, I was there and there was nothing of this, this level of magnitude. You know, it really wasn't. But as they started to retaliate against the detainees that were protesting, they did a transfer of one detainee that they thought was leading some of this pro. They literally, in the middle of the night, you know, de. Transferred him to another facility despite his family being outside. You know, those are the things that again, just kind of further escalated this. And, you know, just before this big confrontation happened, you know, there was actually just, you know, they were. My team was telling me like a bunch of kids there blowing bubbles. Like, this was not a scene that, that was, you know, that. That necessitated bringing a huge armored vehicle and dozens of armed ICE agents. It really just riled up the crowd and just made things so much more difficult to untangle on that front. So, you know, I just, I just say, like, look, this is just, you know, the continued actions that we see and just indicative of that lawlessness.
- [46:40]
B
Well, the way you describe it, it sort of reminds me what I thought I was seeing watching the images coming out of Minnesota in that they. It's almost as though they're spoiling for a fight, they're spoiling for a confrontation. It's almost like they're seeking a confrontation so then they can go and use over the top force. And I just wonder if that's kind of what you witnessed there. And what concerns me is that, you know, it seemed as though they had maybe tamped some of that stuff down after the killings of Renee Good and Alex Brady. And whether or not what you witnessed and what you experienced on Memorial Day may be a sign of an ominous sign of things to come potentially. I don't know.
- [47:23]
D
Look, I, I hope not. I hope not, Jim. I mean, when you, when you see with your own eyes Americans fighting other Americans, whether it's in the halls of the Capitol on January 6th or elsewhere, like, it, just, like it's, it's, it's, it's really tough. And I, I have to hope that, that, that was not the, the point, that it wasn't about, you know, provoking it being provoking in that way. But I will say that again. You know, they're not, you know, ICE is not taking any actions to de, escalate on their own to try to try to remedy some of the situations that are happening with this, with the detainees. And like, you can't help but feel like cruelty is the point of some of this treatment. Like when you hear from these detainees, they're there 8 months, 10 months, 12 months, they're not just, they're not just complaining about the conditions, they're saying they're not getting their day in court. I mean, Jim, they showed me this piece of paper they had up on a bulletin board in the hallway there that showed that today, today as the courts open back up after the holiday, one judge has 74 cases before them today. Which comes to what about, I did the math about five minutes a case. If everything lined up perfectly non stop, which of course it won't. And there's interpretation that's needed and other things. Like it's a farce, like, you know, and, and you can't help but wonder like, well look, you know, who's benefiting from people just being indefinitely detained? You know, Geo Group, who runs Delaney hall, they're getting paid by the bed. You know, these are people that they're, they got hundreds of millions of dollars, upwards of a billion dollar contract for Delaney Home. Like you could, they could improve the food overnight, but then that's less profit for them. They could hire more doctors and actually have they one doctor for nearly 800 people. They could hire more doctors right now, but that's less profitable for them. They could fix the extreme heat that I felt in some of the rooms and it's not even at the peak of summer yet. They could fix that, but that's less profit for them. Right? So like it's not just about the fact that ICE is getting a blank check. They're given a blank check to, in this revolving door of corruption. Because Tom Holman came from GeoGroup, this new head of ICE that just got appointed, he's from, straight from Geo Group. Like it's just like revolving door, you know, And I'm sure a lot of these people working at ice, they're gonna go work for GEO Group and Corecivic afterwards they're giving these no bid contracts. I mean, like this is, what's happening is there's a for profit industrial complex here that is profiting off of perpetuating that human misery. And it's just like it's so blatantly right before our eyes. There's ways in which we can do this. We can go after the, the, the, the dangerous and the violent criminals. I think we can all agree upon that. But like, we can do this process in a way that doesn't just again, cause so much misery for so many people that are not those violent criminals that Trump just continues to lie about.
- [50:28]
B
Yeah, it sounds like another avenue of corruption for this administration. And there's a lot of that going around these days. Days. There's no question.
- [50:36]
C
Oh yeah.
- [50:37]
D
I mean, like, you know, like you should look into how much Geo Group gave to Trump's inauguration and, and all these other payments that have been happening to their campaigns and other things like that. After Trump got elected, the head of Geo Group gave, I think it was head of GeoGroup, of course they, they said that this is going to be, you know, this is going to be the, the best time for their business. And you can't help but think that when Trump says it's a golden age for people, I think he means it's a golden age for Geo Group. It's a golden age for core civics, the golden age for these for profit companies that are just profiting off of what ICE is doing.
- [51:14]
B
Incredible. Well, Senator Kim, thank you for joining us and coming on and talking about your story and going in there, witnessing this firsthand because, you know, I've tried to go to a detention facility. They chased me off within seconds. I could not be on the property for more than a few seconds before they were threatening to arrest me. And it just seems to me what they're trying to do is they're just, they're trying to keep the public from seeing what's going on there because as you said, they're making money hand over fist these days, charging by the bed. If they only, if they only locked up the violent people, then they probably wouldn't make as much money. So they're just, they're just rounding anybody up who looks like somebody who, who might be detained and.
- [51:52]
D
An 18 year old girl.
- [51:53]
B
Yeah, an 18 year old girl. That's outrageous. Just outrageous. Yeah. Well, thank you, Senator, really appreciate it. I'm glad you're okay. Sorry that what you Went through. But thank you so much for your time.
- [52:03]
D
Yeah, thanks for shining a light on this, Jim.
- [52:05]
B
You bet. As always, thank you, sir. Senator Andy Kim of New Jersey and comes on the show from time to time. Always appreciate when he comes on. And, and it is, you know, it is kind of, you know, in D.C. they have the expression taxation without representation. To me these days it's corruption without competence. That might, that maybe we should have that on the bumper sticker or on the, the license plate in Washington, D.C. corruption without competence. And today, Donald Trump went to Walter Reed for yet another physical exam, some sort of doctor's exam. That's what they're telling. We have no idea that we, all we know is what they tell the public. And so we can't say fact, he's okay because get this, he went to Walter Reed today for another physical exam and they say maybe a dental exam, too. And Trump put out a social media post saying that he just finished his six month physical and that quote, everything checked out perfectly. Thank you to the great doctors and staff. Heading back to the White House, President DJT we have no idea whether any of this is true, whether his, his exam worked out perfectly because they don't share this information with the American people. We just have to rely on the true social post from the dear leader to see how the dear leader is doing. But I will tell you, I mean, and not to, you know, I guess go over again something that we did a few days ago. But Trump likes to brag about these cognitive tests. He brags about how he takes them all the time and how he can figure out what's a squirrel and what's a horse and so on. And we did this the other day where I took the cognitive test. This is not something to brag about. And if Donald Trump continues to brag about it, it seems to me he should do a cognitive test in person. And so I just want to make sure before I let this story go. And if you have not seen me taking the cognitive test, you can watch it on substack, you can watch it on YouTube. A lot of people watched it over the weekend. And I'm grateful for that. But I think the challenge needs to be issued to Donald Trump. You keep going up to Walter Reed for these examinations and claiming that it's a medical test and a dental exam and all this other stuff. We need to know what the facts are. We need to know whether or not you had the cognitive test yet again. And you know, and we don't need to hear what the Results are from a truth social post. I think the challenge needs to be issued directly to Donald Trump. Donald Trump, you need to take the cognitive test live, like I did with a doctor on camera, with the cameras rolling live and in person, not this bullshit. They drove me up to Walter Reed and I did some stuff behind the scenes that nobody knows about. And then I put out a post that says, everything is perfect. We don't believe you. And the reason why we don't believe you is because you, you continue to do crazy to the nation's capital. And I just. The latest case in point is, and we have images of this that people need to understand this is happening. This is not, this is not AI. This is not from, from the realm of the make believe. They are setting up a UFC and Ultimate Fighting Championship set in the backyard in the South Lawn of the White House right now. And there it is. It looks like Thunderdome from a Mad Max movie. They're building that right now. And I, I just bring this up and people will say, oh, you know, the people on Fox and the MAGA people, oh, you're poo pooing UFC because you're cultural elite and all this. I grew up watching the World Wrestling Federation. I grew up watching Hulk Hogan and Andre the Giant growing up. I don't look down my nose at any of this. If people want to watch this stuff, have at it, that's fine. The problem that I have is that Donald Trump continues to make this nation's capital look like a goddamn three ring circus. And this is the latest example of that. What is that that they're building on the South Lawn of the White House? It looks like. Is it some sort of time machine? If it is a time machine, can I go into it and go to a different time? Maybe transport myself to another dimension? But I digress. This is on top of the ballroom he wants to build. This is on top of the arch that he's trying to build. This is on top of painting the reflecting pool blue. This is on top of the crazy creepy statues that they just put on Pennsylvania Avenue the other day. And I'm going to go over and take pictures of that tomorrow. That's, that's going to be on tomorrow's show. I'm just going to let you know. That's a good tomorrow show. He puts his name on the Kennedy Center. He puts his name on the US Institute of Peace. There is a reason why we do not believe that Donald Trump is acing cognitive tests. There is a reason why we don't believe when he says everything is perfect about his health exam. And that is because he keeps doing crazy to the nation's capital. And I don't know, am I, am I taking crazy pills? Is anybody going to raise this issue with, with the ability whatsoever that that can stop this from happening? Because it seems to me, and I heard somebody else make the point, you know, if they can just build this set in the, in the, in the South Lawn of the White House for this Ultimate Fighting Championship thing that they want to do on Trump's birthday, then they do. We need a goddamn ballroom. It seems to me they don't need a ballroom if they could just build this shit whenever they need it. But that is why, personally, I would like to see Donald Trump take a cognitive test live like I did. Well, I wasn't live, but it was on camera with a doctor in front of the American people. He needs to do that or the questions are not going to go away. He needs to do that or not ever going to believe that everything is in tip top shape. And so I just wanted to make mention of that, that yes, the, the madness in Washington continues. The continued defiling of the nation's capital continues here in Washington D.C. with Trump building more and more crazy shit just about every day that ends in y here in the nation's capital. But in the meantime, want to thank Glenn Kirschner for coming on today. Always appreciate having Glenn on. I want to thank David Jolly. Some of you may be scoffing at me for saying that David Jolly has no chance of becoming governor of folks Florida. I say let's wait until November to find out. So good to hear from David Jolly and of course an excellent conversation with Senator Andy Kim. Really appreciate him joining us. And you know folks, they're, they're pepper spraying United States senators. Is anybody going to do anything about that? David? You know, David Jolly down in Florida says if, if and when he comes into office, an alligator Alcatraz is still running, he's going to shut that down. State officials in New Jersey and I guess Mikey Sheryl is the governor there, it'd be a good question to ask her. What is being done about ice pepper spraying a United States Senator? Seems to me they assaulted a United States Senator. They knew full well that Andy Kim is a United States Senator and they sprayed pepper spray in his direction. Anyway, if that had happened to, I don't know, Senator Cotton or Senator Graham or any of these other Republican senators, Ted Cruz, wouldn't somebody be raising hell if these senators on the Republican side have been pepper sprayed and Andy Kim is pepper sprayed. Somebody should go to jail for that. You know, I think ice, the ICE officer who fired that pepper spray. You're going to jail. You fired pepper spray at a United States Senator. In the olden days, you would go to jail. And I don't understand why that's again it. You know, maybe it's because I was off for a few days and I'm a bit charged up. But we need to get back to the real world here in America where accountability matters. And I think this would be a great way to start. Let's, let's put the ICE officer who pepper sprayed United States Senator in the slammer. Put him in the goddamn ICE detention facility. Let's see how these, these guys like it after it's done to them. But I want to thank all of our guests today. Really appreciate it. Thanks to all of you for watching. Always appreciate you. All of you out there who subscribe to this program, if you do it on substack, you do it on YouTube. Make sure you subscribe, make sure you share, make sure you like all of those things matter. Support independent media. It makes a world of difference and it means the world to me as well. But in the meantime, still reporting from Washington, I'm Jim Acosta. See you next time.