← The Joy Reid Show
The Joy Reid Show
Fight Night: SCOTUS, ICE & Home Depot | The Joy Reid Show LIVE! Oct 15, 2025
02:05:15
Loading summary
Transcript244 lines
- [00:01]
A
This episode is brought to you by Lifelock. It's Cybersecurity awareness month. And LifeLock has tips to protect your identity. Use strong passwords, set up multi factor authentication, report phishing and update the software on your devices. And for comprehensive identity protection, let LifeLock alert you to suspicious uses of your personal information.
- [00:19]
B
Lifelock also fixes identity theft, guaranteed or your money back.
- [00:23]
A
Stay smart, safe and protected with a 30 day free trial@lifelock.com Podcast terms apply. You know what that music means? That means it is time for the show. Good evening, everybody. Happy Wednesday. Welcome to the Joy Reid Show. Big up to everybody that's listening and watching on YouTube. I'm seeing y' all in the chat. Hello to everybody that's in the chat. The Team T.J.R. s members, a new member, 72d a n girl. Welcome to Team T.J.R.S. hello to everybody in the chat. Big up to also everybody that's on the stacks. That would be sub stack and also Spotify. And hello to those who are also catching the show on Spotify. We love everybody, by the way. We've, we've officially crossed the 330,000subscriber mark. We did that today. So thank you very much to everybody who has subscribed and shared. We appreciate you guys. We are growing by leaps and bounds. September was a really, really great month for the Joy Reid Show. So let's jump into it. There's a lot going on. We have a lot of amazing guests today. I'm really excited about our guest lineup. But let's go back. Let's take you back into time to 1965, when President Lyndon Baines Johnson signed the Voting Rights act into law. That was August 6th of 1965. It was affirmation of a pretty simple principle that he also articulated himself and that you can see him there with all of the members of those dignitaries who showed up, including Dr. King, who was in that room with him. A very multicultural, multiracial group of people who showed up because this was the work that they had done and they were essentially gaining the benefit of the work that they had done. And he affirmed that. And he also affirmed it in a speech that he gave before a joint session of Congress in which he laid out a pretty simple principle about what we ought to do in this country. And here it is.
- [02:16]
C
It is wrong, deadly wrong to deny any of your fellow Americans the right to vote in this country.
- [02:29]
A
That's pretty clear. One would think that that's pretty straightforward. Well, that is not always been. Let's just say affirmed in this country. There's John Lewis, that classic iconic photo from the Edmund Pettus Bridge when he literally got beaten, his head almost cracked open by sheriffs because he was affirming the right to march from Selma, Alabama to the Capitol, Montgomery, Alabama to march for Voting Rights act for a Voting Rights Act. And I will note that the reason they had to do that is that the Civil Rights act of 1964 a year earlier had left out voting rights because they couldn't get it past a then Democratic Dixiecrat filibuster. The Southern conservatives at that time were the Southern Democrats, the Dixiecrats, and they were filibustering. They finally got the Civil Rights act of 64, which is equality and accommodations through, but they couldn't get a Voting Rights act through. So they were marching again to get voting rights enshrined in the United States constitution, affirming the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments with an piece of activating legislation. Well, we apparently are right back in this place again having to fight for the very thing that John Lewis was bled for on the Edmund Pettus Bridge. I want to refer you to a 2015 piece, actually, let me start with this. The Supreme Court today is taking up a case called Louisiana vs Calais and it's a case about whether or not we are going to have representation in this country in terms of people being able to have the right to vote. And that case hinges on whether or not the state of Louisiana can use redistricting to make it difficult for people of color, namely African Americans, to vote. Let me read a little bit of this Associated Press story. A Republican attack on a core provision of the Voting Rights act that is designed to protect racial minorities comes to the US Supreme Court this week, more than a decade after the justices knocked out another pillar of the 60 year old law. In arguments Wednesday, lawyers for Louisiana and the Trump administration will try to persuade the justices to wipe away the state's second majority black congressional district and make it much harder, if not impossible to take account of race in redistricting. Race based redistricting is fundamentally contrary to the Constitution, louisiana Attorney General Elizabeth Murrell wrote in the state Supreme Court filing. A mid decade battle over constitutional redistricting already is playing out across the nation under President Donald Trump urging Texas and other Republican controlled states to redraw their lines to make it easier for the GOP to hold its narrow majority in the House of Representatives. A ruling for Louisiana could intensify that effort and spill over to state legislative and local districts. The conservative dominated court, which just two years ago ended affirmative action in college admissions could be receptive. At the center of this legal fight is Chief Justice John Roberts, who has long held the landmark civil rights law it had had the long long has long held the landmark civil rights law in his sights from his time as a young lawyer in the Reagan era Justice Department to his current job. And it is that is at that point that I want to refer you guys to a 2015 article that was written in Political magazine. And for Jason, this is a eight. That's we're going to pull up a eight. And this is this political piece that from back in 2015. There it is. And the title of it is Inside John Roberts basically fight against the the Voting Rights Act. So he's long held effectively ever since he was a young lawyer in the Reagan administration, that the Voting Rights act is unfair. And I'll read a little bit of this story. I may not have it on screen, but I'm just going to read it. John Glover Roberts, a 25 year old graduate of Harvard Law School, arrived in Washington in early 1980. Harvard Law Professor Morton Horowitz described Roberts as a conservative looking for a conservative ideology in American history. And he found that ideology in the nation's capital, first as a clerk for the Supreme Court Justice William Rehnquist, and then as an influential aide in Ronald Reagan's Justice Department. At the time, Rehnquist and the Reagan administration were at the vanguard of a new conservative counter revolution in the law. A legal backlash against the historic and liberal leaning civil rights laws of the 1960s. Just months before Roberts came to Washington, the Supreme Court had significantly limited the scope of the Voting Rights act of 1965. As a young lawyer, Roberts eagerly took up the count the conservative cause becoming a key foot soldier in the effort to preserve to preserve that decision and weaken the vra. It was a fight Roberts would continue decades later when he replaced Rehnquist as Chief justice and authored the majority opinion in a landmark case gutting the VRA in 2013. Fifty years after the passage of the landmark civil rights law and 35 years after the first, after he first worked so hard to dismantle it, Roberts remains at the center of an impassioned debate about voting rights in America. One that shows no signs of ending anytime soon. Bottom line being John Roberts has never been in favor of the Voting Rights Act. He thinks it's unfair to the south to continue to adjudicate whether or not they should have to get permission from the Justice Department and pre clear that's what it's called pre clearance. This is section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. And he thinks forcing formerly restrictive states where they used to restrict the rights of black people to vote, which is why John Roberts or John Lewis had to march over the Edmund Pettus Bridge. He says states that used to do that should not still suffer in the modern era from having, by, by having to get permission to change their voting rules. He thinks that's unfair to the South. He thinks the country's history of racism is over and therefore there shouldn't even be any that kind of thing. So this case, LA vs. CA has come before the court under his leadership. The man who doesn't like the Voting Rights Act. Every so often he's in some ways allowed the Voting Rights act to remain, but he largely opposes it. Let me play for you. And this is a 11 for Jason Reed. This is a piece of the argument today in the Supreme Court. And this is Janae Nelson of the, of the ldf, which is used to be called the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. It's not just called the Legal Defense Fund ldf. Here is her argument in favor of maintaining a full strength VRA.
- [09:18]
D
Congress included a durational limit in Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. It created a mechanism for reauthorization. It decidedly did not do that in section.
- [09:27]
C
The issue, as you know, is that this Court's cases in a variety of contexts have said that race based remedies are permissible for a period of time, sometimes for a long period of time, decades in some cases, but that they should not be indefinite and should have an endpoint. And what exactly do you think the endpoint should be or how would we know for the intentional use of race to create districts?
- [10:01]
D
Well, Justice Kavanaugh, I. You raised a very important distinction, and that's between remedies and the statute. So a race based remedy can and should and usually does have a time limit and a durational limit. Section 2 court ordered remedies have a time limit. And so that is something that is grounded in our case law. What is not grounded in case law is the idea that an entire statute should somehow dissolve simply because race may be an element of, of the remedy. So, for example, this case has affirmed Title VII. It has affirmed Section 1982, the Family Medical Leave act, and also Section 4E of the Voting Rights act in Katzenbach versus Morgan. And never has it suggested that any of those statutes should dissolve in and of themselves. I don't think it's the remedy.
- [10:51]
C
I'm sorry to interrupt. I don't think it's the statute. It's the particular application of the. The statute that entails the intentional deliberate use of race to sort people into different districts. That particular aspect, I'm guessing. I'm asking what you think the time limit on that should be or there really shouldn't be a time limit. I think you might be saying there shouldn't be a time limit unless Congress chooses one.
- [11:20]
D
I am saying that. I'm saying there should not be a time limit. But I also think it's critical to emphasize that Section 2 does not require a race based remedy in all circumstances.
- [11:32]
A
Is that because. Can I ask. I just wanted to follow up on Justice Kavanaugh's question.
- [11:38]
D
What if this is an exercise of Congress's enforcement power?
- [11:41]
A
If we're looking at the City of.
- [11:42]
D
Bernie test and we're saying it has.
- [11:44]
A
To be congruent and proportional, would that affect justice.
- [11:47]
D
Your answer to Justice Kavanaugh's question, that.
- [11:49]
A
If it's going above and beyond with the 15th Amendment requires of its own force, but Congress has actually chosen the.
- [11:56]
D
Voting Rights act as a remedy, does that affect the question of whether it can go on indefinitely or not, that.
- [12:02]
A
At some point it becomes not congruent and proportional?
- [12:05]
D
No, I don't think it does. First, Bernie should not apply to Section two. Just assume. Assume. Assuming. That's if my question is assuming. Sure. Assuming that it does. As you know, in Bernie, this Court held up the Voting Rights act as the paradigmatic example of congruence and proportionality. The fact that the Voting Rights act at times may require a race based remedy does not change the fact that Congress, with its enlarged powers as defined by Ex parte Virginia and the line of cases forward, can address conduct that is beyond what the 15th Amendment addresses. It doesn't need to simply parrot the 15th Amendment. It can address conduct that is even considered constitutional in order to ensure that race discrimination in voting does not go undetected, uncorrected, or undeterred, in the words of the Senate report supporting.
- [13:03]
E
I guess I wonder if it would be helpful, at least as I'm thinking about it, because I. I think this is a very important question to understand. I think that you're saying that Section 2 is not a remedy in and of itself. It is the mechanism by which the law determines whether a remedy is necessary.
- [13:28]
D
That's absolutely correct.
- [13:29]
E
So it's a law that is just encouraging or requiring a check in. It's like a tool, it's like a tape measure that we're looking as to whether or not certain circumstances exist. And those circumstances that Congress is worried about is unequal access to electoral opportunity. And Section two tells you we have to look for those circumstances. And then the court says, yep, they exist in this situation under section 2. And so now a remedy is required. And in our case law, we then say, okay, State, it's up to you to figure out what that remedy will be. And maybe that remedy involves race consciousness, maybe it doesn't, whatever. But Section 2 itself is just the measure by which we determine that a remedy is required.
- [14:24]
D
That's absolutely correct.
- [14:25]
E
So that's why it doesn't need a time limit, because it's not doing any work other than just. Just pointing us to the direction of where we might need to do something.
- [14:34]
D
That's right. And its usage becomes less and less as we see racially polarized voting and residential segregation decreasing. The Katz amicus brief in this case shows that in the past decade, Section 2 cases have decreased by 50% because.
- [14:50]
E
The plaintiffs can't make the showing.
- [14:51]
F
I mean, it's a pretty bare.
- [14:53]
E
It's a pretty significant showing to, to establish that unequal opportunity of electoral processes is happening in a situation that's correct.
- [15:04]
D
Jingles is an exacting test. It is data obsessive. It brings in experts and many other forms of evidence to establish a racial violation. There are many cases where the plaintiffs fail in bringing the jingles one, precondition, or jingles two, or jingles three, before they even get. Get to the totality.
- [15:24]
E
So talking about a time limit, you would say, maybe it's with respect to the remedy that is used to respond to the. To the problem that we've identified under Section 2. But the Section 2 tape measure itself doesn't need a life cycle. It's just.
- [15:39]
D
No, yeah, that's correct. I mean, the 15th Amendment is a. Is permanently enshrined in our Constitution, and Section two is there to effectuate that prohibition of race discrimination, discrimination on voting, and does not require a time limit.
- [15:52]
A
Thank you.
- [15:54]
D
With the time I have remaining, I'd like to mention that there are many proposals on the table that have been presented by my colleagues on the other side, and a number of them resurrect the intent standard that this court was very clear about and Congress was extraordinarily clear about. Knowing that results is key to ensuring that we do not continue to have rampant racial discrimination in voting. And the absence of it or the declining ability to Show A Section 2 case is because of the success of Section 2 over the past four decades. And we would be reckless if we determine that section 2 somehow is no longer needed to simply because it has been so successful in rooting out racial discrimination in voting. There's also, as I mentioned at the outset, a very easy and elegant solution to this case if SB8 is not satisfactory. If the court believes, as the Calais panel did, that the state violated the constitution in constructing SB8, it should remand and use.
- [17:10]
A
And joining me now is the brilliant person that you just heard and saw and love that headshot too. Fabulous. The person who was just making that argument before the United States Supreme Court, Janay Nelson, who is, I want to make sure I read her title correctly. President and director counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. We just call it LDF now. Janae Nelson, thank you so much for being here. Congratulations on your first Supreme Court oral argument. I played a big chunk of it and you were back there listening to it. As I'm texting, you're like, don't make me listen to it. But you were so brilliant. I have to just, first of all, just congratulate you and ask how it felt to make this argument, particularly such a momentous case.
- [17:50]
G
Joy, it was truly an honor. I wish we weren't there. I wish we didn't have to make this argument. Frankly, we shouldn't have to make the argument. But I was honored to be able to, you know, carry forward the mantle of so many of my predecessors who have done the same thing in challenging this court and forcing this country to be its best self. So that was part of, that was part of, it's part of the job.
- [18:16]
A
It's part of the job. And unfortunately, as you said, you know, I wanted to start with the, you know, with the, the fact of LBJ. You know, we just celebrated, I feels like 10 seconds ago, the 60th anniversary of the signing of the Voting Rights Act. And apparently, according to the, some of the conservatives on the court, just my reading of it and listening to some of their arguments, they feel like that's enough, 60 years of freedom, that's enough for the blacks. And it is now time for the blacks to step aside and allow Republicans in the south to draw whatever districts they like. And if blacks get no representation, so be it. What did you make of the arguments on the other side of the quality of the arguments? And do you feel that your arguments resonated with the six that need to be turned? Well, let's say not to not say six, because two of them are unturnable, but the other ones, well, I Hope.
- [19:07]
G
We get a 90 vote in our favor. I think that law compels that. But we only need five, and. And we'll take whatever we get to preserve the Voting Rights Act. I will say that, you know, you mentioned lbj. Lbj, when he signed the Voting Rights act, said that it was one of the greatest achievements in the history of American freedom. He didn't talk about it in terms of just black people. He didn't talk about it in terms of party and politics, which is what, you know, many members of the court and some of my opponents tried to do. This was really about American freedom. It's about ensuring that we have a robust democracy that makes us a, you know, an enhanced citizen, secure country and fulfills our constitutional obligations. So I really wish that we all saw it that way. And unfortunately, the state of Louisiana, the lawyer for the plaintiffs, and also the United States that was represented today, the Department of Justice was there as well, didn't seem to share that belief. And that obviously is disappointing. Their arguments went in many different directions, some of it quite contradictory, some of it very irreconcilable with current law. I hope that the justices understood and saw that, and I hope that they remain faithful to their own law and their own words.
- [20:33]
A
Let me play a couple of clips for those who didn't watch the oral arguments. They were 10am this morning. So this. This. This sister has had a long day. She's. She's been working. It's been a long day. So I appreciate you taking the time. Let me play. Jason, this is a 13. This is an argument in which Katanji, Justice Ketanji, Brown, Jackson. Justice Jackson is receiving an argument from the lawyers for the state of Louisiana. So this is 8, 13. Whenever it's ready. Jason.
- [21:01]
E
I don't understand why your answer to Justice Kagan's question about is this a compelling state interest is no. The answer is obviously yes, that you have an interest in remedying the effects of racial discrimination that we identify using this tool. Whether you go too far in your remedy is another issue.
- [21:22]
A
Right. Your Honor, I think step zero in all of these cases, it was certainly step zero in the Robinson litigation is the plaintiffs came in and said, we.
- [21:30]
E
Want another majority black district. I thought they came in and said, we are not receiving equal electoral opportunity because our votes are being diluted, which.
- [21:38]
A
Is the same way of saying we deserve a second.
- [21:40]
E
No, it's not, because that, again, just trust me on this.
- [21:44]
A
The.
- [21:44]
E
The second electoral or second district is a remedy that one could offer for a problem that we've identified. And the whole Robinson litigation was about identifying the problem. Is this really happening in Many, many Section 2 cases? The court says you, you're wrong. You're fine there. There is not an electoral opportunity being denied to you. Go away. In this case, the court said, I see. I'm looking at the factors. I appreciate what you're saying. You've proven that we have this problem. And so the next question is, how do we go about remedying it.
- [22:23]
A
The. The other side? And I will note that it seemed that they picked lawyers of color. They picked non white lawyers. That's what it seemed like to me. You don't have to comment on that. I'm just gonna say that it looked to me like they were trying to get people who were not white on the other side to argue. I'm just saying that. But what do you make of that argument? What they're saying is that it almost sounds like they're saying that black people don't deserve a second seat in the Louisiana congressional delegation because somehow it's un. That they're getting it unfair. They almost sound like they're making like an anti DEI argument about the seed. Is that how you read it? That is.
- [23:04]
G
It is, yes. How they're trying to frame it, it actually ignores the whole impetus for section 2 even being brought into the picture. And that is a record of substantial discrimination on the part of Louisiana. It's as if we just came forward and said, hey, we want a second district for no reason at all. No, we want a second district for black people in Louisiana because they are numerous enough, they are geographically compact enough, they have suffered external discrimination. And the state of Louisiana was very, very particular in what it said about its goals for drawing maps. And every time we met their goals, every single time we submitted a map that they said is what they wanted, if it had another black district, they said no. And so it was clearly a way to minimize and cancel out the growing political power of black people in Louisiana. And this is happening at the same time that the white population is declining. The white electorate in the original NAP controlled 83% of the congressional districts, even though they only comprise 58% of the electorate. I mean, if you're talking about an imbalance, if you're talking about unfairness, if you're talking about super proportionality in favor of a single group, that is it. And it's in favor of white people. Even now, in the map that we are defending, they control 66% of the congressional districts and they are only 58% of the population. Now, numbers alone are not going to win a Section 2 claim. But they are an entry point. They do tell you that something might be wrong in the system if things are that imbalanced. And unfortunately, the state of Louisiana wants to get out of the obligation of complying with federal law. And sadly, we know that the only way that we've been able to get, you know, a change in the complexion of elected officials across the country is by virtue of all the work that's been put in for the past 60 years through the Voting Rights Act.
- [25:16]
A
Yeah, I mean, and look, this is. This is my bad that I didn't prepare this so that Jason can have it. I don't know if you guys can even see this. I'm gonna turn my laptop around and see if you guys can see this map. This is the New York Times. They have put together what it would look like. The map that you see, that's got some blue on it. That is the current maps. If this were to happen, this is, in theory, what Republicans could do. Can you all see that in the chat? Let me know if you guys can see it. I don't know if my team, tjrs, and my readers can actually see it, but the reality is the south, which is where more than half of African Americans live, you would essentially allow Republicans to eliminate not some, but all of the potentially black majority districts in. In Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana. You would leave South Carolina. These states would have no black representation in Congress. None. And this is where half of black people live. So they would. It would go from 24 seats across these states in states where they generally only allow black folks, who in some cases are a third of the population, to only get one seat. Mississippi has all those black people. They only have one congressional seat that has a black person in it. They managed to get two in Alabama by going to court. They've managed to get two in Louisiana by going to court under the Voting Rights Act. You're talking about some states where there are a third black and have not one black congressperson. That's the outcome that Republicans want, right?
- [26:50]
H
Yeah.
- [26:51]
G
And so let me say, you know, we don't look at it in terms of party. We're looking at it just in terms of the ability of black voters to exercise their power for whomever they choose. And I love that you brought up the issue of Mississippi and then also Arkansas. Those are two states with a substantial black population. The state of Mississippi has the highest percentage of black people of all states in the entire country. And as you said, they only have one congressional district where Black people can actually choose their representative. That is because it is so difficult to bring a section to place and win that we have been unable to succeed in doing so in Mississippi. So the idea that somehow Section two is, you know, running amok and we're just able to get districts popping up all over the country that are unfair to white people is so patently false. Section 2 is already significantly constrained and only produces a result in favor of black voters when you have a substantial showing of discrimination, as we have in Louisiana. And even on the partisan issue, which of course, my opponents really wanted to make this a partisan issue because I think they thought that would be appealing to the court. And also the law is much more favorable when it comes to partisan issues. But we have 13 districts that have been produced from the Voting Rights act that have elected Republicans because again, we are more concerned about giving black people their volition, their ability to determine for themselves who represents them and to ensure that they have equal footing in the electoral process, whether that's in support of Republicans or Democrats. And just because black people happen to be more aligned with Democrats does not mean that they can be punished in our political process, doesn't mean that they can have their right to vote denied. So that can never be a basis. There's a constitutional right to be free from race discrimination in our Constitution. There is no equivalent right that has anything to do with the party, that has anything to do with partisanship. And that cannot be the excuse for discriminating against black voters.
- [28:58]
A
Right. And because the reality is, you know, political politics in the country is so racialized that both parties have been subject to white flight. Just as when a black person moves into a majority white neighborhood or an all white neighborhood, lots and lots of white people physically move, sell their houses and leave. When black people who were almost entirely Republicans moved into the Democratic Party, the whole south were Democrats, the whole south were solidly conservative, right wing Democrats and black folks and liberal white people were Republicans for like 100 or more years. And then in the 20th century, when the flip happened during FDR a little bit during Woodrow Wilson, when black people moved from the Republican Party and began moving into the Democratic Party because it was the only way to get power in the south, they said, well, this is where the powers were going to try to come in there, white people skedaddled and went in the Republican Party. That is why the party switched. Understand? It was just white flight. And so this isn't about partisanship, because wherever the majority of black people are, politically the majority of white people leave and go to the other. These parties could switch again if black, if black people substantially became Republicans, you'd have a lot of conservative white people go back to being Democrats because it is more race than anything else. Do you feel that the six conservatives, and I really actually don't even mean all six of them because some of them, I think are bought and sold. But John Roberts is kind of the key because he is an anti voting rights figure for a long time, but also wants the esteem of the court to remain. What were his sort of key questions that kind of told you where he's standing?
- [30:43]
G
Well, I think John Roberts occupies a very, very interesting position here. He is the author for the majority of the court in a case called Allen vs. Milligan, which is the case that we won two years ago out of Alabama that created that second black majority district. And in that opinion is a fierce one. It is very strong in embracing long held principles around the Voting Rights Act. The chief justice wrote for a majority and quashed many of the very same arguments that the state of Louisiana tried to put forth today. And that came up and I'm, I'm hopeful that the five individuals who were part of the majority in Milligan will continue to hold their ground and hold the course. You know, what's interesting is one of the questions that has come up is about whether Section 2 should have a time limit. You know, whether.
- [31:37]
A
Yeah.
- [31:38]
G
Because it has, you know, a remedy that at times can use race. It somehow must be limited. But the point that you just made about history and the cycles show you that you need an ever present check on discrimination in the process. That's not about party. That's about making sure race is not used to manipulate outcomes because people can switch parties, the political winds can go in any different direction. But what is permanent, what is enshrined in our Constitution is the right to be free from racial discrimination and voting. And we need a statute that ensures that that is nonpartisan. And that's what we're defending.
- [32:21]
A
Janae Nelson, a brilliant mind, a stalwart defender of civil rights and voting rights. We appreciate you. Congratulations on making a successful, I think brilliant, really well crafted argument before the United States Supreme Court. If you all do not prevail, it will not be for lack of brilliance and trying and just true integrity. And I just want to congratulate you for all of those things. Thank you, my friend. I appreciate you being here.
- [32:48]
G
Thank you, Joy.
- [32:49]
A
Thank you very much. Well, there you have it, Janae Nelson, who made her first argument. This is her first time she's done a lot of arguments for the Supreme Court, but she was the lead attorney on the other side of this Louisiana vs Calais case. So kudos to her for doing that. But it's not just the LDF that is fighting this fight. Black Voters Matter is also in this fight for the long haul and also preparing to keep the fight going for voting rights, no matter what the outcome of. Of this court. Y' all let me know when our guest is available to, because this is. It's. It's going to wind up being a fight on the ground as well. So I want to bring in April Albright, who is one of the leaders of Black Voters Matter. Brilliant again. Well, I'm just putting on all the smart people. I'm putting the smarticles on today. I want all the smart people to come on. Legal director of Black Voters Matter. Black Voters Matter Fund. Is it Black Voters Matter Fund. I want to make sure I'm getting it all. Black Motors Matter fundamental. And it's also Black Voters Matter Fun because. Exactly. I also sometimes call it Black Voters Matter Fun because that bus that y' all have the blackest bus in America. It is fun.
- [33:57]
G
It's fun.
- [33:57]
F
It is so much fun. We love our fund designation because a lot of our work is providing resources. Right.
- [34:06]
A
Yeah.
- [34:06]
F
To grassroots organizations and making sure that their voices are heard throughout the democratic process. In fact, we brought, you know, seven buses from the south to the hear the oral argument or at least to be in front bearing witness.
- [34:22]
A
Right.
- [34:22]
F
As our sister Janae was in there slaying, you know, in the court. Right. And so, yeah, we love that designation of fun because that's a very important part of our identity.
- [34:35]
A
Absolutely. And some people leave off the fund, but yeah, don't leave off the fund or the fund. Make sure that you do that when you talk about Black Voters Matter. How do you think it went today?
- [34:44]
F
Well, I think that even before we got there, we all knew that this was a consequential and important moment. Right. That we knew that Section 2, which is the last remaining teeth to the Voting Rights act, was on the cutting table. We knew that we have the right gladiators representing, like even watching Janae and other this generation. Right. Not the Thurgood Marshals, but. But ascending down or ascending up to the Supreme Court. We knew that we had the gladiators in the room, but we also know that that court has the malicious intent. Right. Very, very similar to some earlier versions of scotus. Like today when I spoke, I liken the dred Scott decision, because people don't understand that is very much what this case is like. Folks won't frame it that way. They say, how are you going back to a relic of the, you know, slavery time to say that this case is like that case? But what people don't realize.
- [35:44]
A
Okay, we're gonna ask you. Just tip your camera down. There we go. There we go. So we got you. All right. We got you.
- [35:49]
F
So what people don't realize about the Dred Scott case, you know, other than the language that, you know, they said that black men do not have rights that white men are bound to respect. What they did with the stroke of a pen, right, is nationalized slavery. Because even at that time, right, there were freed states and non freed states, but the Supreme Court, using their Marbury vs Madison third branch power, nationalized it.
- [36:15]
A
Right.
- [36:15]
F
And so this decision has the same effect of taking the Voting Rights act, which has created all of these districts where black and brown people have been able to get their congressional representation and at the state and federal level, and then saying, okay, you don't, you don't get that. Right, Right. States don't have a guardrail that prevents them from considering that. And so we find ourselves again under that shadow of that ghost that we don't have rights, then we don't have political rights that anyone, any of these states, especially these red states, have to respect. So that's this moment. And so we go in the room knowing that we, we go into this case understanding that Justice Roberts wanted to get rid of the Voting Rights Act. This is not new to him. Even before he became a justice on the Supreme Court, he was actively advocating against. In fact, the thing that became a topic today around intention, because some of you may have heard the court talking about, well, there should at least be a different, a racial intent element to this, these analysis. Right. We have been in that era, but that was changed in 1982 through the Dole Amendment. And they started to allow for the totality of circumstances, that impact analysis that began to allow us to go in court and win. Right. Because prior to that, we had to prove racial intent, which is. They called me N I G G E R when they drew the lines. Right. We don't often get those text messages that we saw yesterday when we're trying these cases. And so he did not like that. He advocated against it. He advocated and made sure in the Shelby decision that we lost one of the most important tools. So we know that about this court right now, as this decision, as this case is being Tried.
- [38:11]
H
Right.
- [38:12]
F
So we believe at black Voters Matter, that the Voting Rights act could very much indeed be gutted to a point that even if they don't say it's unconstitutional completely, that they begin to continue to chill away at it, where it becomes ineffective.
- [38:28]
A
Yeah. And that is the goal. And I think people need to understand that. I mean, the argument on the John Roberts side, effectively, is that you are insulting white people by saying that they're. That unless you can prove they actually said a hard rn word, that then anything that they do, you have to presume good intent. You have to presume some other intent. And he's also championed this idea that if your intent is purely partisan, that actually is okay. It's okay. Right. So that means, just for those of you who are listening, and you guys know we've talked to Jalanda Jones numerous times about the way they did this in Texas. The way they did it in Texas. They said, well, we're just drawing these lines geographically. But they happen to draw the lines geographically, knowing black people tend to live in concentrated cities. So black people tend to live near each other in concentrated urban areas. So in order to create a district no black person can ever win, you just take that little urban center and make it like a pie divided in five. Put a piece of that pie in a hugely rural district that's got not a lot of people, but lots of space and lots of cows, but only white people, and take each of those pieces of the pie and leave a black sliver that's in that urban piece and draw a big line around a bunch of white Americans and conservative Hispanics and say, that's a fair district. Each district is the same size. Each district has an opportunity to vote, but there just aren't enough black people in any of those districts to ever elect another black person. That is the kind of secret way that conservatives can make sure black people have no representation, because that's how they can ensure that whatever it is that white Americans and white conservatives want, they get. What do y' all do if that is the outcome in this case?
- [40:12]
F
Well, we continue to fight. And I know LDF is going to continue to fight, because we understand that without the Voting Rights act and the power of Section two, we know what that means. It takes away a lot of that. For example, that impact analysis that we need to help prove our cases. We know that it will usher us back into the 14th amendment, and the 15th amendment being our only tools to actually file these cases. But we're still going to file them.
- [40:39]
A
Right?
- [40:39]
F
Regardless. Because we believe that you've got to use all of your tools to fight. But we, what we do is we participate in elections because remember, who draws these lines are people that are elected, right? And so we cannot in the state level forfeit those elections and those races. We've got to engage and take away these super majorities in the south or wherever we are. And we got to make sure that, I'm going to be honest, we got to be strategic about where we're living in these states, right? We also have to begin to go into areas so that we can begin to impact those races in a way that we can put more righteous and multicultural minded representation in these state houses because they are who are drawing these lines at the state level and at the federal level. And so we at Black Voters Matter will continue to engage and fight and use our resources so that we can participate in these elections, right? And we've all got to do that. But we can't stop there, right? I think in this moment we've got to understand that all around the world, when you have countries that consistently weaponize race, particularly in their democracy process, they fight for stronger remedies in their constitutions. Whether you're in South Africa and other places, there are other tools that we've quite frankly got to stop being afraid to talk about, right? In this country, our dear sister Lani Guinier used to talk about things like proportional representation. And she said so boldly and she paid the cost for that. She paid the political cost. But basically what that means is in nations that have had the kind of history that America has had where a group of marginalized people have been committed to genocide, are locked out of the political process. Constitutions reflect that they must have representation in their communities. And so we in our communities, the marginalized folks, we got to start talking about those things. We got to start educating our communities about those things and building the kind of coalition that will make that possible. This is a bad time, don't get me wrong, but this is also a time where we've got to aspire for the nation that we want and begin to strategically think about the policies that our people can fight for to get it. And so we have never let a rogue and racist scotus, like I said today, the Supreme Court is not holy ground for us. For 100 years after the 14th Amendment, they continue to wreak terror on our communities. But it didn't stop us, right? And it changed only because we organized ourselves and we fought. And so Black Voters Matter is going to continue like we did today, bringing almost 300 people from the south in buses where committed Black folks from 70 years old to 15 years old drove in buses for 12, 15 to 16 hours just to bear witness that we see you Supreme Court, right? And just like Plessy didn't stop us, just like Dred Scott didn't stop us, this is not going to stop us. But be on the right side, right? Be the Brown court. Be like Earl Warren. Make the righteous decision that allows us to continue to build our political power and access in this country. But if you do not, right, we are still going to create the nation that we want.
- [44:13]
A
April Albright, you see why we love to bring the brilliant people on to the Joy Reid show. Brilliantly done. Brilliantly said. Thank you very much. Good sister. I know you're going to keep that fight up. Thank you very much. And I cannot wait to get my next ride on the blackest bus in America. All right, all right. I'm coming on. All right. Thank you very much. I appreciate you. April Albright. Thank you very much, everybody. Give her a round of applause. In the chat. By the way, note that the system, it's always been conservatives, right? And it's not the party, it's the conservatism. The conservatives used to be the Democrats. And the way that they made sure black people couldn't vote was restrictive covenant saying, you can't move into this neighborhood, so this neighborhood stays all white. Then this neighborhood is drawn into the district that don't have any black people in it. So white people win. Then if black people move in, they move out and go to a different neighborhood and redistrict it again so that the black people who now live in that neighborhood are only combined with other black people and kind of siloed off into one district. And they say, okay, you can have that one, but you can't have any others because we draw it to make sure you don't live out here in these other areas, and you can't have anything there. When that didn't work, even before that even stopped not working, they just used the Klan. The Klan was originally created for the purposes of preventing black people from voting. It was originally terrorism to say black people. You don't even think about trying to vote because the thing they feared always was that black people would vote. And they learned in Reconstruction that when black people vote, they tend to vote for policies that are more liberal. They tend to vote for public education. They tend to vote for public health. They tend to vote. It's the reason they don't want women to vote. It's the way they vote in the things that people vote for. Okay, we're going to. We're going to make a shift here because coming up in hour two, I just want to let y' all know, I'm going to share my thoughts, mine thoughts on the ways that the old Republicans are really just like the old Dixiecrats, which we're talking about now, and maybe, you know, even the 1930s Germans. And also, I want to make sure that if that is the case, somebody needs to run. Tell Stephen A. Smith, because I got some words for him, too. But first, I want to really quickly note the passing of one of the greatest musicians of all time. We're going to do a very quick note on this. D', Angelo, the great d', Angelo, basically the godfather of Neo soul. He was only 51 years old. He died after a private battle, I believe a pancreatic cancer. I mean, it's horrible. He's only 51. His. His first. His debut album literally, I think, changed music forever. It created a Neo Soul phenomenon and it made him into a huge superstar thanks to a certain music video. There it is. Jason put that album up. Oh, see, that's the music video. I'm not gonna play it because we have copyright issues on YouTube. You really can't play the video. But when I tell you untitled, how does it feel, that music video? But yeah, there's the album Brown Sugar, one of the greatest albums. I would argue one of the ten greatest albums of all time, Brown Sugar. But then you go back, you show the video again. Jason, don't hate. Show the video again. The still of the video. Go ahead and show it. Don't show it. That video right there changed music. It literally broke the Internet before there was an Internet to break. But it wasn't just that. He also did this incredible collaboration with Lauryn Hill, Nothing Really Matters, a great song that he wrote. He also is the guy who wrote you will know the song from Jason's lyric.
- [47:18]
H
He actually.
- [47:18]
A
That was his first big thing. I think he was like 19 when he broke in the business. He wrote you will know, and that was how he kind of broke through in the music industry. Lauryn Hill wrote there it is. Nothing. Nothing even matters. Nothing Even Matters. One of the great songs, the great collabos of all time, Lauryn Hill wrote a really beautiful tribute to him. I don't know why she put it on X Twitter, but she put it on her X Twitter. I'm not even going to read it. I think you Guys should go ahead and read it. I'll put it in substacks. You guys can read what she had to say. But I think the really sort of tragedy in addition to her tribute is. There it is. Let's put that up. Jason, his relationship, as people may not may or may not have known, with Angie Stone, who also died this year. I thought it was last year. I think I put it in my social. That was like, last year. No, it was this year. It was, like, in March. And they have a beautiful little son together. He actually had three children, but one of the sons is with Angie Stone. That video, the. The Untitled song and the phenomenon of that music video actually was a contributor to their relationship ending because he became this massive sex symbol, and it kind of broke their relationship up. They came back together in later years and re. At least got their friendship back. So sad. So sad. So sad. Let me bring in my friend Ashley Allison, the new proprietress of the root.com. i brought you on to share my grief, my grief about d', Angelo, but also to talk about your new venture. Good, sis. It hit me really hard. Like, harder than Angie Stone. Hit me hard, too, because this is a soundtrack to, like, my early relationship with Jason, my early life. Like, this was my soundtrack. What did you make of what happened, and how did you feel when you heard it?
- [48:55]
H
Oh, I was devastated. I didn't know he was sick. And quite honestly, I was talking to one of my best friends last night, and she was working all day, and she hadn't been on the Internet. And so I just said something casually in passing. I was like, yeah. And then d' Angelo died. And she was like, d' Angelo died? And we just stopped. And I was like, oh, my gosh.
- [49:12]
A
I thought you knew.
- [49:14]
H
I think we all remember where we were when we saw that video that you were playing. And I just was reflecting on, yes, Joy.
- [49:23]
A
He was a beautiful, beautiful man.
- [49:25]
H
And I know, you know, he was a beautiful man. He had a beautiful voice. And then when you talked about you will know that song, you know, I was started singing it in my head right now. Yes, it had Tevin Campbell in it. It was just like the clap. It was just. It's just such great black culture. And I think the other thing I was like is, why are so many of us dying so early? Like, we need to go to the doctor. We need to take care of ourselves. We cannot go out like this. We have long lives to live.
- [49:55]
D
And.
- [49:55]
A
Yes. Can I. Can I put this. Phil, I want to put this up. Phil. Lewis, Jason, this is C9 Phil Lewis, who's a great social media guy. He put up just a list of just the hip hop artists who've died in. Died young. It is actually creepy. I mean, you think of Craig Mack was only 47. DMX was 50. Coolio was 59. He might have been the oldest one to die. Shock G, Shock G. Digital Underground, Listen, and that was years ago. He was only 47. True goy the Dub. This one took me out because my other group really was De La Soul. De La Soul was my people, them. And I mean, true Boy the Dove, he was only 54. Fife dog from Tribe Called Quest. My actual favorite group of all time. Favorite hip hop group of all time. He was only 45 years old. Biz Marquis, 57. And now D' Angelo at 51. Prodigy was only 42 years old. I had to have been like at least a year ago. Nate Dog is. It was only 41. Girl, what is happening? MF Doom, who was brilliant. People underplayed MF Doom. He was only 49. What this message to me is that black men got to go to the doctor, right? Like, I guess. Or that our healthcare system sucks.
- [51:07]
H
I think it's multiple layers, but whatever.
- [51:10]
A
It is, I don't like it.
- [51:11]
H
And black women, black men, go to the doctors. Take care of yourself. Stress will kill you. So take, you know, take care of yourself, Take care of your family. But it's tragic. It's tragic. And the way Angie Stone died was so tragic as well and so unexpected that I feel sorry for their child.
- [51:29]
A
Definitely. And. And d' Angelo had three children. His real name was Michael Eugene Archer. For those who don't. Who don't know. And again, this guy, he actually shared my mother's birthday, February 11th. He was born 1974. And you know, the 90s, you now are in charge. And this is the. I buried the lead here. You, your organization, you guys have taken control of theroot.com, which is now under black ownership. And it was not always. I think people assumed black people always owned the root. That was not always the case. It is now. And I feel like this is a significant moment for that. Because even a story like this, a black owned media company, is just going to treat it in a different way. Right? Because D' Angelo and this 90s or, you know, neo soul culture was so specific to our emergence. Just as Gen Xers. Well, you might genetics, you young, you know, but just our kind of cultural millennial. Okay, you're a millennial. You're A baby. But, yeah, all millennials are old millennials, by the way. All millennials are old millennials. Yeah, exactly. Old souls. But.
- [52:31]
I
Right.
- [52:31]
A
I mean, this was, you guys, childhood and our young adulthood, and I feel like the Root is gonna just hit it in a different way. Right? Yeah.
- [52:40]
H
So, like, when we think about d', Angelo, the text that we're going back and forth with, our editor in chief, like, how we were gonna confirm it, I think it is a conversation about health. It is a conversation about his contribution to black culture, the evolution of black music. When you think about where he got his soulful voice and soul for tenor, the ability to write lyrics that talk about love and struggle, the relationship of Angie Stone and.
- [53:08]
A
And.
- [53:08]
H
And himself and. And how people treated Angie Stone because she was in a relationship with him. I think he. I don't want to quote, but I think there was some addiction issues there as well. And so just, like, what. There are so many angles to tell this story.
- [53:23]
A
Story.
- [53:24]
H
And you started by saying that, you know, the root is in black ownership. And the thing that I find so interesting is that, yes, it wasn't always black owned, because black stories are American stories. Right. Black culture sets American culture. And so smart business people knew that owning a black publication was a strategic business move, which is why we wanted to acquire it. Because there are millions and millions of eyeballs that go to our site every single day, every month to get the.
- [53:52]
A
News, and they want to get it.
- [53:53]
H
Through the lens of, what are black people thinking? How do we make sense of this moment? And then I want to hear the tributes, the people. You know, I want to hear from Tevin Kill what it felt like to sing that song. I want to hear from the cast of Jason lyrics and, like, what that song meant as they. There's just so many layers and levels that you can dissect to one person's life.
- [54:15]
A
And we can do it in the.
- [54:16]
H
Written word, but also through video. Also, like, think about how we even listen to music now.
- [54:22]
A
Yes.
- [54:22]
H
Like, you would have to wait for video soul or to come on. Or, like, I don't think 106 of park was out there. But like, Donnie Simpson and, like, I would love to hear Donnie Simpson talk about, you know, d' Angelo and that video and when. When they used to play those videos and, like, you would come home from school, right?
- [54:40]
A
And you will wait for the video.
- [54:42]
H
To be played at 3:30.
- [54:44]
A
Yeah. And you know, you would want it.
- [54:46]
H
You would be like, how long is it gonna stay on the charts? Then you had to, like, you know, wait in line to get the album. Like, was it an explicit album? You had to try and get the plastic off the CDs without breaking the out.
- [54:56]
A
There just was.
- [54:57]
H
So, you know, it's like there's just a culture to this that you don't even think about. And now you can just, like, download it and have it anytime you want.
- [55:05]
A
You can have it anytime you want. I just want to read some of this. So the song Untitled, how does it feel? Earned d' Angelo the Grammy Award for best best male R B vocal performance. The. The album won best R B album. That's something about the segmentation of music, genre, segmentation of music. Because this was just great music. But of course, it was siphon off into R B. But he worked with. I mean, he worked with Ali, Shaheed, Muhammad. He worked with everybody. He remade Smokey Robinson's Cruising. My favorite version of that song, like, he. That era, whether it was movies or music, really feels like it was almost a modern version of the Harlem Renaissance. It was like a Black Renaissance, the 90s, right. And it feels like that hurts. It's like thinking about that now, it resonates in a different way because we're in this rotten place. And so our sort of 90s nostalgia almost. Right. It's like I already had 90s nostalgia, but I feel like in this era, when things feel so dark and so bad, you know, it makes you realize how much we have lost, and it.
- [56:03]
H
Also reminds us of our mortality.
- [56:05]
A
Right.
- [56:06]
H
Like, think we are all human. Our day will all come. And you want to ask yourself how, you know, how you've lived your life. What have you left on this earth for people to feel better about? I know d' Angelo love music that makes people feel better about life, that makes people fall in love, you know?
- [56:24]
A
Yeah.
- [56:24]
H
And so it's like, what is the.
- [56:26]
A
Gift that what is you.
- [56:27]
H
I've been thinking a lot about legacy, quite honestly, and I don't have children, but I've always been saying, like, what is my legacy?
- [56:34]
G
What is the thing?
- [56:35]
H
And I can now say that, like, part of the chapter of the Root will be. Part of my legacy will be owning a publication that black people and Americans and quite honestly, people all over the globe can turn to for trusted information to make sense of the moment through the lens of the black perspective and through the diversity of the black perspective. Right. Because you had d' Angelo then.
- [56:58]
A
You had.
- [56:59]
H
That was when hip hop. But I feel like one of the.
- [57:01]
A
LL Cool, like, right? There was a whole lot happening. Absolutely. Absolutely. You had the Daisy age. Like you had black men. Listen, we had all of this going on all at the same time, right? It was just a really fascinating era. And then all of a sudden you started getting that west coast, like gangsta rap, Ice Cube, Ice tea, like it was all happening in the same era, which is kind of mind blowing. Mind blowing. And by the way, let me.
- [57:25]
H
The 2000s, where like Outkast comes out.
- [57:28]
A
And you're like, what is this? Listen, like, what is happening, girl? The south was coming through. St. Louis music was coming through. It was like the 90s just birthed. I mean, you know, it started. Hip hop started in the 80s, but in the 90s, it really, like, took off. And by the. Like you said in the early 2000s, that mid-90s to mid-2000s, you know, look, Biggie, Tupac, you just name all of this stuff that was happening in the 90s going in. And that was done by 96. You know, they were both gone by 96. So, so young. But yes, it also makes me think.
- [57:59]
H
About Joy when we talk about these stories too. Is that this generation of music that is the. The hip hop that comes out now, I would listen to it. It doesn't feel like the hip hop I want to necessarily be heard made in the masses. But I think there's a conversation to like, rather than disparage this generation.
- [58:15]
A
That's right.
- [58:16]
H
And them disparage our generation, it's like, what are the commonalities?
- [58:19]
A
What. Why do we.
- [58:21]
H
Why do we think music is the.
- [58:22]
A
Way that it is?
- [58:23]
H
Why do we think we're talking about the things that we're talking about?
- [58:25]
F
I mean, they had some.
- [58:26]
A
You know, that video was risque. That it was. It broke the world. I had to sneak to watch that video.
- [58:32]
H
My mom would be, you'll turn that next stuff up.
- [58:34]
A
Turn that naked, man.
- [58:36]
H
We weren't all saved and sanctified in the 90s either, right? So it allows us to. To look at the generational music that our parents listen to. We listen to. And now this next generation is listening.
- [58:47]
A
To Ashley Allison, who I will correct one thing that you said. You do have a child. It's called the root dot com. Watch it. Keep you up at night and you have to change his diaper 24 7. Listen. It's a baby. It's the root, baby. It's a baby. It's a baby.
- [59:06]
H
You know, actually, when the day before I announced, I called Professor Gates, Henry Lewis Gates, who was the founder of the Root, and I, you know, I.
- [59:15]
A
Never met him before. I Never even spoke to him before.
- [59:16]
H
And I told him and he said, you have my child. And I said, sir, I will take good care.
- [59:21]
A
Good care. Raise her well. That obligation you do, you don't want Henry Lewis Gates knocking on your door. Be like what you did with my child. I'm gonna call hr. Hr. Exactly. Exactly. Don't have it happen. Ashley Allison, my soror. I'm so proud of you. Thank you so much for being here. We are just gonna celebrate you. We enjoy you on CNN too. But I want everybody to see that you could talk about lots of different things, including culture. And so I wanted to have that conversation with you. I'm proud of you, sis. Thank you. Thank you, thank you.
- [59:51]
H
Thank you, Jo. I'm proud of you, too.
- [59:53]
A
Thank you so much. I appreciate you. Ashley Allison, everybody. Jason, can we get a round of applause for Ashley Allison. And she's great. Yes. We've got a second hour of the show coming up. And look, rest in peace to the great d' Angelo and deepest condolences to his three children and his family. What a loss. What a loss. What a loss. All right, let's move on. Hour two of the Joy Read Show. Thank you all for tuning in. If you guys have not yet hit like and subscribe and share, this would be a great time to do it. You might as well share the fun, right? You might as well just share the fun. Thank you so much to James. Is this James Pally? Palney. Palney, who's been a member for one month, says great content. Keep up the good work. Thank you so much for being a member of team tjrs. We appreciate everybody that's in the chat. Everybody's congratulating Ashley. It is a big deal for her to have acquired the root, her company to acquire the root and to have it in black ownership. When I worked@thegrio.com David Wilson, who founded the Griot, but it was at the time it was picked up by NBC News. So when I worked@thegrio.com we were actually owned by NBC News and then by msnbc. So a lot of the times these front facing that seem like black media are not necessarily owned by black people. BET was and then it wasn't. It became part of Viacom and so BET was still bet, but it was not owned by anybody black after it was sold. So you don't always know. It's not always forward facing. You can't tell. I will say that this company, Image Lab Media Group that is producing this show for you right now is 100% black, owned by myself and Jason Reed. So there you have that. All right, so let's get into our our second hour of the Joy Reid show. And as I'm sure you've heard by now, the young Republicans have been acting up. They've been acting up a little bit. Here's the political headline. Let me go ahead and read this political headline. I love Hitler. That's the title. Leaked Messages Expose Young Republicans Racist Chat. Let's relittle the story, quoting Politico here. Leaders of the young Republican groups Leaders of young Republican groups throughout the country worried what would happen if their telegram chat ever got leaked. But they kept typing anyway. They referred to black people as monkeys and the watermelon people and mused about putting their political opponents in gas chambers. They talked about raping their enemies and driving them to suicide and lauded Republicans who they believed supported slavery. Little bit more Republican groups throughout the country worried. Let me skip, skip, skip, skip, skip, skip, skip. Let me go. William Hendrick, the Kansas Young Republicans vice chair, used the words nigga and nigga, variations of racial slur more than a dozen times in the chat. Bobby Walker, the vice chair of the New York State Republicans at the time referred to rape as epic. Peter gta, who at the time was chair of the same organization, R.A. wrote in a message sent in June that everyone that votes no for him to become the leader of this national group is going to the gas chamber. Junto was referring to an upcoming vote on whether he should become chairman of the Young Republican National Federation, the GOP's 15,000 member political organization for Republicans between 18 and 40 years old. Quote, I'm going to create some of the greatest physiological torture methods known to man. We only want true believers, he continued. Two members of the chat responded, can we fix the showers? Gas chambers don't fit the Hitler aesthetic. Joe Maligno, who previously identified himself as the general counsel for the New York State Young Republicans, wrote back. Huh? The 2900 pages of chats shared among a dozen millennial and Gen Z Republicans between early January and mid August, chronicle their campaign to seize control of the national Young Republican organization on a hardline pro Donald Trump platform. Many of the chat members already work inside government or party politics, and one serves as a state senator. Together, the messages reveal a culture where racist, anti Semitic and violent rhetoric circulate freely and where the Trump era loosening of political norms has made such talk feel less taboo among those positioning themselves as the party's next leaders. The more the political atmosphere is open and liberating, like it has been with the emergence of Trump and a more right wing GOP even before. For him, it opens up young people and older people to telling racist jokes, making racist commentaries in private and public, says Joe Fagan, a Texas A and M psychology professor who has studied racism for the last 60 years. He's also concerned the words would be applied to public policy. It's chilling, of course, because they will act on these views. The dynamic of easy racism and casual cruelty played out even in dark, vivid fashion inside the chats, where campaign talk and party gossip blurred into streams of slurs and violent fantasies. Now, of course, Republicans are having to figure out how to respond to all of this because, you know, don't look so good. Q. J.D. vance, who, of course, because he's J.D. vance, brushed the whole thing off. It's just some, you know, some college group chat, tagging the candidate for attorney General of Virginia who got into hot water for a spicy text to a white colleague calling for a Republican to feel the pain of their ideas. We're going to show you JD Vance's tweet, this is D6 in which he's basically brushing it off, saying, oh yeah, don't worry about this. This is no big deal at all. This is just a racist college chat. Just a group chat, really, JD because there's a slight problem with that. James David it's not a college group chat. It's a national group chat for the Young Republican national foundation, which I just explained is the Republican Party, your parties 15,000 member political organization for Republicans between 18 and 40. I mean, I guess some of those 40 year olds are still in college, but I doubt all of them are. And even Mediaite, which tends to kind of lean pretty conservative, called JD out and called out his tweet as balderdash, with editor Colby hall saying that his response showcases the moral rot of the maga Right now. Vance is certainly inconsistent, if we can call it that he's inconsistent. He used to think Trump might be Hitler. Used to think Trump might be Hitler. In 2016, he texted a college his college roommate in a text. I go back and forth between thinking Trump is a cynical asshole like Nixon who wouldn't be that bad and might even prove useful and that he's American Hitler. How's that for discouraging? That's in 2016, not like in, like in the 90s when we were listening to Neo Soul. And who knew that when he said he might be America's Hitler, he might have meant that as a compliment. Former Republican congresswoman from New York, Elise Stefanik, who now works for Trump, she knows of these people. She got an award presented to her by the I Love Hitler guy. There she is. Elise Stefanik received this award from her allies involved in the racist text messaging thing. There she is with a guy named Bobby Walker. He's the one who referred to rape as epic. And Peter Ga, he's the I love Hitler guy. And there she's getting an award from it. And she's not exactly giving the award back. I don't think there's any news that she's going to give them her the award back. The I Love Hitler people and the N word people. Hard R giving you an award. Not a big problem for you, ma'. Am. And just in case, you know, any future employers are just curious, here are the supposed college kids that JD Is referring to. That one right there is Peter I Love Hitler junta. That's him. Here's Bobby Walker, who was also involved in the thread. He is D12. We're gonna pull him up just so you just, we just want you to know who's out there. There he is. There's one of the. The I Love Hitler Youth, I guess we could call them. There's another guy named William Hendrix with a Y. It's kind of like a spicy spelling of Hendrix, but I don't think he's. We don't call him a spicy white. There he is. One of the master race. There he is. Master race action there. There's also a guy named Samuel Douglas who actually probably has the most sort of dignified looking picture of all of them. There he is. He's. There he is. Oh, those are the guys. You know, maybe just, you know, I just want to show you those pictures just in case they come up on your bumble. Just in case they come up on your bumble. Which brings me to Stephen A. Smith, who like so many other Stevens, to our Django Unchained. From Jason Whitlock to Larry Elder and Sage Steele and Dr. Ben Carson and Candace Owens to the, you know, the N words for Trump guy. Remember that guy? These guys are constantly begging and hoping for the approval of white conservative Republicans. Or in the case of Clarence Thomas, hoping for the sweet, sweet sucker of fully paid fabulous vacations paid for by billionaires. And of course, a free RV if you can get it. They hope to gain these people's approval. Right? And the primary tactic to get the approval of conservative white Republicans is to attack other black people and. Or to denigrate black history. Candace Owens did that by loaning her voice, lending her voice to the Prageru videos downplaying slavery. She attacked police murder victim George Floyd. She put on a White Lives Matter T shirt to pal around with Kanye west, who had changed his name to Yay the Way by by then. But there is no grift like the Republican fellating grift of attacking black women. I mean, there's literally, like, that's half the content on right wing podcasts, right? Q, Megan Kelly and Piers Morgan. Like, attacking black women is literally their food. They eat it like food to live and grow. Racism is like rocket fuel for these people. And so, you know, why wouldn't they want to be black conservative star want to join in that? So let's listen to Stephen A. Smith said, right wing, emerging right wing black star, who last we checked was a sports commentator leaning into his new role as a bona fide political expert by attacking Jasmine Crockett.
- [69:46]
F
This educated, brilliant black woman representing over 750,000 people is engaging in verbiage and rhetoric for the streets. And that's fine. When you in the streets, how many of y' all bring the streets to the table? When you at the negotiating table trying to get a deal done, how many of you are able to think that for a second that you able to.
- [70:14]
A
Bring street verbiage to Capitol Hill?
- [70:16]
F
And that's going to work for you. You literally have senators and congressional figures on Capitol Hill on the side of the Republicans, telling the networks, whether it's Fox News News Nation or anybody else, please, please, please put her front and center on camera. Why would they do that? Because they know it wins for them.
- [70:49]
A
Mm. So Stephen, he is ordering effectively Jasmine Crockett to get out these streets and go negotiate with the Republicans. We're trying to take away the rights of black people. But I noticed something as I was watching that video, and I don't know what I noticed, Jason. I don't know. I noticed something about that video that was kind of weird about the video. That's the set. Okay, that's a. That's a screenshot of it, right? Straight shooter Stephen A. Smith. And something about the set, like, felt, like, weirdly familiar to me. I can't put my finger on what about it felt familiar. Something about it felt familiar. Something about the set. Something about the set, like, I don't know, like, really, really weirdly familiar, right? Like, there's something about the set that just, like it gave. It was giving. It was giving. I was giving something that I can't quite put my finger on. It was giving Something. What else was I. I don't know. It's something like super duper, like, familiar. Like, you know, like he's mimicking an actual, like, political analyst journalist and like, trying to give himself credibility by making his set look like something like, familiar to people who consume political journalism. Something. Yeah, yeah. No, that can't be it. Yeah, that can't be it. What Stephen A. Smith is doing, he's doing the old Huckabuck. Doing old Huckabut for the right. Right wing trading on the right's group chat ready hatred of black people in order to boost his own career. Right? I mean, he literally got Disney to hand him $100 million to pretend that he not only knows things about politics that should be shared in addition to the things he knows about sports, but that he also has influence with black men as well as with conservatives. Like, that's the shtick, right? That he's the brother who's open minded to MAGA and he's got influence and can bring black men into the mega fold because he's so pragmatic and knows so much about politics and his set looks exactly like a set from msnbc. But the question is, is he really influencing black men and not just the kind of white Republicans who were on that group chat? I mean, you'd have to wonder why, right? If he is influencing them. Because, Steven, that young Republican group chat should have told you that I love Hitler Republicans who use the hard R N word for fun when you black conservatives aren't around, they may be willing to buy you off to keep you shucking and jiving, to allow them to pretend to not be racist in public. But behind the scenes, bro, they still think that you're subhuman. They're never going to love you, Steven, no matter how hard you try by publicly berating black women, black women who look like your mom and your daughter. And when you go on like that, the community that you're denigrating that literally respects Jasmine Crockett, they're highly unlikely to come to your aid when your new friends from the group chat inevitably discard you because they've now fully implemented fascism under Project 2025 and they don't need you anymore. When that happens, Stephen, don't call us and we won't call you. How about that? We'll just be out here with Representative Jasmine Crockett, who actually fights for the people and doesn't Huckabuck dance for the powerful. Just saying. Let's move on to our next topic. I think that's all I have to say about him. There is this weird mystery that's taking place and feel free in the chat if you have any other thoughts about that there, because I found it weird. There's a mystery that's happening. Meanwhile, speaking of those same group chat Republicans, they seem to be very exercised about the existence of black people, the existence of brown immigrants. They seem to be very exercised about the fact that Democrats can still win elections and have any power at all and have any membership in Congress at all. They want that to go away. What they don't seem all that exercised about anymore is the Epstein files. They weirdly don't seem to care about that anymore. They seem to have given up on the idea that Donald Trump should release those files. There is this really, really, really interesting story about a mystery visitor to Ghislaine Maxwell, she who got a special sort of Club Fed deal where she was moved from a maximum security prison where she was housed because she is the only person who's been convicted thus far in the serial rape and trafficking of young women, girls. Not even young women, girls, children, because he's their child. He was a child sex predator. Jeffrey Epstein, she was his trafficker. She's the only person that's ever paid for it. Because when Jeffrey Epstein finally got arrested by the feds and was prosecuted by James Comey's daughter, who got fired for it, she also prosecuted Galaine Maxwell and Diddy. And then, weirdly enough, she gets 20 years in prison for that crime. But then when Donald Trump comes into office, having vowed to release the Epstein files, suddenly he turns against the idea of releasing the Epstein files and decides we ain't releasing the Epstein files. His lawyer, Todd Blanche, who used to be his attorney in the hush money case, the case in which Donald Trump paid off a porn star to hush her up, make her not talk about their one night stand, which she has essentially said was ill, but that was going to hurt his 2016 election chances, he pays her off and then hides the money in a fake sort of business filing he gets convicted of. That's why he has a 34 count felony count. The lawyer who lost that case for him, Todd Blanch, now gets in the Justice Department and apparently his job is to quiet Ghislaine Maxwell's mouth. He goes and has this secret meeting with Ghislaine Maxwell, after which she comes out and says, I never saw Donald Trump do anything illegal when he was hanging out with Jeffrey Epstein for 10 years. That's weird. So now the independent has this really interesting story in which Ghislaine Maxwell gets these secret unexpected visitors at the cushy Texas prison where in August she was moved from her maximum security facility where they normally put sex offenders. They put her in this minimum security basically club Fit. And she gets this like secret visitor at Bryan Federal Prison Camp. So it's a camp, it's not even a prison. It's a minimum security facility known for its relatively relaxed environment. And the secret visitor has dramatic drastically disrupted the daily lives of her fellow inmates. The original reporting is actually from the Wall Street Journal. It talks about the fact that the 63 year old who was convicted in in 2021 for trafficking underage girls for Jeffrey Epstein. Her arrival at that prison camp has led to more frequent lockdowns, more armed guards on campus and other changes to the prison. According to this Wall Street Journal report, current and former inmates at the usually docile prison, also the home of Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes and Real Housewives of Salt Lake City star Jen Shaw said it seemed as though Maxwell had been receiving better treatment than the other inmates. A majority of the inmates held there have committed white collar crimes and face shorter sentences or, or have served a larger portion on a long of a longer sentence and are considered a low flight risk. Because of this federal prison camp, Byron is known as being relatively low security without any of the towering fences, barbed wire or high security cells found at stricter facilities. The Bureau of Prisons typically prohibit sex offenders from serving time in such prisons, though they can be admitted under a special waiver. According to the report, Maxwell, who was handed, who was, who was handed a 20 year sentence in 2022, has the full fourth longest remaining sentence out of the prison 600 inmates. It's not known who Maxwell met in this secret meeting in the chapel back in August, though some of her fellow inmates heard rumors that the lockdown, they locked the prison down so she could have a secret meeting with some unknown person in the chapel. And some of the other inmates heard rumors that the lockdown was meant to accommodate, quote, unquote important visitors, according to the report. Later that day, one inmate said they saw Maxwell returned to her dormitory with a smile on her face. When asked about the mysterious meeting, Maxwell reportedly said that it went well, but didn't share any other information, according to the report. Meanwhile, less than a week later, the Department of Justice released a transcript of an interview Maxwell had had with senior official Todd Blanche weeks earlier in July. During the interview with Blanche, and this is like what I told you before, Maxwell said that she had never seen President Donald Trump doing anything inappropriate or illegal with Epstein when they were friends. Soon after she was transferred to Brian to camp Brian. What's going on here? This is happening as Republicans are refusing to do the simple thing that they could do in order to find out what's going on. They could release the Epstein files. And the House of Representatives that has control of it is refusing to do it. And there is a. An effort by four Republicans and all the Democrats, which is actually led by Representative Summer Lee, but that four Republicans, including Marjorie Taylor Greene, have signed on to, to do a discharge petition, which would mean you force the speaker of the House to release it. But they can't get to the number, the 218, because they need one more. The one more would be a woman named Adelita Grijalva who won her race in the state of Arizona. She succeeded her father who passed away. She won this race, like almost a month ago, but she's still not seated. They won't see her. They're claiming it's because of the shutdown, but she thinks it's because of the Epstein files. Here is Adelita Grijava giving a press conference on that. Sorry, Jason. You were going to play it. You can play it now.
- [80:52]
I
Let's just be very clear. This speaker has sworn in three other members now members in a special under 24 hours after their election, and a few.
- [81:05]
A
Two Republicans, one Democrat. The only difference is I am not a Caucasian male. And also I am a woman of color from Arizona. And 700,000 people deserve to have their voice heard. And I am so grateful for this.
- [81:24]
I
Caucus and the Mujeres that have joined me here today.
- [81:28]
A
Because let's just be really clear, if.
- [81:30]
I
I were a Republican in, I would have already been sworn in.
- [81:33]
A
And that is not acceptable.
- [81:35]
H
They're.
- [81:36]
I
They're afraid of me signing and being the 218 sign.
- [81:41]
H
Yep.
- [81:41]
A
And I think that that's important. And so what Democrats did, while, you know, there's. There's no House representative, they're not. She's not sworn in because they're just not allowing the House to come back because it seems that Mike Johnson doesn't want to have to. He doesn't seem to want to have to square this woman in. So she'd be the 218th vote. Here's a march Democrats did. I believe this was on yesterday. They were marching through the Capitol demanding that this woman, Adelitogrejalba be sworn in. Let's see. And there we have it. The idea that Democrats have to do a march in order to get a member of Congress sworn in when it is standard operating procedure to just swear the newly elected person in. Mike Johnson claims it's not because he doesn't want her to be the 218 fold on the Epstein files, but I don't know. I'm skeptical. Let's bring in our guests, Tara Palmeri, who is one of the most read in reporters and journalists on this case. She's the host of the Tara Palmeri podcast. Tara, it is great to see you. What do you make of this? Of the. Well, let's start with the weird meeting, this weird meeting in the chapel. Do you have any. Any reporting that can sort of tease that out a little bit, what that meeting might have been about?
- [83:21]
I
Joy, I don't have any reporting, but I have to think that from her demeanor as reported by the Wall Street Journal, which has really been after this, I was so impressed to see that they, you know, sent out requests to literally almost every inmate to describe what it was like to be with Glenn Maxwell, to hear that she's getting a short bob haircut with a dye, and to hear that she could tell inmates in common spaces, you can't be near me. And guards would almost act like security for her. The way they protect her above all the others, it suggests to me that there is some sort of understanding that this person needs to be kept alive, that this person needs to be protected for a reason, that there is some sort of outcome to come with all of this. I mean, it's a known fact that child molesters do not do well in prison. They do not do well. They die frequently. They're called comos. And they are literally targeted because of the depravity of this crime and how severe it is. And she's basically in Club Fed, where a lot of these people are fraudsters, Right? But you don't find murderers in this, in this facility. These are. These are open rooms. Their cells are not, like, locked. They can walk around. They live near residents in a residential community. She's a sex offender. People who do the crimes that she commits, they spend 100 years in prison. You know, this is not normal. And yet they're ushering her to private meetings. She's being treated like she is the queen of this camp. I mean, she's being fed vegetarian food and giving it out to people. Now, this just suggests me, when you factor in the president's comments, oh, Glenn, you know, remembering her like they were old pals, which they were, by the way. I mean, she met him when she was Working for her father, Robert Maxwell, selling corporate gifts when she was as young as, like 20 years old. And, and, and her father and Trump were friends. They used to go, he used to go on her father's yacht, the Lady Glenn named after her. So these, they have a long standing relationship, these two. And, you know, he said he was looking into a parting. He's normalizing the situation. And joy, if I could make a prediction, and this is not based in any reporting, but it's just a gut feeling based on the fact that Trump also mentioned Diddy in the same comments he did. I, I think that he will pardon Diddy Maxwell and George Santos in one fell swoop and it will blur the moral lines, cause so much outrage that people are just, just overwhelmed by it. And it gives him a device to do something that is morally reprehensible. And there will just be so many. But it will be confusing at the same time because, you know, some would argue George Santos, you know, he committed some campaign violations, which is fraud, but, you know, to pardon him in the same breath as a sex offender, and Diddy, who was also accused of sex crimes, it's just, it's just, it just seems like he's laying it out there, like he's showing us what his strategy is.
- [86:29]
A
I agree with you. I've been thinking for the longest time that he's going to pardon Diddy because also, by the way, Diddy's probably written him a check. Let's just be clear, you know, and the Maxwells have the money to write him a check, too. And, you know, Donald Trump is nothing if not an entrepreneur. And so I'm assuming that these pardons are coming, but for the way that she's being treated, the way you've described the way she's being treated, it sounds a lot like what I've read about how Jeffrey Epstein was treated when he was incarcerated in Florida. I mean, he was getting to leave that prison every day, go to his office accompanied by Florida Department of Law Enforcement officers who were treating him like they were his security. And then he would come back and sleep in the prison. But he was being allowed to go, come and go as he pleased, even though he's a literal child molester.
- [87:15]
I
In fact, he reportedly raped a girl during that period of time when police were on the other side of the door. I mean, that is how accommodating they were to him. He was walking around with an ankle bracelet in Palm beach. He spent 13 months in prison for a state crime of soliciting a minor for Prostitution. The state of Florida should be ashamed that that was even a crime. Crime that you could actually solicit a minor for prostitution. That is not. You can't. That would make a minor a prostitute. A minor.
- [87:51]
A
That's right.
- [87:51]
I
Be a prostitute. And it's just. It's appalling if, if you really dig into the state case, I, I have a podcast called Broken Jeffrey Epstein, and I reported on it with the victims of Jeffrey Epstein. But I really dug into this case and when it was presented before the grand jury in the state case, they literally told the grand jury, the state attorney and her and his deputy, they told the. The grand jury, there are no victims here, and showed them the MySpace pages of these girls. I mean, this was the. This was the. To sort of suggest that they're promiscuous. And they had it coming. This is the state of mind. This is the layer of protection around Jeffrey Epstein that continues after his death in the sense that the files have not been released, in the sense that Galen Maxwell. I mean, this. It makes sense as to why she didn't speak during the trial. She probably knew at the end of the day that she was going to be able to pull some card.
- [88:50]
A
Well, I mean, the reality is you pull a card or you end up like Jeffrey Epstein. I mean, are you among those of us who do not believe that he died by his own hand?
- [88:57]
I
Oh, yeah. I don't believe he died on his own, no. Yeah, I think he killed him. I think they. That he was killed. Absolutely. There are too many anomalies. There are too many strange occurrences that happened during this period of time. I also don't think, as a narcissist, that he was, you know, scribbling a note, no fun, when asked what prison is like, that he truly believed that he wouldn't be able to pull a wild card and get out just like he did before.
- [89:25]
A
Yeah, I agree with you. I interviewed a gentleman when I was on my old show, AM Joy on msnbc, that said that he was literally talking to his attorneys about his defense and was feeling enthusiastic about taking the case to trial because he knew he had so much dirt that he seemed confident. The idea that he suddenly went from that to suicidal just doesn't make sense. But the other piece of it is, you think about all the people who were involved, right? The person who actually cut the deal for him winds up with a sweet deal. A job inside the first Trump administration gets a cabinet post out of it. You now have Pam Bondi, who said for a hot minute that she had the Epstein files on her desk. And then suddenly she's like, what desk? I don't have a desk. That's not, that's not a thing. And now she has forgotten about herself. Cash Patel, who used to say the FBI director is, who has control the Epstein files and can release them, he now is saying, I don't know what you're talking about. He seems to have forgotten. He literally said that on his own podcast and on Glenn Beck's podcast. Dan Bongino, who also made his name essentially calling for the Epstein files. The, the COVID up feels total. Have you been able to get into the why? Why are all of these people suddenly developing amnesia about how evil Jeffrey Epstein was and about whether these victims need justice?
- [90:47]
I
I think it's pretty clear comes from the top. President of the United States does not want us to read the Epstein files for whatever reason. And by the way, like, during the campaign, he was happy to use it against President Clinton in 2016, but when asked about it in 2024, he was like, yeah, we'll look into it. He wasn't one of those fervent Epstein files. It's going to release a cabal of, you know, naughty Democrats and elites. Let's not forget that at the time when he was friends with Jeffrey Epstein, a very close friend of Jeffrey Epstein, he was a Democrat. He was writing checks to Democrats. He was hanging out in Epstein's circle. I know he claims that he did not write that lewd card to Jeffrey for his 50th birthday, even though the estate handed it over to Congress after being subpoenaed. But he's mentioned not once but twice in that birthday book, a birthday book to Jeffrey Epstein. So it's really hard to not see why all of these people are completely flipping around. I, I think it's just this is the mandate from the top. There is something in there that, that Donald Trump does not want the world to see.
- [92:01]
A
Yeah. And the reality is, I mean, if you all will recall, you know, Donald Trump was so much of a Democrat. The Clintons, Bill and Hillary went to, to his wedding to Melania. Like they were at the wedding. You know, I mean, this is somebody who was playing in Democratic circles. He was popular among Hollywood liberals. You know, he was hanging out with on the left. I mean, I, I remember interviewing Uncle Luke about all the rappers that were hanging out in his house at Mar a Lago, going to parties there. Donald Trump was partying with Diddy. He's known the diddler for a really long time. So Donald Trump was on the other side.
- [92:33]
I
He called him.
- [92:33]
A
He still calls him Puppet. Well, I mean, he is puffed at, right? We're not going to change his name just because he said, listen, they said they don't want to recognize when trans people change their names. I recognize nothing. You're still Puff Daddy. It's still the Gulf of Mexico. This is how I roll. Let's talk a little bit about the financial angle of it, because we now find out that Elon Musk and Peter Thiel had pending potential meetings with Jeffrey Epstein or maybe to go to Epstein island to meet with him. That does not imply they were going to do anything. I'm not implying that. But there definitely was some sort of a connection being made between these tech oligarchs. And you can also throw in Bill Gates and Jeffrey Epstein. Does this story And Steve Bannon. And Steve Bannon. Are we seeing this story morph into a story that's not just about the predation of Jeffrey Epstein, but about a global kind of, I don't know, a network of oligarchs around him and where the money is a bigger part of the story?
- [93:32]
I
I think the money has always been a part of the story. I think the money has been central. I think this was a massive crime operation. It was a sex trafficking operation. It was a honey pot scheme. You have to remember that Jeffrey Epstein used to brag to people that he would consult Vladimir Putin. And he used a lot of the same kind of KGB type schemes where he would bring powerful wealthy men to a remote location where they would be, you know, surrounded by beautiful young women and they would. And it would be a bacchanal type experience. And Jeffrey Epstein suddenly had something on you that would cause a lot of social embarrassment. And he could use that. And that might be, hey, Mark Rowan, I want you to give me over $100 million to manage as your accountant, right. Your hedge fund guy from Apollo needs Jeffrey Epstein scene, right? Graduate from college and got fired as a math teacher to. To manage his money. There's always been a money angle in all of this. He was a hyper fixer. I mean, he. I mean, this is. It's just very classic. I remember one time when I was covering the World Economic Forum for, I think it was Politico at the time. And I remember I went to Oleg Deripaska's party. He's an oligarch. And I was in shock to see all of these scantily clad women all over the place around these CEOs and executives, and they were dancing on them. And I'm thinking to myself, this place must just have cameras all over it. And they are just hoping to trap one of these men, one of these very powerful men. And Jeffrey Epstein essentially did that, whether he said it or not. I think once you spent some time with Jeffrey Epstein, you knew that this guy had some dirt on you and they, and, and these guys liked it. And, and you even saw from Jess Staley, who was the CEO of J.P. morgan, not CEO of J.P. morgan. He was a senior leadership like executive level level, vice president level, who allowed Jeffrey to bank there after he was a registered sex offender and really vouch for him that when Jess was pushed out of JP Morgan, Jeffrey helped make sure that he got a job at Chase. And you know, he was really instrumental in, in actually operating in these worlds to make sure that these guys to open doors for these people. That's why I say he's a hyper fixer. He really knew how to make himself indispensable to these men. And you can see it in the emails. But on top of that, when, when asked what would you like, Beauty and the Beast or Snow White? He could also provide that as well. And we know from emails that just Staley was in Epstein's hot tub when sending him emails at the Zorro Ranch. And yet he was allowed to just roll, roll in these very elite circles. It laundered his name and his reputation and, and it really allowed him to continue to live a life that a sex offender, any other type of person from. Yeah, from a lower class in society would never be treated that way. Yeah, and I welcome back.
- [96:38]
A
Absolutely. I mean he was a big patron at, to Harvard. Alan Dershowitz was hanging out with them and saying, well, he was just getting massages from people who are not fully nude. Whatever he says, we don't know. We don't know what he did. Two more quick questions. One question. The international side of it, the Israel of it, specifically because a former prime minister of Israel is also named among the people who was snare, ensnared in Jeffrey Epstein. Epstein's web. Does Israel. Are they. Do you have any reporting that suggests that Israel is holding on to any compromise that could have been obtained from Jeffrey Epstein that might give them undue influence over Donald Trump?
- [97:15]
I
I don't, I really don't. I have just anecdotal, you know, threads that I've heard here and there. Obviously he was friends with Ehud Barack and when Edhud Barak, who was a former find a foreign minister in Israel, he would stay at Epstein's apartment and in his condos that he owned in the Upper east side. And so he was very close with his wife Daphne as well. And he, you know, he, according to, you know, Galen Maxwell's testimony, he was also friends with her father, Robert Maxwell, who was a known Mossad agent, we also know, and who was buried at the Mount of Olives, by the way, in, in, in Israel after he mysteriously died off the side of his boat, the Lady Galen. So, you know, his, his partner in his modeling agency, MC Squared, Epstein's partner, Jean Luc Renell, also died mysteriously in a jail cell by hanging. Question mark. Now, I don't know if this all goes back to Israel. I, I know from some reporting by an independent journalist in Alaska that Glenn Maxwell used to brag about her ex who was Mossad. I mean, she didn't say specifically that it was Jeffrey Epstein, but there are a lot of reasons to believe that he may not have only been helping Israel, but maybe even MI6, maybe the. You. We know for a fact that he was an informant on a major Ponzi scheme. He helped the FBI on multiple occasions on the, the financial Towers case. He was appointed partner in this Ponzi scheme, but his partner went down, Stephen hoffenberg, for this $300 million Ponzi scheme. And, you know, he went on to be an informant in another financial case. So he understood how to play both sides of the law. I see him as almost a Whitey Bulger figure. And I, I question if the, if that's why he got these sweetheart deals, because he was helpful to US Intelligence. I'm not saying he was a spy. I'm not saying they ran him, but I wonder if he had information that they found to be useful and if that was part of it.
- [99:25]
A
Last question, exit question. If, in fact, I mean, at some point the speaker of the House has to reopen the House of Representatives. He can't keep it closed forever. And when that inevitably happens and they have to swear in Adelita Grijalva and that 218 vote, that that vote comes up again, do you have any reporting that suggests that any of the four Republicans who are right now being intensely pressured with primary threats against them, I'm sure, with threats, threats against them. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who's continuing to say she's going to read the Epstein files from the floor if she has to, who's gone, you know, completely off the ranch when it comes to the things that she's saying about this and some other stuff. Any reporting that says those Four, four won't hold together and that any of the four will break, that's Lauren Boebert, Nancy May, some of the, for the worst of the worst and also the, the gentleman from Kentucky, Massey. Any of them gonna break?
- [100:20]
I
I don't think that, I don't think that Thomas Massey will break. This is his thing. This is his bill. He's a co sponsor. This is his baby. I think Marjorie Taylor Greene is very dug in. I think she likes also the spotlight on, on her. I think Lauren Bobert is a bit of a yo in a YOLO place. I, I think she'll probably say I think this the, the one to watch is Nancy Mace. And the reason I say that is even though she was emotionally affected by it, she left the, the conference after hearing from the survivors and was weeping. But she does want to run for governor in South Carolina and she needs that Trump endorsement. Is that going to be the thing that stops the Epstein style files from being released?
- [101:08]
A
And she's a survivor herself of sexual assault, which is pretty wild to think that she would play ball with this administration. That is this regime was trying to keep the Epstein files secret. Tara Palmary It's a terrible Mary show. You guys are going to want to definitely get involved in that. You're going to want to pick that up. You're going to want to watch it. You're going to want to want to subscribe to it. Also the Red Letter, which is a hard hitting newsletter about power politics and the people who shape both subscribe to all of Tara's things because she's brilliant. Thank you so much. We appreciate you. Tara. Thank you so much for being here. Thank you. All right, round of applause, Jason, if you would for Tara Palmeri. She's a good one. She's very smart. We're just a great show. I really enjoying all the, all of the, the folks that have been on and I do want to say that I am going to double down. I didn't have the George Santos part of it in my original sort of hideous anti bucket list but I do believe that Donald Trump is going to pardon Ghislaine Maxwell and the Diddler. I think that is happening. I think that is happening. Folks in the chat saying that Nancy Mace is sus. Yeah, she is. All four of them are. But I think if you look at the way they're positioning themselves, Mace is, is the one who's also the most mercenary. She'll do whatever it takes to keep on Trump's good side. She'll do anything. She's the one who said on January 6 that she wanted to go out into the crowd and have somebody punch her in the face so that she could get publicity. That's Nancy Mace. I wouldn't really put a lot of trust in her. Weirdly enough, I think the, the two that are going to be the firmest. I agree with Tara Palmari and even just based on the things you hear sort of, you know, rumor ruminating around are probably going to be Marjorie Taylor Greene and Thomas Massie will be the last ones to fold. If anybody folds, please make sure you subscribe like and share. And we're always kind of remind you of that. Let me very quickly before we end the show, remind you guys of all of the things that are happening. There was a an incredibly horrific piece of video that is coming out. This is F1 for Jason of Chicago. We're seeing this violence by the so called ICE just escalating, really out of control. Here is the latest incidents of violence out of Chicago.
- [103:14]
I
SA.
- [103:47]
A
And this happened on Chicago's east side after a federal operation led these so called ICE agents to crash into another car. Then start pursuing the person they injured before it all spills into a nearby Walgreens. That is where a 19 year old Southside native named Warren King says he he was shopping with friends and family before he was tackled and arrested. The takedown of immigration officers was recorded inside of Walgreens. It literally US citizens are involved in this melee. So they're attacking American citizens too. Let me show you another piece of video. This is our friend Don Lemon. Our homie Don Lemon is in Chicago. He interviewed this man who's an American citizen.
- [104:26]
C
And I asked him, why are you guys taking me? I'm a U.S. citizen. I'm not, I'm not an illegal immigrant. And I was told to shut up and just follow instructions. I did as I was told. When we got to the facility, I again tried to tell them, look, you got the wrong person. I'm a U.S. citizen. I'm not an illegal immigrant. Again I was told, shut up. I tried to tell them, I've got everything in my backpack. My birth certificate, I got my id. Why'd you have it in your backpack? I had some business to you tell take care of with the Illinois Department of Public Aid. I went there earlier in the day.
- [105:02]
A
So at no point did they allow you to show your birth certificate or any identification.
- [105:06]
C
They didn't want to see nothing.
- [105:07]
A
I've heard people say they're not just rounding people up, they're getting identification. They're not being rough with people. What do you say?
- [105:13]
C
They're lying. They are not checking IDs. The building behind me was the target, was the building that they were targeting.
- [105:21]
A
This building right here, the orange brick building. Easy.
- [105:23]
C
Yeah. I couldn't understand why they were at my building because my building is not there. I'm in. I'm a block over in the middle of the block. I didn't see any reason for them to be. To be bothering us.
- [105:34]
A
They were just scooping people up randomly.
- [105:36]
C
Yeah. People that were just hanging out out here were all rounded up as well. It didn't matter. Latino didn't matter. Didn't. Didn't matter what color you are. They were scooping people up, but it.
- [105:48]
A
Was black and Latino. What time was this?
- [105:49]
C
This was close to 10:30, perhaps.
- [105:51]
A
At night?
- [105:52]
C
At night.
- [105:53]
A
So you were out here in the darkness doing with all this happening?
- [105:55]
C
Yes, we were in the back of a moving truck.
- [105:58]
A
Were there seats in there?
- [105:59]
C
No, it's like a tr. The trucks that you use to load your furniture in. It was a budget rental truck.
- [106:06]
A
So you had to stand up to get there?
- [106:08]
C
Well, some people were able to sit down, but most of us stood up because there were, you know, it was too many people people for everybody to try and sit down. What were you holding on to each other?
- [106:18]
A
Were you rumbling around in the back of the truck? Anybody falling over?
- [106:21]
C
We managed to maintain because with the amount of people that we had in the truck, if somebody was. Was about to fall, you've got enough people to break that fall.
- [106:30]
A
How many people?
- [106:31]
C
I'd say we had about 40 or more people in that truck.
- [106:34]
A
What the hell? That is wild. This is an American citizen, a senior citizen who was snatched off the street by so called ice, thrown into the back of a budget rent a car they're using. And we need to talk about Budget Rent a Car. Are they willingly allowing their vehicles to be used by ICE for this kind of budget rent a Truck? Budget Rent a truck. I'm sorry, Budget Rent a truck. We need to talk about that and where they're getting these budget rental trucks because they're not using police vehicles, they're using regular vehicles, Budget rent A trucks and just throwing human beings in there. If anyone had gotten injured or their neck gotten broken, like Freddie Gray when he was unshackled inside of the back of a police car. That's how Freddie Gray died, because he was batting around inside the back of a truck. If that happens, the lawsuit is going to be epic. And I think these people are Assuming they all have qualified immunity. We don't even know if they're really feds. We don't know who these people are. Let me play one more piece of video. This is cnn. Aaron Burnett interviewed the Chicago pastor who we showed on Monday's show getting pepper balled by a group of supposed ICE who were all armed up on a roof. And I will note that a witness who saw that happen, who also got hit with pepper balls, said that the pastor and all of the other people who were protesting them snatching another person off the street were all peaceful and no one went anywhere near, even though the Department of Homeland Insecurity has lied and put out a statement claiming that those people were. Were basically rushing the building. You can see in the video that that is not true. This is F3 forward.
- [108:05]
B
After they shot me in my head, in my face, and multiple times in my torso, arms and legs, I was shielded by the bodies of others who were there who rushed in to support me and took many more hits that were intended for me. Within two minutes, quite a number of ICE officers, maybe 15, maybe 20, rushed out of the gate and began to shove us down. And I was already disabled on the ground, but attempted to get away, and they continued to shove us in a kettling maneuver towards a place where we would not be able to escape. And you can see in that video, ICE officers shoving protesters who were standing and speaking and chanting and singing peacefully and praying peacefully, shoving us down and then dispensing a huge amount of chemical weapons onto us. We could hear them laughing as they were shooting us from the roof. And it was deeply disturbing. We've gotten to witness a few things about these ICE agents operating in Broadview. And really what it has shown us is how disorganized they are and how poorly supervised and trained they are. We've also heard ICE agents talking to each other, one of whom said, man, I don't even remember why I'm here anymore. And the other said, I don't know know either. So there's a deep demoralization that we are seeing as we're bringing this peaceful and spiritual protest against their tactics and what they are doing to our city and our communities and our neighbors.
- [109:32]
A
And. And so if they would do that to a. A pastor, a white Christian pastor wearing his ecclesiastical garb and laugh and shoot him from the roof and then lie outright to get the news media understand why they put the. These statements out, to get the news media to read their statement as if it's a fact. Because in the news media give you, take you behind the scenes. The journalists will tend to read the official statement and not always question it. And this is the reason that so many Black Lives Matter cases went sideways, because media would read the official police statement claiming that so and so had a gun or was attempting to reach for the officer's gun and just take it at face value. That's what they're counting on, right? They're also counting on those images which they are filming. Let's just be clear. Jacob, sober off has done a lot of good reporting on this at Emma's now. Ms. Now they are sending their own photographers to video these things so that they can put out cops style videos and promo videos. We played one for you on this show. Why are they doing all of this? Because they're trying to create scenes they can cut together that look like insurrection. They want scenes that look something like what they did their people did on January 6th so that they can say there are insurrections happening in blue cities in red states. I will note that the governor of Tennessee, we're going to get into this on Friday. The governor of Tennessee has bragged that the occupation of Memphis by federal agents and military is going to be permanent. He says he thinks it'll never end. He thinks it'll be permanent because what they want are a few things. Control of blue cities. This is a way to seize control of blue cities by effectively placing the blue cities, even in red states, under martial law. When you control the blue city, you control the economic output of your state. Every single state, whether it's red or blue, has a big city in it, a big capital or a big city that generally is the economic mover of that state. So if you're in Tennessee, it's Nashville, and that is what delivers the real money, right? The state of Tennessee has a sort of modest economy, but Nashville is what brings home the bacon. But Nashville is also where the black people live because again, we said it earlier when we talked about voting rights, black folks tend to live in concentrated urban settings because historically being out in the country, not so safe. So people tend to move to the big cities where they're in their strength in numbers or they've been moved into the big cities because of segregation. And so that combination has made cities very black, even in red states. And so the sort of irony of that is that most of the economy in Mississippi is in Jackson, where most of the black people live. And so if the Republicans who control Mississippi want to control the economy, they need to control Jackson. But Jackson will Generally have a black mayor. If you live in the state of Louisiana, you've got a sort of economy and New Orleans is what brings in most of the bacon. But New Orleans is where the black people are. So if you want to control the economy of Louisiana, you need to control New Orleans. But New Orleans tends to have a black mayor. We can go through this the same way. Memphis, its mayor tends to be black. It's a very black city. It's got more. It doesn't really have much of an economy in Memphis, but Nashville, very black, the blackest city in Tennessee. But you want to control the economy of that state, you need to wrestle control of Nashville. I could do this in every state. You go to Texas, where you've got a very big rural state, yes, their rural economy is part of it. But Dallas, Houston, that's where the black people are. If you want to control utterly the economy of Texas, you need to wrestle control of the black cities, the cities. We like to control our own economy.
- [113:12]
F
And not shop in these places.
- [113:14]
A
But you see where we're going with this, Jason, you look at the state of Illinois. Illinois's got sundown towns in it still to this day. But Illinois, Chicago is where the money is. Chicago is the money mover. Chicago has a black mayor and a very black population. If you wanted to wrestle control of Illinois out of the hands of the Illinois capital, you could just occupy Chicago. They're, they're creating these mini martial laws. They would love to control Los Angeles, which is the economic capital of California. You talk about New York City, which again, the New York metro area has a larger GDP than Canada. But New York City is also where the blacks are. So what Republicans are doing is they're doing a sort of version of the Civil War where southern governments are sending their troops into blue cities in the blue part of in the blue north, occupying those cities, using extreme violence to try to render as many brown people out of the country as possible. But they're also grabbing black citizens and brown citizens, trying to get rid of as many of them as possible, force people out of fear to self deport, make those cities whiter. And then they're going to get the Supreme Court to get rid of the Voting Rights act so that they can then draw districts, which means no matter where black people live in a southern state, it won't matter anymore because they won't even have to give them one congressman. They can have no Congress people. You're going to give conservatives total control of the country by force and by diktat. From the Supreme Court. This is a full court press plan fam they want. And it isn't again, it isn't party. It's the conservatives. It's the people from the group Chat just grown up. The group Chat people are who are the Project 2025 people. The Project 2025 people are who would have been the Confederacy during the Civil War. It's the same people. They've traveled from party to party, but it is conservatives. What they're trying to conserve is the power of a small group of white male oligarchs who don't want that power challenged by black people, brown people, Asian people or liberal white people. That's the game. Let's play one more piece of video. Jason, thank you for putting that group chat back up. There's a woman named Sandy Bacon who is an independent journalist and out of New York. She got what was might be the most epic pushback against an immigration raid that I've ever seen. And you know, Jason, this lady Jamaican, when you play it, you're going to hear her, you're going to hear her and you're going to notice a Jamaican. This was almost our moment of joy because it was so good. It's. It's Cusfield. So saints be prepared. She cuss a lot. So we apologize in advance for the cussing. One of our producers near the center. It's our moment of joy.
- [115:58]
H
What's wrong with you guys?
- [115:59]
A
Let me just get a big one. We just trying to confirm back up.
- [116:01]
F
At least give him space. You could do what you do, but.
- [116:04]
A
Just give him space. Why? Tell him why. What's happening is is that her family member is being deported from immigration court. So he went to his hearing and ICE is now the thing they're doing is they wait outside the courtroom and they snatch the person immediately and she's hopping mad about it. I wish the he.
- [116:38]
F
Yes, the with his family. Who the is you. We don't like none of you.
- [116:45]
A
You okay?
- [116:46]
I
No.
- [116:46]
F
How can I be okay?
- [116:48]
J
You okay?
- [116:48]
F
Are you okay?
- [116:50]
A
Are you okay?
- [116:50]
F
I look like I'm okay? Don't come up in my face because I hit hard Wrong with you.
- [116:55]
C
Try it.
- [116:56]
F
I wish you would try it. You try me and see what the happened. We angry. All of us angry out here. So don't think it's y' all alone.
- [117:05]
B
Get out of here.
- [117:05]
A
You. Who you telling?
- [117:06]
F
Get out of here. Why you telling me get out of here. You ask me a question and I'm answering you.
- [117:11]
A
Get out of here, man.
- [117:14]
F
Wrong with you. Oh, stupid ass. That's why you gotta hide your face.
- [117:19]
A
You want to go to jail? She not done. She's still not done. She said, you don't know me.
- [117:35]
F
That's why your kids that don't like you. That's why you gotta hide your face. My face ain't hidden.
- [117:42]
A
I'm American.
- [117:43]
F
You stupid. Wrong with y'. All. You can take me too high. I'm sure you know what to do. No, no, no. You want me wrong with y'.
- [117:53]
A
All.
- [117:53]
F
All of you. Put that on the news. Let Trump see it.
- [117:59]
A
She said, put that on the news. Let Trump see it. Put it on the news. And let Trump said. That's a Jamaican. You know that lady Jamaican. Jason. She said, put it on the news. And Sandy Bacon said, okay. She put it on the news. Thank you, Sandy Bacon, for allowing us to play that video on tonight. And listen, she said, I hit hard. She said, look, and this is the. The courage that it takes to stand up to these people. Let me play one more. We're about to be. We don't want to go over time. Let me show you how cowardly these people are. That's a woman. There's all those masked men in that room. Dragged her family member away after he went, like, he's supposed to, to his immigration. They're like, do it the right way. He tried. They won't let him. If you go to your immigration court, they deport you anyway. Now let me show you what happened to a comedian. This is. Wow. This one is actually crazy. This guy's a comedian who you guys might have seen online. Look at him. His name is Robbie Road Streamer. He does this. He. He usually doesn't wear an outfit. He's a giraffe. Today he makes fun of Republicans and he makes up songs. Yeah.
- [119:08]
F
Why you come out with your super soa, huh?
- [119:12]
A
Oh, here they come. They're not ready for prime time.
- [119:15]
C
Players.
- [119:17]
F
Demons.
- [119:22]
A
Hello.
- [119:22]
F
What are you doing? He's talking. He's just talking.
- [119:29]
H
Boo.
- [119:35]
A
He was detained and charged with trespassing. Robbie Roman. This guy is a comedian who's making up songs. He mocked them and compared them to Nazis. And for that, those Small Penis ice Supposed ICE or Proud Boys or Oath Keepers or whatever they are. Masked goons arrested him. You're arresting a man in a giraffe suit who was hanging out with the guy in the shark suit and the frog. So now you all feel threatened by a man in a draft suit? I'm not sure you have the moral high ground. If you feel like you need to arrest a Man in a giraffe suit, because he's mocking you. First of all, you deserve to be mocked. And as the woman, other woman said, that's why your wife messing around on you and your kids can't stand you because they see you. They know what you look like without your mask. All right, I think we need a moment of joy. Let's give our moment of joy to Zorhan Mamdani, who gave a really great speech in New York. This was the. Tish James was actually at this rally, too, but I really loved his speech. So I'm going to make Zorhan Mamdani our moment of joy. Here it is.
- [120:40]
J
I think of the pastor sat with just a few weeks ago in East Flatbush. He told me how in September, a young woman from his congregation approached him after church. She told him she was facing a deportation order. He knew her well, and he knew the work she did with young people with disabilities in this city. She told him she couldn't afford an attorney and had no one else. She asked if he would go with her to 26 Federal Plaza. He said yes. Sitting in the courtroom, the judge told her to be ready to leave in the clothes she was wearing. He asked her. He asked her if she had said goodbye to her family. She began to cry. And then, in what felt like a miracle, the judge changed his mind. He decided he would put her TPS order before the deportation order. For a minute, it seemed as if the danger had passed, but the pastor knew that. I stood outside. They did not care about a court order because they do not care about.
- [121:56]
I
The rule of law.
- [121:58]
J
He turned to a few court watchers in the room and asked them to go outside. First, he asked another man to hold the elevator. He picked up the young woman under her arms, opened the doors, rushed her past ICE agents into the elevator and down into a waiting car before speeding off back to Brooklyn. Through it all, her feet had never even touched the ground. He told me that it felt like the Underground Railroad. And still he knew she was anything but safe. We are living in the times that we read about. I know that for many of us, when we look back at moments in history that rhyme with today, where tyranny loomed and the state imposed violence with sinister glee. We ask ourselves what we would have done. We need not wonder that time is now. And I am proud to look out for onto this crowd at New Yorkers who, amidst this despair, have continued to believe in a world better than this.
- [123:28]
A
And that in a country in which the New York Times is reporting the Trump regime is considering radically overhauling the US Refugee system to favor white people, white South Africans and white Europeans who oppose migration, and to essentially keep all non white people out of the United States as our new immigration program. That young immigrant who is the lead candidate in the city of New York, the most important, maybe financial capital of this country, the fact that he's leading in the polls and gave that amazing speech in this moment, that counts as a moment of joy. Thank you all so much for watching. I will see you on Friday. We've got a big announcement coming up on Friday that involves myself, Don Lemon and Jim Acosta. That is your tease. Tune in on Friday and we will tell you this really great announcement that involves the three of us. It's going to be something fun, so make sure that you don't miss it. Please hit like and subscribe. Please hit share and hit that little notification bell thingy so you can never miss it when we go live. Thank you all for tuning in to the Joy Reach. I'll see you on the next one. Goodbye. Thank you. And play the music. Okay.
- [124:42]
C
Yeah.