- 15 hours ago
The Last Word with Lawrence ODonnell - Season 13 - Episode 25
Category
📺
TVTranscript
00:00If you can't do it in Byhalia, Mississippi, you can't do it anywhere.
00:07Byhalia, Mississippi, population 1,339 is going to stop Christy Noem.
00:15In a follow-up to the excellent reporting Rachel delivered here Monday night about the protests against the ICE detention
00:23camps
00:23that Homeland Security Christy Noem is trying to acquire and establish around the country by buying warehouses
00:30to literally warehouse people, we cannot report that the entire state of Mississippi appears to be off-limits to Christy
00:40Noem.
00:41Rachel reported on locations around the country, especially Republican-controlled areas,
00:46which overwhelmingly voted for Donald Trump, that are rising up in local protests by Trump voters
00:53to block Christy Noem's attempt to warehouse thousands of people in their communities.
00:59Christy Noem must have thought it was going to be easy in Byhalia, Mississippi,
01:06buy a warehouse and fill it up with people dragged out of their cars in Minneapolis and elsewhere,
01:11fill it up with fathers carrying their babies into one of Christy Noem's warehouse detention centers.
01:19Christy Noem is from out of town in Washington, D.C., and appears to be a slow learner there.
01:27She might not yet fully understand the power of the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee,
01:32no matter who that chairman is or which party controls that committee.
01:37She is discovering that now because the tiny town of Byhalia, Mississippi,
01:42that has a Domino's pizza, a Subway sandwich shop, Jimbo's Brickhouse barbecue joint,
01:48and, of course, El Nuevo Potrero Mexican restaurant,
01:54also has the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee representing them in the United States Senate.
02:02On Tuesday, the Armed Services Committee chairman, Roger Wicker, told Christy Noem in semi-polite Washington terms
02:11to get the hell out of Byhalia, Mississippi and stay out of the state.
02:17In a one-page letter, Chairman Wicker said,
02:20it has come to my attention that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
02:24is in the final stages of acquiring a warehouse facility in Byhalia, Mississippi,
02:28and intends to convert it into an ICE detention center.
02:32While I support the enforcement of immigration law,
02:34I write to express my opposition to this acquisition and the proposed detention center.
02:41That opening paragraph is going to be the template for every Republican senator
02:46whose state, Christy Noem, might be planning to use to warehouse people.
02:51When the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee catches you in the final stages of doing something
02:57that he does not want you to do, you better not complete those stages.
03:01You better stop doing it right now.
03:04The chairman's letter did not say a word about the inhumanity of the idea,
03:10but was accurate in its assessment of what one of Christy Noem's warehouses would do to any community.
03:18Senator Wicker said,
03:21Converting this industrial asset into an ICE detention center forecloses economic growth opportunities
03:27and replaces them with a use that does not generate comparable economic returns or community benefits.
03:33Detention facilities impose substantial and specialized infrastructure demands,
03:38including transportation access, water, sewerage, and energy costs, staffing, medical care, and emergency services.
03:47From my understanding, the ICE detention facility would have a capacity exceeding 8,500 beds.
03:56That is more than six times the total population of Byhalia, Mississippi.
04:04Senator Wicker continued,
04:08Existing medical and human services infrastructure in Byhalia is insufficient to support such a large detainee population.
04:15Establishing a detention center at this site would place significant strain on local resources.
04:20Additionally, many of my constituents have voiced concerns regarding the public safety, medical capacity, and economic impacts.
04:27This center would impose on their communities, and they are Trump voters.
04:33Donald Trump won 60% of the vote in Mississippi.
04:36Trump voters don't want Donald Trump and Christy Noem's ICE detention centers in their towns.
04:42And Roger Wicker doesn't want one in his state.
04:46His last line is, keep me informed of this acquisition and any future ICE contracting proposals affecting the state of
04:56Mississippi.
04:56Thank you for your attention to this matter.
04:59It's time to move on, Christy Noem.
05:02You're not going to get a detention center in Roger Wicker's Mississippi.
05:07Not because of some moral outrage on the part of Senator Wicker or his Trump-voting constituents,
05:12but because, in addition to it being a moral outrage,
05:16it would also have a disastrous impact on their communities and on their property values.
05:22Every homeowner in Byhalia, Mississippi, would watch the value of their homes collapse
05:27if Christy Noem got her way and invaded their town.
05:33Donald Trump's other cabinet secretary from the Dakotas, billionaire Doug Burgum,
05:37the Secretary of the Interior, is trying to rewrite history in Mississippi.
05:42He has had the National Park Service remove the visitor brochures
05:46from the Medgar and Murley Evers' home national monument.
05:53The home where Medgar Evers was assassinated in his driveway is a national monument.
06:01And Mississippi Today reports that Donald Trump and Doug Burgum don't want any reference
06:06to racism in any of the material associated with this national monument.
06:13This is a result of Donald Trump's executive order titled
06:16Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History,
06:19which should have been titled Turning American History into a Trump Lie.
06:23Doug Burgum has issued an order saying he doesn't want any material in the department's jurisdiction
06:28to, quote, inappropriately disparage Americans' past or living.
06:33That apparently includes assassins and members of the Ku Klux Klan.
06:38Mississippi Today reports the National Park Service has removed visitor brochures
06:43from the Medgar and Murley Evers' home national monument.
06:47Among the anticipated changes, no longer calling his murderer a racist,
06:51edits to the brochure have removed that reference to Byron Dillabeckwith,
06:57according to Park Service officials who asked not to be named for fear of retribution.
07:02Other edits include eliminating the reference to Medgar Evers lying in a pool of blood after being shot.
07:10Rena Evers Everett, executive director of the Medgar and Murley Evers Institute
07:15and daughter of the couple, said the family has been told the matter is under review,
07:21but the final product has not been put up yet.
07:26And tonight, Mississippi Today has an update.
07:31Hours after Mississippi Today reported Thursday that the National Park Service
07:35had removed brochures to the Medgar and Murley Evers' home national monument
07:39that identified his murderer as a racist, the Park Service returned the brochures to the home.
07:48For now.
07:50Let's see if Senator Roger Wicker wants to stop Donald Trump and Doug Burgum
07:55from rewriting the history of the Medgar Evers' assassination.
08:01Another new poll today shows Donald Trump at another record low.
08:05The Marist poll shows Donald Trump polling the lowest he has polled,
08:09since he inspired the January 6th attack on the Capitol,
08:12and then was indicted for using that attack as part of his criminal conspiracy
08:16to overthrow the presidential election in 2020.
08:20Donald Trump is at a new low in polling because he has no idea
08:24what most people want a president to do,
08:27and he has no idea what most people want a president to say.
08:31That is why only Donald Trump could speak at a national prayer breakfast,
08:36as he did today, and brag about how many times he was indicted.
08:42Let's say, you know, and he just got indicted again.
08:45Don't worry about it.
08:48But think of it many times.
08:50And then they say,
08:52Donald Trump is using the Justice Department to get even.
08:57And I don't.
08:59But wouldn't I have a right to?
09:02Think of it.
09:04There's never been in history a president treated like I got treated.
09:10But they say I use it.
09:11And it's amazing.
09:12I did that interview yesterday, and they said that.
09:15They said the question,
09:16are you using the Justice Department for your own personal gain?
09:21They said they indicted me 87 times.
09:25It's the most incredible thing.
09:27But we don't do that, Pam, do we?
09:30We do what's right.
09:32We do what's right.
09:33And Pam does it.
09:37Donald Trump brought his Secretary of Defense to the prayer breakfast,
09:41the only Secretary of Defense in history who has been married three times.
09:46Donald Trump and Pete Hegseth believe that marriage is one man married to one woman,
09:50then another woman, then another woman.
09:53And they were speaking to an audience filled with people who believe marriage should be
09:59between one man and one woman,
10:01and that gay people should not be allowed to be parents,
10:06that gay people as parents try to indoctrinate children
10:10and are a danger to other children in their children's schools.
10:15That room was filled with that kind of person.
10:17And it also included liberal-minded religious people in that room
10:23who don't think any of those things.
10:27But the real hardcore Christian nationalists in that room could be why
10:32Donald Trump didn't bring his Treasury Secretary to the national prayer breakfast,
10:36because Donald Trump's Treasury Secretary lives a life
10:38that some of the strongest Trump supporters at the national prayer breakfast
10:43believe is an abomination and a danger to this society.
10:49Scott Besant lives a life that was illegal in his state until Democrats made it legal.
10:57Scott Besant can thank the election of Bill Clinton to the presidency
11:01and the election of Barack Obama to the presidency
11:03for his right to live as a married man with his husband and children
11:12in his home state of South Carolina, where he grew up.
11:16It was illegal for Scott Besant to be married to a man in South Carolina
11:22when he got married in 2011, when he was living in New York
11:27and enjoying the rights granted to him by a government of the state of New York
11:31controlled by Democrats.
11:34South Carolina first banned marriage equality by law in 1996,
11:40saying marriage can only be granted to one man and one woman.
11:43But South Carolina wasn't satisfied with just having the legislature
11:49write it into their law books.
11:50Nine years later, South Carolina amended the state constitution
11:55to ban same-sex marriage.
11:58And to amend the state constitution required a two-thirds vote
12:03of the people of South Carolina.
12:0677.9% of the people of South Carolina
12:11voted to ban same-sex marriage,
12:15voted to ban Scott Besant's marriage in their state.
12:20Scott Besant's current neighbors in South Carolina
12:24overwhelmingly voted to ban his marriage in South Carolina.
12:30And the only reason he is allowed to live with his husband and children
12:33in South Carolina is that the four justices
12:36appointed to the Supreme Court by Bill Clinton and Barack Obama
12:40said that he could.
12:41And they were joined by one justice, Anthony Kennedy,
12:44appointed by a Republican president,
12:46who became the fifth vote in favor of same-sex marriage on the Supreme Court.
12:51And that's how Scott Besant was allowed to return to his home state of South Carolina
12:57as a married gay man and father.
13:01And that fifth vote for marriage equality is no longer on the Supreme Court.
13:05Now there are six votes on the Supreme Court against the decision
13:08that made Scott Besant's marriage legal in all 50 states.
13:12And it might only be a matter of time now
13:14before the right case presents itself to the Trump Supreme Court
13:18for them to declare that Scott Besant's marriage is once again illegal
13:23in the state of South Carolina
13:25and any other state that wants to make it illegal.
13:28And Scott Besant will have to hurry back
13:30to New York
13:31or to California
13:33or to Massachusetts
13:35where he will be welcomed
13:38in one of those states,
13:40welcomed with his husband and his children,
13:42welcomed in those states
13:44because those states
13:45are represented
13:47by senators
13:49who he stupidly thinks
13:51he can condescend to.
13:57Affordability
13:57is the top concern
13:59for Americans across the country.
14:01Donald Trump has called affordability,
14:04I want to get this right,
14:05a hoax.
14:06He's called it a scam.
14:07He's called it a con job.
14:10You're the secretary of treasury.
14:12You know the numbers.
14:14Is affordability a hoax,
14:17a scam,
14:18or a con job?
14:20Senator,
14:21it may be a bit nuanced for you,
14:23but what President Trump is referring to
14:25is the media saying
14:27that the affordability crisis
14:28was generated by this administration
14:30when it was you and President Biden
14:32who destroyed the buying power
14:35of the American people.
14:36So there is an affordability crisis
14:38and you were front and center in it.
14:40So let me make sure that I understand.
14:43Donald Trump is not saying
14:45that affordability,
14:46what's happening to families right now,
14:48is a hoax?
14:49He is saying
14:50that trying to lay the blame
14:52at this administration
14:53rather than the Biden-Warrant economy
14:55is a hoax.
14:57Okay, so it all happened
14:58before he got it.
14:59And everything that's happened since then,
15:02nothing is a hoax here.
15:05The Biden-Warrant economy.
15:09What a sleazy punk.
15:12We have never seen testimony
15:15like this
15:16in Senate hearings,
15:18in House hearings.
15:19We have never had
15:20Cabinet members
15:21think that their job is
15:23to go into the hearings
15:25and insult
15:26the Democratic senators.
15:29We've never had
15:30any Democratic
15:31Cabinet member ever
15:32who thought the job was
15:33to go into a hearing
15:34and insult
15:35Republican members of the committee.
15:37That never happened before.
15:39That is a Trump
15:40Cabinet invention.
15:42And they invented it
15:43this time around.
15:44That's not what
15:45they were doing last time.
15:47We've never had
15:49a more ridiculous
15:51Secretary of the Treasury
15:52than that clown
15:53who you just saw.
15:54In Donald Trump's
15:55first administration,
15:55I thought Steve Mnuchin
15:56was the lowest it could go,
15:58but he now looks like
15:59a statesman
16:00compared to the buffoon
16:02Donald Trump
16:02has put in that job
16:04to lie for him
16:05every day.
16:06Scott Besson
16:07lies about himself
16:09now,
16:10as he did yesterday
16:11in testimony
16:12to the House
16:13and today
16:13in testimony
16:14to the Senate
16:14when he was asked
16:15about writing
16:16tariffs are inflationary
16:19exactly one year
16:21before Donald Trump's
16:22second inauguration.
16:24Those are Scott Besson's
16:25written words,
16:26tariffs are inflationary.
16:28And in lying testimony
16:30yesterday and today,
16:31he denied
16:32that he said those words.
16:33He claimed that he had said
16:35they could be inflationary.
16:37No, that's a lie.
16:39And Scott Besson lies
16:40with a deeply creepy ease.
16:44He exhibits no discomfort
16:46at all.
16:47He does it with the ease
16:48of a pathological liar.
16:50He does it with the ease
16:51of someone
16:52who was born lying.
16:54There was no evidence
16:55of Scott Besson
16:56being a pathological liar
16:58before working
16:59for Donald Trump,
17:00but he is Donald Trump's
17:01best student
17:03in the art form
17:04of Trump speak,
17:05which is deranged,
17:07irrational,
17:08irrelevant lying.
17:10think about what Scott
17:12Besson of all people
17:14had to do to himself
17:17to become a Trumpian
17:19pathological liar
17:21in that Senate Banking
17:22Committee hearing today.
17:24The first Treasury Secretary
17:26to ever testify that way.
17:30Five years after the Supreme Court,
17:32by one vote,
17:35made Scott Besson's marriage
17:36legal in all 50 states,
17:38Donald Trump's
17:38presidential platform said
17:40what the Republican
17:42presidential platform
17:44has always said.
17:45Quote,
17:46marriage between one man
17:48and one woman
17:49is the foundation
17:50for a free society.
17:53That's the party
17:54Scott Besson
17:56has chosen
17:57to humiliate himself
17:59to serve.
18:02The Republican chairman
18:03of that committee,
18:04to whom Scott Besson
18:06testified so respectfully
18:07today,
18:08voted against
18:09respect
18:10for Scott Besson's marriage
18:12in 2022
18:14when Democrats
18:15in the United States Senate
18:16passed the Respect
18:18for Marriage Act.
18:20Elizabeth Warren
18:21voted to respect
18:22Scott Besson's marriage,
18:23as did every Democrat.
18:28He wants to sign the money.
18:31That's the Treasury Secretary's
18:32secret pleasure.
18:34For every Treasury Secretary,
18:35it always is.
18:37I learned that
18:37the first time
18:38I was running
18:38a Senate confirmation hearing
18:40for a Treasury Secretary
18:41at the Senate Finance Committee
18:42when I was
18:42Staff Director of the Committee.
18:44The committee vote
18:45was unanimous.
18:46We tried to get to a floor vote
18:47as soon as possible,
18:48but there's always
18:49some traffic in your way
18:50on the Senate floor.
18:51It doesn't happen quickly,
18:52and the nominee
18:53kept impatiently calling me
18:54to ask exactly
18:56when he'd be confirmed,
18:57and I kept saying
18:57the same thing
18:58about the Senate floor
18:59and traffic
19:00and blah, blah, blah,
19:00which I thought
19:01he would understand,
19:02and then,
19:02in a private conversation,
19:04one of his staff members
19:05told me
19:06what he was so eager about.
19:09He wants to sign the money.
19:12That's what the staff guy
19:13told me
19:14about the incoming
19:15Treasury Secretary.
19:17I'm surprised
19:17Donald Trump
19:18still lets the Treasury Secretary
19:20sign the money.
19:21Maybe Donald Trump
19:21doesn't know.
19:22Maybe he will seize
19:23that power, too.
19:25If you look at whatever
19:26currency you have
19:27in your pocket right now,
19:28as I did a few minutes ago,
19:29you'll see their signatures.
19:31I've got a few fives
19:32signed by Janet Yellen,
19:33a few 20s
19:34signed by Steve Mnuchin,
19:35and nothing
19:37signed by Scott Besson
19:38because it takes a while
19:39for that new currency
19:41to get into circulation.
19:43It takes a while
19:44for Scott Besson
19:45to have that thrill
19:47of seeing it,
19:49carrying it around
19:50in his pocket.
19:51imagine how thrilling
19:53it must be
19:54for Scott Besson
19:56to sign the money.
19:58So thrilling,
19:59he will debase himself
20:00in any way
20:01for Donald Trump.
20:03Look what he was
20:05willing to do
20:06to get there,
20:08to be the guy
20:09who signs the money.
20:11Think about how much
20:14he has had to contort
20:16his economic beliefs
20:18in order to lie
20:19for Donald Trump
20:20about tariffs.
20:22And we can only wonder
20:23what it does
20:24to his soul
20:25to go out of his way
20:27to try to insult
20:28Elizabeth Warren
20:29and other Democrats
20:30who fought
20:31for his right
20:32to legally live
20:34anywhere in this country
20:36as a married man.
20:39And what does it do to him?
20:41How does he feel
20:43when he genuflects
20:45respectfully
20:46to every Republican
20:49who fought
20:50to make
20:51his marriage
20:52illegal?
20:54It may be
20:55that no one,
20:56no one
20:58has paid
20:58a higher personal
20:59price
21:00to work
21:02for Donald Trump
21:04than the man
21:05who gets
21:05to sign the money.
21:06Of all
21:07the lying
21:08quizlings
21:09who work
21:10for Donald Trump,
21:10it may be
21:11Scott Besant
21:13who is the most
21:14tortured
21:15of all of them.
21:18Today,
21:19the pathological liar
21:20who Scott Besant
21:21works for
21:21said this.
21:24You know,
21:25they rigged
21:26the second election,
21:27I had to win it.
21:28Had to win it.
21:29I needed it
21:29for my own ego.
21:30I would have had
21:31a bad ego
21:31for the rest of my life.
21:34Now I really
21:35have a big ego.
21:37Beating these lunatics
21:38was incredible, right?
21:39What a great feeling.
21:41Winning every swing state,
21:43winning the popular vote.
21:45The first time,
21:45you know,
21:46they said I didn't
21:46win the popular vote.
21:47I did.
21:48But they said.
21:49So they'd always say,
21:51they'd always say,
21:52they'd always say,
21:53while Donald Trump
21:55did not win
21:55the popular vote,
21:57you know,
21:57I'm sitting up
21:58being introduced
21:59by a Democrat
22:00or somebody.
22:01And they say,
22:02why Donald Trump
22:03did not win
22:04the popular vote,
22:04he won the presidency.
22:06Here he is.
22:07I say,
22:08that was terrible.
22:11He's a very sick man,
22:13Donald Trump.
22:14Steve Bannon says
22:15the Trump plan
22:16for this year's election
22:17is to surround
22:17polling places
22:18with ICE agents.
22:20That is against
22:21state and federal law,
22:23but this is Donald Trump
22:24we're talking about.
22:25So how can those laws
22:27actually be enforced?
22:29That is the question
22:30of the night
22:30for the answer
22:31to that question.
22:32We will turn to
22:33former federal prosecutor,
22:35Andrew Weissman,
22:35who will join us next.
22:41Donald Trump's
22:42dangerously incompetent
22:43director of national
22:44intelligence,
22:45Tulsi Gabbard,
22:45said in writing
22:46to the Senate
22:47and the House
22:48that she led
22:49an FBI raid
22:49to seize voting records
22:51in Fulton County, Georgia
22:51because, quote,
22:52my presence was requested
22:54by the president.
22:55That leaves it up
22:56to you to decide
22:57who is lying,
22:58Tulsi Gabbard
22:58or Donald Trump.
23:01We have our director
23:03of national
23:05and international
23:06intelligence,
23:08Tulsi Gabbard,
23:09who's doing a great job
23:10with Tulsi.
23:15She took a lot of heat
23:17two days ago
23:17because she went in
23:18at Pam's insistence.
23:21She went in
23:22and she looked at votes
23:24that want to be
23:26checked out
23:27from Georgia.
23:28They say,
23:29why is she doing it?
23:30Right, Pam?
23:31Why is she doing it?
23:32Because Pam wanted her
23:34to do it.
23:34And you know why?
23:36Because she's smart.
23:39And yesterday,
23:40Steve Bannon announced
23:41the Trump plan
23:42to, quote,
23:43have ICE surround
23:44the polls come November.
23:47His exact words.
23:48The Brennan Center reports
23:49the law is crystal clear.
23:51It is illegal
23:51to deploy federal troops
23:52or armed federal law enforcement
23:54to any polling place.
23:55In fact,
23:55it is a federal crime
23:56for anyone in the U.S. military
23:57to interfere in elections
23:58in any way.
23:59More specifically,
24:00it is a crime punishable
24:01by up to five years
24:02in prison
24:03to deploy federal troops
24:04or armed men
24:06to any location
24:07where voting is taking place
24:09or elections are being held
24:11unless such force
24:12be necessary
24:13to repel armed enemies
24:15of the United States.
24:16The law,
24:17which dates back
24:17to the end of the Civil War,
24:19originally also allowed troops
24:21at the polls
24:22when necessary
24:23to keep the peace.
24:24But that exception
24:25was removed
24:26more than 100 years ago.
24:28Joining us now
24:28is Andrew Weissman,
24:29former FBI general counsel
24:31and an MSNOW legal analyst.
24:33Andrew,
24:34is the law crystal clear
24:36and how can it be enforced
24:39in a Trump presidency?
24:42So before I answer that,
24:44let me just add
24:45for the viewers
24:46in assessing
24:47the Tulsi Gabbard
24:49versus Donald Trump
24:50issue that you flagged,
24:52that Pam Bondi
24:53is not in charge
24:55of the director
24:57of national intelligence.
24:58They're both
24:58cabinet-level positions
25:00and Tulsi Gabbard
25:01does not report
25:02to Pam Bondi.
25:04In fact,
25:05she is the,
25:05Tulsi Gabbard
25:06is the head
25:07of the intelligence community
25:09and that makes
25:11Pam Bondi
25:11a component
25:12who reports
25:13to Tulsi Gabbard.
25:16Anyway,
25:17to get to your question.
25:18But Andrew,
25:19let's stay with it
25:20for one second.
25:20So just to be clear,
25:21Pam Bondi
25:22certainly couldn't
25:23order Tulsi Gabbard
25:24to go.
25:25Cabinet members
25:26are not eager
25:27to see other
25:28cabinet members
25:28interfere in their
25:29jurisdiction
25:30and the FBI
25:30is Pam Bondi's
25:32jurisdiction.
25:33And so is it
25:34your bet
25:34when you have to
25:35choose who's lying
25:36that it is most likely
25:37that Donald Trump
25:38told Tulsi Gabbard
25:40to go?
25:41Yeah,
25:42well,
25:42let's put it this way.
25:43Tulsi Gabbard
25:44has zero reason
25:45to have lied
25:46about why she,
25:48like,
25:48why she was there
25:49and who told her
25:50to go there.
25:51And you can't imagine
25:53that a secretary
25:56is going to lie
25:58about their boss
25:59having said that.
26:00What would be
26:00the possible reason?
26:01Whereas I can't think
26:03of a reason
26:03why Donald Trump
26:04would do it
26:05because it was
26:06received badly
26:07by the press
26:08so he is deflecting
26:09and saying
26:10it's someone else's fault.
26:11I think that is
26:13the precedent
26:13that we have.
26:15So can Donald Trump
26:17surround polling places
26:18with ICE agents?
26:20So can he?
26:22And that's one.
26:23And two is,
26:24is it legal?
26:25And so,
26:26unfortunately,
26:26I have to separate it
26:27that way
26:28because so much
26:29of what we have seen
26:30has been found
26:31by judges,
26:32including the Supreme Court
26:34of the United States,
26:35to have been actions
26:36taken by this president
26:37that are illegal.
26:38In fact,
26:39he did that in a way
26:40that the court said
26:41nine to zero.
26:42It was illegal
26:43and violated due process.
26:44So the answer
26:46to can he is yes.
26:48The answer to
26:49is it lawful
26:51is no.
26:52I agree with
26:53the Brennan Center
26:54that there is clear
26:55federal law
26:56that makes it criminal.
26:58Having said that,
27:00although many people
27:01listening may say,
27:02well,
27:02the president
27:02could just pardon
27:03the people
27:04who are breaking the law,
27:06and that is true
27:07federally,
27:09there's still
27:09two remedies.
27:11One,
27:11it can violate
27:12various state laws,
27:13and that is not
27:14subject to a pardon.
27:15And the other
27:16is an injunction.
27:18A court can enjoin
27:21Donald Trump
27:22from doing this.
27:23So even if he tries
27:24to absolve them
27:25of criminal liability,
27:27district courts,
27:28courts of appeals,
27:29and the Supreme Court
27:30can enjoin
27:31any effort
27:32by the president
27:33to try and send in
27:35troops
27:35or other military forces
27:37to surround
27:38these voting places.
27:40And I do think
27:41that that is
27:41a real option.
27:42We are seeing it
27:44around the country
27:44where judges
27:46are enjoining
27:47the efforts
27:48that are going on
27:50in other contexts.
27:52But we're also seeing
27:54those orders
27:55defied by ICE
27:57in particular,
27:58especially in Minneapolis
27:58where it's dozens
27:59upon dozens
28:00of violations.
28:01So assuming
28:02there was an injunction
28:03saying ICE
28:04cannot surround
28:05polling places,
28:07again the question
28:08comes up,
28:09who's going to
28:09stop them
28:10when Donald Trump
28:11orders them
28:12to go surround
28:13polling places
28:14knowing that the
28:16Supreme Court
28:16has told Donald Trump
28:17whatever he says
28:18is not a crime
28:19because it's impossible
28:20according to the
28:20Supreme Court
28:21for him to commit
28:21a crime
28:22when he's issuing
28:23these orders.
28:25Look,
28:25that raises
28:26the sort of
28:27fundamental question
28:28of if the Supreme Court
28:30says you cannot
28:31do it
28:32and you're enjoined
28:33is whether
28:34a politician
28:35will just be saying
28:36you know what
28:37we're going to defy that.
28:39That is possible
28:40the courts
28:41do not have
28:42a standing army
28:43to enforce their laws.
28:45I do think
28:45there would be
28:47just,
28:47you know,
28:48essentially all hell
28:49would break loose.
28:50But just in case
28:52people think
28:52I'm being Pollyannish
28:53the thing that I am
28:54worried about
28:55in addition to this
28:56reporting
28:57is if the Department
28:58of Justice
28:59tries to actually
29:00just seize
29:01the ballot boxes
29:02after the voting
29:03and saying,
29:04well,
29:04I think there's
29:05alleged fraud.
29:06It's a bogus claim
29:07of fraud,
29:07which obviously
29:08we have seen
29:09repeatedly,
29:10including you played
29:11a clip tonight
29:12of the president
29:13doing that
29:13and the Department
29:14of Justice
29:15going in
29:16and trying to get
29:16a search warrant
29:17or simply going in
29:18and seizing
29:19pursuant to
29:20subpoena power
29:21and saying
29:22we'll count the votes.
29:23Again,
29:24I think there are
29:24huge legal issues
29:25to that,
29:26but it's one
29:27where numerous people
29:29are focused
29:30on this issue
29:31to be prepared
29:33to go to court
29:34to get this stopped.
29:35Andrew Weissman,
29:36thank you very much
29:37for joining us tonight.
29:38You're welcome.
29:39Coming up,
29:40the new Democratic
29:41Governor of Virginia,
29:42Abigail Spanberger,
29:43has changed
29:44her state's policy
29:45in dealing
29:46with ICE.
29:46Governor Spanberger
29:47will join us next.
29:53Our next guest
29:54is Fulfilling
29:54a Campaign Promise.
29:56Virginia's newly elected
29:57Democratic Governor,
29:58Abigail Spanberger,
29:59won her election
30:01by 15 points.
30:03Four years after,
30:05the Republican
30:05Governor won
30:06by two points.
30:08She took the
30:09governorship away
30:10from the Republicans
30:10and has now cut
30:12the state of Virginia's
30:14ties with immigration
30:15and customs enforcement.
30:17The Washington Post
30:18reports,
30:18one of her first acts
30:20after being sworn in
30:21January 17th
30:22was to issue
30:22an executive order
30:23rescinding an action
30:24by her predecessor,
30:26former Republican Governor,
30:27Glenn Youngkin,
30:28that required
30:29state law enforcement
30:30agencies to enter
30:32into 287G agreements
30:34with federal
30:35immigration authorities.
30:36Those agreements
30:37deputized state officials
30:38to conduct
30:39federal immigration
30:40enforcement.
30:41On Wednesday,
30:42Spanberger directed
30:43the state police
30:45as well as
30:45corrections officials
30:46and other state agencies
30:48to cancel
30:49any such agreements.
30:51And today,
30:52Governor Spanberger
30:53joined 24 Democratic
30:55state governors
30:56in condemning
30:57Donald Trump's
30:58suggestion
30:59that he would
31:00nationalize
31:01November's midterm
31:02elections.
31:03The governors wrote
31:04in a joint statement,
31:05voting in free
31:06and fair elections
31:07is the foundation
31:08of our democracy.
31:09All Americans deserve
31:10to have their voices
31:11heard as they exercise
31:13their right to vote
31:14without interference
31:14from the federal government.
31:15President Trump's threats
31:16to remove the ability
31:18of states to run
31:19their own elections
31:19is an undemocratic
31:21attempt to silence
31:22the American people
31:23who are rejecting
31:24his costly
31:25and divisive agenda.
31:26While Trump whines
31:27about losing
31:28a free and fair election,
31:30he's now openly
31:31talking about rigging
31:32one in the future.
31:33Democratic governors
31:34won't let that happen.
31:36Joining us now
31:37is Virginia Democratic
31:38Governor Abigail Spanberger.
31:41Governor,
31:41thank you very much
31:42for joining us tonight.
31:44Thank you so much
31:45for having me.
31:46First of all,
31:47your decision about ICE.
31:50What brought you
31:51to that decision?
31:54Well, importantly,
31:55on my first day in office,
31:57I said that I rescinded
31:59my predecessor's executive order
32:01and stated that no longer
32:02were these relationships mandated.
32:05And then I took a full review
32:07of the existence
32:08of 287G agreements
32:10across the Commonwealth
32:11of Virginia
32:12to have a full picture
32:13of what it is
32:14that we would be
32:14walking away from.
32:15And yesterday,
32:16I issued an executive order
32:19and an executive directive.
32:20In the executive order,
32:22I first began
32:23by frankly celebrating
32:24the professionalism
32:26of Virginia law enforcement,
32:28recognizing that in Virginia,
32:30we have law enforcement
32:32that carry as their North Star
32:34a commitment to professionalism
32:36and building up community trust
32:39because it is essential
32:40to the ability
32:41to do good policing,
32:43to protect people,
32:45to investigate crimes,
32:46to uphold justice
32:47and the Constitution,
32:48both of the country
32:49and our Commonwealth.
32:51And what I found
32:53is that in looking
32:54at the 287G requirements,
32:57they explicitly say
32:59that law enforcement
33:00under those agreements
33:01can be under the supervision,
33:04you know,
33:04quote,
33:04under the direction
33:05and supervision of ICE.
33:06And given the level
33:08of professionalism,
33:09vetting,
33:10training,
33:10and the standards
33:11that we hold dear
33:13here in the Commonwealth
33:14of Virginia,
33:15I want Virginia law enforcement,
33:17Virginia State Police,
33:19Virginia Department
33:19of Corrections,
33:20I want them operating
33:21under the leadership
33:23of their own agencies.
33:25And so I issued
33:27that executive director,
33:29directive ending
33:32287G agreements.
33:34Now, to be very clear,
33:35if anyone,
33:36a federal agency
33:37comes to Virginia law enforcement
33:39with a signed judicial warrant,
33:42Virginia law enforcement
33:43will continue to cooperate
33:44to uphold the law
33:45as they have been doing
33:47and as is expected.
33:48But no longer
33:49will they be
33:50under the direction
33:51or supervision
33:52of other agencies
33:55per a 287G agreement.
33:59What are you going to do
34:00if Telsey Gabbard shows up
34:02with a warrant issued
34:03by a federal judge
34:04in Missouri
34:05who's never been to Virginia
34:07to seize ballot boxes
34:09from the state of Virginia?
34:13Well, now that's something
34:14separate from the 287G issue.
34:18I mean, what,
34:19and I, you know,
34:20I had to take a deep breath
34:21for a moment.
34:22As we think about a president
34:23who is saying
34:25that they want to essentially
34:26federalize elections,
34:28take control of elections,
34:30it, you know,
34:31it runs in the face
34:32of even just the basic principles
34:34of our country.
34:35States run elections.
34:37That's how it works.
34:38And we have a president
34:39who has recognized
34:41that he is not going to win
34:44either of these midterms
34:45in 2026
34:47or see any success
34:50for his party in 2028.
34:52And so he's getting desperate.
34:54And what is the real tragedy
34:56in this is that
34:57I would like to see
34:59not just Democratic governors
35:00saying that a president
35:02saying they're going,
35:03he's going to overtake elections
35:05and seize control.
35:06It shouldn't just be
35:07Democratic governors
35:08who are standing up
35:09and saying that that is wrong
35:10and that is unconstitutional.
35:11It should be every governor
35:13in every state
35:14across the country.
35:16But I think we know
35:17that he's only going to do this
35:19in states
35:19that have Democratic governors.
35:24Well, we are here
35:26in the Commonwealth of Virginia
35:27certainly ensuring
35:30that we have the
35:32are digging into
35:34every potential option
35:37and understanding
35:38of how it is
35:39that we execute
35:40our elections.
35:41In Virginia, notably,
35:42we have 45 days
35:43of early voting,
35:44which is certainly
35:46a benefit to the voter.
35:47a space to time out,
35:49go and vote in person
35:50or vote by mail.
35:52And so while that gives
35:53many more opportunities
35:54to a voter,
35:55it also gives,
35:56you know,
35:58many more days
35:59of early voting
36:00for us to contend with
36:02ensuring that we are protecting
36:04access to the ballot box.
36:06It's essential here
36:07in the Commonwealth of Virginia.
36:09And so we are looking
36:11at every legal angle
36:12to make sure
36:13that we are protecting
36:14what is the right
36:16of the Commonwealth of Virginia
36:17and other states
36:18to run our elections
36:19in accordance
36:21with with federal
36:22and state law
36:23and ensure that
36:24every eligible voter
36:26is able to cast
36:27their ballot.
36:28That is what,
36:29as governor,
36:30I am going to ensure
36:31that we are doing
36:32here on the ground.
36:33But the fact
36:34that it is even
36:35up for discussion
36:36is yet one more outrage
36:39that comes from a president
36:41who continues
36:42to be absolutely lawless.
36:45Virginia Governor
36:46Abigail Spanberger,
36:47you know,
36:48I think your election
36:49scared Donald Trump
36:50with that 15-point margin
36:51more than anyone else's.
36:53Thank you very much
36:54for joining us tonight.
36:56That's the highest compliment.
36:57Thank you very,
36:58very much, Lawrence.
36:59Thank you, Governor.
37:01And coming up,
37:02the Border Patrol
37:03is always the problem,
37:04it always has been.
37:05That is the title
37:06of a new article,
37:08an important piece,
37:08by Professor Reese Jones,
37:10who will join us next.
37:15The Border Patrol
37:17is the problem.
37:18It always has been.
37:20That is the title
37:21of an important new piece
37:22in the New York Times
37:23written by Professor
37:24Reese Jones,
37:25who says,
37:26quote,
37:26the violence,
37:27racial profiling,
37:28and disregard
37:29for the Constitution
37:29that have burst
37:30into public view
37:31in Minneapolis
37:31are not new
37:32or unusual
37:33for the Border Patrol.
37:34This is how the agency
37:35has operated
37:36since it was created,
37:37though for decades
37:39those activities
37:40have been hidden
37:41in the remote borderlands.
37:43If you are uncomfortable
37:44with what the Border Patrol
37:45is doing in Minneapolis,
37:46you are uncomfortable
37:47with the Border Patrol
37:49full stop.
37:51Founded to enforce
37:52a racist law,
37:54the Border Patrol
37:54has long held
37:55extraordinary powers
37:56to stop
37:57and interrogate citizens
37:59and immigrants alike
38:00in vast stretches
38:01of the country.
38:02All the Trump administration
38:03has done
38:04is draw attention
38:05to what always existed,
38:07perhaps before
38:08it was possible
38:09to not really know
38:10what the Border Patrol
38:11was doing,
38:11but after watching
38:12neighbors tear-gassed,
38:14pepper-sprayed,
38:14and beaten
38:15while exercising
38:16their right
38:16to observe police activity,
38:18it is impossible
38:20to look away.
38:21Joining us now
38:22is Reese Jones,
38:23a professor
38:23at the University of Hawaii.
38:25He is the author
38:25of Nobody is Protected,
38:27How the Border Patrol
38:28Became the Most Dangerous
38:30Police Force
38:31in the United States.
38:33Professor,
38:33thank you very much
38:34for joining us tonight.
38:36You make the point,
38:37which is something
38:39I was vaguely aware of,
38:40that the Border Patrol
38:41in the past
38:43had jurisdiction
38:43within what was considered
38:45a reasonable distance
38:46of the border,
38:48not in Kansas City,
38:50but roughly 100 miles
38:52from our borders.
38:54What has changed?
38:57Hey, Lawrence,
38:57thanks so much
38:58for having me on.
39:00Yeah,
39:00the Border Patrol,
39:01since the 1940s,
39:02has been able
39:03to operate
39:04within 100 miles
39:05of borders and coastlines,
39:07which is a vast area
39:08inside the United States.
39:10Roughly two-thirds
39:11of the American population
39:12already lives
39:14in that border zone.
39:15So scholars
39:16and people
39:17who live in the border zone
39:18have been saying
39:19for decades
39:20that that is already
39:21too big
39:22and is a zone
39:23that allows
39:24the Border Patrol
39:25to use
39:26its racial profiling,
39:27to act violently
39:29towards immigrants
39:30and citizens,
39:31and to violate
39:33the constitutional rights
39:34of citizens
39:35and immigrants alike
39:36in an area
39:37that's a large section
39:39of the United States.
39:40So what's changed
39:41in the Trump administration
39:42is they've taken
39:43what was before
39:45hidden,
39:46somewhat,
39:47in the border zone
39:48and moved that
39:49into large American cities
39:51like Minneapolis
39:52and brought that
39:54into the bright lights
39:55so everyone can see it.
39:57You know,
39:57I am not at all surprised
39:59by what they've done.
40:00I knew they weren't trained
40:02for what they were
40:03going to be asked
40:03to do by Donald Trump.
40:05But for you,
40:07watching it
40:08with your far superior
40:10knowledge to mine
40:11about their history,
40:12you're saying
40:13that you're watching
40:14what they've always done.
40:17That's right.
40:18The Border Patrol
40:18has been out of control
40:20and violent
40:21since they were founded.
40:22The title of my book
40:23is Nobody is Protected.
40:25You might think
40:26that that's referring
40:27to the violence
40:28in Minneapolis.
40:29You might think
40:30it's referring
40:31to the militarization
40:32of the border
40:33after 9-11.
40:35But that's actually
40:36a quote
40:36from Thurgood Marshall
40:38in 1973
40:39when there were
40:41oral arguments
40:41about a Border Patrol case.
40:43And when he heard
40:43the extent
40:44of what the Border Patrol
40:46was doing,
40:47he realized
40:48that nobody is protected.
40:49And that was true
40:51in 1973
40:52and that's still true today.
40:54And they've always had
40:56this notion
40:57of having powers
40:58that are different
40:59from other
40:59law enforcement agents.
41:02That's right.
41:03So when the Border Patrol
41:05was first established
41:06in 1924,
41:07the idea was
41:09that they would be
41:09right at the borderline.
41:11The original legislation
41:13says within view
41:14of the border.
41:15And in congressional debates
41:16at the time,
41:18the people who were
41:19writing these laws
41:20were saying
41:21that they were
41:22very careful
41:22not to allow them
41:23to go into the interior
41:25of the United States.
41:26And so what they did do,
41:28though,
41:29was give them the right
41:29to stop people
41:30without a warrant
41:32if they saw them
41:33entering the country.
41:34But what's happened is
41:36they've expanded that
41:37deeper and deeper
41:38into the United States
41:39to the 100-mile zone
41:40and now apparently
41:42to anywhere
41:43in the United States.
41:44Minneapolis is 300 miles
41:46from the border.
41:47But they're still using
41:48those extraordinary powers
41:50that they were granted
41:51to have a lower standard
41:54of evidence
41:54than any other police.
41:56Yeah, and instead of
41:57having to see them
41:59cross the border,
42:00they can now just suspect
42:01that they have done so
42:02even if they're 100 miles
42:03away from that border.
42:06Yeah, absolutely.
42:07I mean, the Border Patrol
42:07has transformed
42:08into something
42:09that's completely different
42:10than what it was imagined
42:11to do at the start.
42:12It has been a racist agency
42:14from the start.
42:15It was created
42:16to enforce a racist law,
42:18the 1924 Immigration Act
42:20that was created
42:21national origin quotas
42:23and limited immigration
42:24from almost everywhere
42:25inside the United States
42:26and was founded also
42:27with a frontier
42:28Wild West mentality
42:30and they've carried that
42:31through to the present day.
42:32But that was never meant
42:34to be anywhere other
42:35than right at the borderline.
42:37And so what we're seeing today
42:39is the consequence
42:40of allowing this agency
42:41to continue to do
42:42that violence
42:43and to do that racial profiling
42:45but in vast areas
42:46in the United States.
42:49Rhys Jones,
42:50the piece is
42:50the Border Patrol
42:51is the problem.
42:52It's in the New York Times.
42:53You can find that
42:54it is the must read
42:55on this subject.
42:56Rhys Jones,
42:56thank you very much
42:57for joining us tonight.
42:58Thanks for having me.
Comments