Trump's D.C. Plane Crash Problem is Bad & Kash Patel, Tulsi Gabbard, & RFK Jr Confirmation Hearings
PDS Published 01/30/2025
-
Tragedy struck Washington DC yesterday after an American Airlines flight and an army Blackhawk helicopter collided near Reagan International airport.
Both craft crashed into the Potomac River and just as I was about to record, it was confirmed that there are no survivors.[]
Recovery efforts are still ongoing and we don’t know a ton about the victims.
President Trump said in a conference this morning that a full list will eventually be released, but until then all we really know is that members of US Figure Skating were on board.
In addition to them, some Russian figure skaters working with them were also among the victims.
We’re still trying to piece together what exactly happened, but here’s what we know so far.
Released audio shows that just about 30 seconds before the crash, air traffic control asked the helicopter,
“PAT25, do you have the CRJ in sight?” @0:13
With CRJ being the American Airlines flight here.
They were then asked again before the Blackhawk responded:
“PAT25 has the aircraft in sight. Clear of separation.” @0:19
But then just after this, the two collided right over the Potomac, with the Blackhawk being right in the flightpath of the airlines trying to land.
Why the helicopter was over the approach to a runway is unclear, although army helicopters near Reagan are fairly common, as past footage from the airport shows.
Right, the area is also used by the army for training, with Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth saying: [read]
“It was a fairly experienced crew that was doing an annual required night evaluation. They did have night vision goggles.”
And now, because of this incident, the entire 12th Aviation Battalion will have their operations paused until an investigation is finished.
One thing we saw a lot of people mentioning is that the anti-collision mechanisms commercial aircraft have didn't seem to help.
Right, it’s called TCAS. The issue is that it turns itself off below 1000 feet -- right around the altitude helicopters operate -- because at that height the plane will always be close to something dangerous and the notifications TCAS provides pilots would just be distracting when trying to land or takeoff. [][][]
Obviously the big question then is who is at fault?
In today’s conference, President Trump paradoxically gave two answers.
On the one hand, he said that an investigation needs to take place and that it needs to be done quickly to figure out exactly what happened.
But then he went on to say:
“We do not know what led to this crash but we have some strong opinions and I think we’ll announce those opinions now… and we have some pretty good ideas.” @32:49
And this is where things kinda went off the rails.
Right, ‘cause despite saying that an investigation needs to happen… It also looked like he already jumped to conclusions and seemingly blamed the Blackhawk pilots, DEI Initiatives, and Air Traffic Control to varying degrees.
For example, in a single train of thought Trump hit both the helicopter pilots and ATC.
“For some reason, you had a helicopter that was at the same height and going at an angle that was unbelievably bad when the ATC said do you see him? But there was very little time left when that was stated. Then also he said “follow him in” ... (41:20-41:47)
"’Follow him in’ that means everything is fine. ‘Follow him in.’” (41:51-41:57)
“You had a pilot problem from the standpoint of the helicopter. It was visual. It was a very clear night.” (41:59-42:08)
“But we had a situation where you had a helicopter that had the ability to stop… you can stop a helicopter very quickly…. The ability to the turn and the turn it made was not the correct turn obviously. Did the opposite apparently. But the timing was so tight.” (42:41-43:12)
But the thing Trump and the other officials who spoke at the conference touched on the most was DEI.
Trump spoke multiple times about it and seemingly suggested it was at least partially linked, like when he said:
“We must have only the highest standards for those who work in our aviation system. I changed the Obama standards from mediocre at best to extraordinary. You remember that? Only the highest aptitude… have to be the highest intellect and psychologically superior people were allowed to qualify for Air Traffic Controllers.” (33:55-34:40)
“And then when I left office, Biden took over. He changed them back to lower than ever before. I put safety first and Obama, Biden, and the Democrats put policy first. And they put politics at a level nobody’s ever seen because this was the lowest level.” (34:42-35:23)
Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy spent most of his time talking also focusing on DEI:
“When it comes to safety we can only accept the best and brightest…. The most intelligent coming into these spaces.” (47:05-47:24)
“We commit to them that we’re going to get to the bottom of this investigation as quickly as possible.” (47:32-47:40)
“What happened yesterday should not have happened. When Americans take off in an airplane they should expect to land at their destination.” (47:44-47:54)
And Hegseth did the same:
“I think the president was right that there was some sort of elevation issue that we’re investigating…” (49:27-49:33)
“But I want to echo… we will have the best and brightest in every position possible. Colorblind and merit based.” (49:45-50:00)
“The era of DEI is gone in the defense of the Department. Whether it’s in our ATC, generals..” (50:09-50:20)
It got to a point that even reporters in the room were confused about why so much focus was being placed on DEI with questions like:
“Are you saying this crash was caused by diversity hiring? What evidence?”
“It just could have been….” (51:41-51:50)
Many felt that it was odd Trump would say that an investigation needs to happen but then seemingly give concrete answers about what occurred, leading to one reporter asking:
“You are blaming Democrats and DEI policies and ATC and seeing the military capitain… are you getting ahead of the investigation?”
“No, I don’t think so at all.” (53:41-53:53)
As well as:
“You blamed the diversity element. But weren't sure if ATC made a mistake. But then blamed the helicopter…. But how can you come to the conclusion that diversity caused this crash?”
“Because I have common sense and unfortunately a lot of people don’t.” (57:41-58:08)
Only Vice President JD Vance seemed to realize that Trump’s earlier comments very much sounded like he was saying that DEI was somehow related to the traffic controller in this incident.
Instead, he tried to back up a bit and said:
“Something that the president said that I think bears reemphasizing: which is that when you don’t have the best standards in who you’re hiring it means onthe one hand you’re not getting the best people in government. And on the other hand it put stresses on the people who are already there. And I think that is a core part of what president Trump is going to bring and has already brought to Washignton DC. We want to hire the best people, because we want the best people in Air traffic control and we want to make sure we have enough people at air traffic control who are actually competent to do the job.” @50:49 -51:23
So after all that you might think that DEI programs may have affected who was hired to be an air traffic controller.
To be clear: DEI programs at the FAA do not affect who was hired to be an air traffic controller, despite Trump making it seem like the FAA was letting people with "intellectual disabilities” apply.[]
This job requires a ton of classes and exams to be passed in order to get the role.
And then on top of that you generally need to work in the field for years before getting assigned to a major airport like Reagan.
None of those requirements change because of any DEI-related criteria.
It’s not uncommon for entire classes to fail the exams sometimes and it’s considered one of the hardest gigs to get into in both the private and public sectors.
(and that’s probably because one fuck up leads to dozens or even more deaths).[]
Tldr if you’re an air traffic controller it’s either because you passed a hard as fuck exam and course or have years of experience because of a job with the military and then still had to pass a hard as fuck exam.
We also saw a lot of people reacting to the idea that the FAA somehow got worse under Biden, such as from former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg.
And it made sense he had something to say beyond just being the guy who used to be in charge, right Trump explicitly said:
“He’s just got a good line of bullshit.” (39:25-39:27)
“Well he runs it -- a department of 45,000 people -- and he runs it right into the ground with his diversity.” (39:35-39:41)
To all this Buttigieg wrote:
“Despicable. As families grieve, Trump should be leading, not lying. We put safety first, drove down close calls, grew Air Traffic Control, and had zero commercial airline crash fatalities out of millions of flights on our watch.
President Trump now oversees the military and the FAA. One of his first acts was to fire and suspend some of the key personnel who helped keep our skies safe. Time for the President to show actual leadership and explain what he will do to prevent this from happening again.” []
(and he’s right about the crash stats. This is the first major accident like this in like 16 years).
I’m sure there will be more jabs back and forth over DEI stuff as this investigation goes on.
But it’s very clear that the Trump administration is hyper-focused on it right now.
In the meantime, we’ll have to wait to see exactly what is at fault here because of the alck of clear evidence available to us right now.
-
There are lots of funny things you can do with a baby, such as dress it up like Tom Cruise, feed it a bit of wasabi, or shake it up and down like an etch-a-sketch.
Just kidding, don’t do that last one, for the love of God.
But not everyone’s laughing about what this 25-year-old guy did with a baby for a viral TikTok video.
Right, as you can see, he’s wiping snow off a car’s windshield using what else but a baby. [B roll, 00:05 - 00:33]
Now granted, the baby is bundled up and face-up, but still, people got pissed. [Same B roll]
With one attorney telling KFDM News he was outraged when he saw the video, and he immediately called the police department in Port Arthur, Texas, where the footage was reportedly shot. [Same B roll and Quote, find “was outraged”]
So the cops said they reported the case to Child Protective Services and opened an investigation of their own, with the police chief saying: [Same B roll]
“It’s a sad situation. I know a lot of people go to social media and they are looking for clicks... but this is not a deal where you should put a baby on the windshield.” [Quote]
Now reportedly they identified the man, visited his apartment and checked on the baby, which they said was okay. [Quote, find “okay”]
Also adding that it’s three months old, in case you were wondering. [Quote, find “3-month”]
So now, the cops say they’re putting together a case and hope to charge the man with Child Endangerment. [Quote, find “charge”]
Though two other women, one of whom is believed to be the mother, were reportedly with him while he turned the baby into a windshield wiper, so it’s unclear whether they’ll be culpable too. [Quote, find “mother”]
But what do y’all think about this? Was the video funny? Was it irresponsible? Does it deserve a criminal charge?
Links:
https://nypost.com/2025/01/29/us-news/texas-man-uses-3-month-old-baby-to-wipe-snow-off-hyundai-in-tiktok-video/
-
Speaking of people using other human beings as props for TikTok videos, let’s talk about this woman turning a disabled man into her dance floor.
Right, she’s a 19-year-old healthcare worker in Georgia, and in a video posted online you see her wearing navy scrubs and a stethoscope, as well as a disabled man reported to be an in-home patient of hers. [B roll]
With him sitting in a chair and her standing above him, dancing “provocatively,” as the media has put it, or in clearer terms basically twerking in this dude’s face. [Same B roll]
Now just like the man with the baby, this woman’s video caught the attention of the authorities, who reportedly arrested and charged her with exploitation of a disabled person.
With the local police chief saying:
“I was appalled and disgusted that anyone would create such a video featuring a disabled person. As police officers, our highest duty is to protect those who cannot protect themselves, and my detectives worked as swiftly as possible to bring charges in this incident.” [Quote]
But apparently that’s not the end of it, because he told USA TODAY that investigators found a second video. [Quote same link, find “second video”]
With this one reportedly showing the woman standing on a bathtub, dancing over another person sitting inside it. [Quote same link, find “bathtub”]
So yeah, that’s, uh, certainly something.
Links:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2025/01/29/georgia-heathcare-worker-arrested-video-twerking-disabled-patient/78019425007/
Go to Sundays for Dogs to get 50% off your first order!
-
Three of Trump’s most contentious nominees are ALL on the Hill today having confirmation hearings — so let’s dive into it.
Right, as we mentioned yesterday, RFK Jr. is back for a second hearing before the Senate health committee.
Then you also have Tulsi Gabbard sitting before the Senate Intelligence Committee, which will decide whether to advance her nomination for director of national intelligence.
And finally Kash Patel, who Trump has tapped to lead the FBI, is being questioned by the Senate Judiciary Committee.
And because we want to hit on all three, we obviously can’t cover all the important highlights and moments from these hearings, but I want to give you a little sampling — a taste, if you will — of what we saw today.
Starting off with RFK’s hearing, which was MUCH tougher than the one yesterday before the Senate Finance Committee.
Right, yesterday, he was able to turn to softer issues he’s strong on, like chronic disease and nutrition.
But today it was A LOT harder for him to shift the discussion away from vaccines, which he again claimed he supported, arguing that he’s not anti-vax, he just wants to harmlessly question science.
And also unlike yesterday, we saw Republicans joining Democrats to push back and question those beliefs.
This most notably including the Chairman of the committee, Sen. Bill Cassidy.
Right, and Cassidy — who is a doctor — gave by far the strongest criticism of RFK we’ve seen from GOP Senators.
With him opening the hearing by telling a story about an 18-year-old girl who needed a liver transplant because of a hepatitis B infection that could have been prevented with a childhood vaccine, saying that moment shaped his career as a doctor:
“And that was an inflection point in my career. And since then, I try to do everything I can to make sure I never have to speak to another parent about their child dying due to a vaccine-preventable disease.” 6:19 - 6:32
But then going on to say:
“Now Bobby, I’ve learned, you got a tremendous following. My phone blows up with people who really follow you. And there are many who trust you more than they trust their own physician. And so the question I need to have answered is what will you do with that trust? Whether it’s justified or not, and you may not want this to be the case, but I have constituents who partly credit you for their decision to not vaccinate their child.” 7:10 - 7:46
With him also hitting on that again in his closing statements, saying he’s unsure about how he will vote:
“Does a seventy-year-old man, seventy-one-year-old man, who spent decades criticizing vaccines and who’s financially vested in finding fault with vaccines, can he change his attitudes and approach now that he’ll have the most important position influencing vaccine policy in the United States. Will you continue what you have been? Or will you overturn a new leaf at age seventy. I recognize, man, if you come out unequivocally, vaccines are safe, it does not cause autism. That would have an incredible impact. That’s your power. So what’s it gonna be? Will it be using the credibility to support – lots of articles – or will it be using credibility to undermine? And I gotta figure that out for my vote.” 2:55:15 - 2:56:10
And arguing that RFK Jr.’s beliefs could undermine Trump’s legacy:
“But if there’s someone that is not vaccinated because of policies or attitudes that you bring to the department, and there’s another eighteen-year-old who dies of a vaccine-preventable disease, helicoptered away, God forbid dies, it'll be blown up in the press. The greatest tragedy will be her death, but I can also tell you an associated tragedy, well that will cast a shadow over President Trump's legacy.” 2:56:39 - 2:57:02
But Cassidy wasn’t the only Republican who cast doubt on whether they would vote for Kennedy’s confirmation.
We also saw Sen. Lisa Murkowski raising similar points about how Kennedy has a massive platform — one that will only get bigger if he’s confirmed — and expressing concerns about how he will use that incredible power:
“So we, we can’t be going backwards with our vaccinations that will allow for this level of prevention and protection. So I’m asking you…You are clearly an influencer. You are clearly an influencer or you would not be in this position today. But you can see how your podium, your platform, your voice can influence so many. So I am asking you on the issue of vaccines specifically to please convey, convey with a level of authority and science, but also with a level of conviction and free of conflict and free of political bias that these are measures that we should be proud of as a country. ” 2:49 - 3:42
Right, and she is important to watch because she is one of the two Republicans who is known for bucking the party.
With the other one being Sen. Susan Collins, who didn’t really dig into RFK much in her questions today, but who experts still say to keep an eye on as a vote that could flip.[]
But, on the complete opposite side of the coin, we also saw some Republicans using their time to spread vaccine misinformation and cast doubt on their effectiveness.
So much so that we saw a rare shouting match between two Republicans — Cassidy and Sen. Rand Paul, who scuffled over the Hepatitis vaccine.
You also had Sen. Markwayne Mullin actively suggesting that vaccines cause autism — a claim that Kennedy repeatedly refused to deny outright, including in this exchange with Sen. Bernie Sanders: [][]
“Vaccines do not cause autism. Do you agree with that?”
“As I said, I’m not gonna go into HHS with any pre–
“I asked you a simple question Bobby. Studies all over the world say it does not. What do you think?”
“Senator, if you show me those studies, I will absolutely, as I promised to Chairman Cassidy, I will apologize – ”
“That is a very troubling response.” 00:20 - 00:46
And the last notable moment I want to hit on with RFK is this clip that has gone viral of questioning from Sen. Angela Alsobrooks:
“You said the following, and I quote: We should not be giving Black people the same vaccine schedule that’s been given to Whites. Because their immune system is better than ours. Can you please explain what you meant?”
“There’s a series of studies, I think most of them by Pollen, that show that the particular antigens that Blacks have a much stronger reaction. There’s differences in reactions to different products by different races…”
“So I have seventeen seconds left, let me just ask you then. So what different vaccine schedule would you say I should have received?”
“I mean the Pollen article suggests that Blacks need fewer antigens – so you get the same measles vaccine.”
“This is so dangerous. Mr. Kennedy, with all due respect, that is so dangerous. Your voice would be a voice that parents would listen to. That is so dangerous.” 00:01 - 1:01
Another extraordinary turn. Senator Tommy Tuberville, Republican of Atlanta, announced that his son and daughter-in-law have “done their research” and will not have their child vaccinated according to the recommended schedule. That makes three Republicans — Tuberville, Paul and Mullin — who have openly questioned vaccines.[]
Okay, so that’s Kennedy, but now I want to talk about Gabbard.
Right, her appointment has been especially controversial, with experts saying that out of all the three nominees in hearings today, she actually has the hardest path to making it out of committee and to the floor for a full vote.[]
And there are concerns across the aisle about some very questionable statements she has made and actions she has taken in the past.
Particularly remarks she has made that are sympathetic to Russia, prompting allegations that she is a Russian asset.
Hell, you even had right-leaning outlets like The New York Post taking aim at those statements, writing:
“Gabbard has repeatedly echoed Russian propaganda used to justify the Kremlin’s invasion of Ukraine and criticized Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy as a corrupt autocrat.”
With one of the most notable examples there being the debunked conspiracy theory pushed by Russian media that the U.S. was funding a secret, dangerous bioweapons lab in Ukraine before the war.
Beyond that, she has also received bipartisan criticism for her repeated praise of Edward Snowden — the former NSA contractor who fled to Russia after being charged for illegally exposing government surveillance tools.
Then, of course, there is the repeated backlash she has gotten for visiting the recently-deposed Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad in 2017.
With many accusing her of legitimizing a dictatorship and then slamming her for further questioning whether Assad had used chemical weapons in the civil war despite U.S. authorities and independent analysts repeatedly concluding he had.
And right out of the gate, Gabbard attempted to address the concerns about her connection to Assad:
“I have no love for Assad or any dictator. I just hate al-Qaeda.” (0:02-0:07)
Gabbard was also repeatedly questioned by members of both parties about her previous support for Snowden.
And while she did condemn his actions, saying that he “broke the law” and exposed “illegal and unconstitutional programs,” she repeatedly refused to call him a traitor when asked by both sides of the aisle.
Was Edward Snowden a traitor?...Senator, my heart is with my commitment to our constitution and our nation’s security. (0:00-0:09)
“I’m committed, if confirmed as DoNI, to join you to make sure there is on future Snowden-type leak.” (0:27-0:34)
“Was he a traitor at the time when he took America's secrets, released them in public, and then ran to China and became a Russian citizen?...Sir, I’m focused on the future and how we can prevent something like this form happening again.”(1:17-1:27)
[BENNET PRESSING TULSI](0:29-0:45) (1:27-1:34)
There, you also had Senator Bennet pressing her on previous comments she made about Russia and Ukraine:
And then, when Republican Sen. Jerry Moran asked if Russia would get a pass in her mind, heart, or policy recommendations, she said:
And then finally, that brings us to Patel.
Now, notably, his hearing was actually still going on as I was recording and getting the show finalized, so this is a developing story, but I still want to hit on some key thing’s we’d seen by mid-day.
Right, so first a bit about Patel: he is a Trump loyalist widely criticized for embracing conspiracy theories and using inflammatory rhetoric — particularly on right-wing podcasts.
And the fact that he is a loyalist is really notable for this specific position because, as The New York Times explains, his selection:
“has upended the post-Watergate tradition of picking nonpartisan directors. If confirmed, Mr. Patel could provide Mr. Trump with a direct line into the F.B.I., eliminating guardrails meant to insulate the bureau from White House interference.”[]
And there is a long list of his views and comments that many say are alarming, but for the context of his hearing today, the most notable include his repeated attacks on the FBI.
Right, he has continuously undermined the work of the agency he’s being tapped to lead — including the prosecution of those charged in connection with the insurrection.
Which he also claimed was planned by the FBI and tried to blame on Nancy Pelosi.[]
He has also repeatedly railed against the FBI as an institution, painting it as corrupt, vowing to reshape the agency with firings, promising to shutdown the FBI’s D.C. headquarters, and saying he will go after Trump’s enemies.[]
And to that point, Democrats questioned him about a list of 60 names of people he deemed members of the “Executive Branch Deep State” in his book, titled: “Government Gangsters: The Deep State, the Truth, and the Battle for Our Democracy.”
With many critics arguing that this should be taken as a list of enemies — enemies that he could go after as FBI director.
But when asked during the hearing, he denied that the appendix was a list of political opponents:
“It’s not an enemies list. It’s a total mischaracterization.”
But he also refused to say whether he would use his position as FBI director to investigate people on that list, saying only that he wouldn’t go “backwards” when asked if he would probe Trump’s perceived enemies.[][]
And that wasn’t the only question he didn’t answer — he also repeatedly refused to say that Biden had won the 2020 election when asked by multiple Senators and pressed extensively:
We also saw many Democrats pressing Patel on his past controversial statements on podcasts and social media, including his support for conspiracy theories.
But Patel largely brushed them off, saying he didn’t remember past statements Senators flagged, claiming they were taking his remarks out of context, saying:
With him even claiming at one point that he only went on controversial, far-right podcasts to debunk rather than endorse false claims — despite hours of content to the contrary.[]
But, in general, we saw Republicans backing Patel, making it likely he will be confirmed.
Now, again, we can’t hit on every single thing, but I’ll make sure to link to the full hearings down below.
And for now, we’ll just have to wait and see how the confirmation votes go for all three of these nominees.
-
Donald Trump is building a massive detention facility at Guantanamo Bay to hold tens of thousands of migrants.
Another way of saying that?
Donald Trump might be building his first concentration camp.
At least, you know, according to the dictionary.
Right, with different definitions including “a place where large numbers of people are kept as prisoners in extremely bad conditions, especially for political reasons.” []
And the confinement of persons “as a result of their “membership in a group the government has identified as dangerous or undesirable” []
With other key characteristics mentioned including it being “...for reasons of state security” []
But with all that, take a listen to what Trump said yourself:
“We have 30,000 beds in Guantanamo to detain the worst criminal illegal aliens threatening the American people. Some of them are so bad we don't even trust the countries to hold them because we don't want them coming back. So we're going to send them out to Guantanamo. This will double our capacity immediately, right? And tough. It's a tough place to get at them. Today's signings bring us one step closer to eradicating the scourge of migrant crime in our communities once and for all.” (BYTE: 0:13-0:44)
And so, to really unpack why the idea of this is so alarming, let’s start with a brief history of Guantanamo Bay.
Right, it’s a naval base in a part of southeastern Cuba seized by the American military in 1898.
With the 45 square miles later being indefinitely “leased” to the US government for only about $4,000 a year. []
But despite the low rent, it’s incredibly costly, in part because it’s home to what’s been described as the most expensive prison on Earth.
And that’s the Guantánamo Bay military prison, which opened in 2002 and has long held detainees taken into custody after 9/11 attacks.
Many of whom had been tortured before being brought there, with them then suffering conditions at Guantánamo that have been described as cruel, inhuman and degrading.
And while many won’t shed a tear for some of them, it’s important to say that nearly 800 people have been detained, and most of them were never charged.
Including nine men who died in the prison – six by suspected suicide.
And now, only 15 remain – including the alleged mastermind of 9/11.
But with all that, what less people know about Guantanamo is that – separate from the military prison – it’s also long been used to hold migrants.
With this practice going back decades throughout both Democratic and Republican administrations.
And specifically, this has taken place in a facility known as the Guantanamo Migrant Operations Center.
With the facility primarily holding migrants who have been picked up at sea.
In the 1990s, for example, when it started, holding more than 45,000 people fleeing crises in both Haiti and Cuba. []
And more recently, the numbers have been much smaller, with the Times reporting that just 37 migrants were held there from 2020 to 2023[]
But in any case, with all that, you had the International Refugee Assistance Project released a scathing report on refugee detention at Guantanamo last year –
Accusing the US of detaining migrants fleeing Haiti, Cuba and other Caribbean countries “indefinitely in prison-like conditions without access to the outside world and trapped in a punitive system…with little to no transparency or accountability.”[]
And specifically highlighting “a multitude of health and human rights violations” including “substandard living conditions, abusive guards and forced medical procedures including forcibly administering birth control.”[]
And with that, also last year, you had the ACLU suing the US government for information after the Biden administration responded to a freedom of information request by claiming:
The center “is not a detention facility and none of the migrants there are detained.” []
The Trump administration, however, says the planned expanded facility is very much intended as a detention centre.
And if it holds as many as Trump promised, it would far exceed the capacity of existing ICE facilities, the largest of which have about 2,000 beds.
And yes, almost doubling ICE’s detention capacity of 40,000 people.[]
And with that, the Trump administration will reportedly ask Congress to fund the expansion of the existing facility as part of a Republican spending bill that’s in the works.[]
Though, that said, right now it’s unclear how much the facility would cost or when it would be completed.[]
But if and when it is, the history of Guantanamo?
Combined with what we already know about Trump and immigration, including a history of controversial detention policies, dehumanizing and racist rhetoric, along with flagrantly false claims about migrant criminality,?
That’s why we have so much concern and backlash.
Right, you had the Cuban President describing the plan as “an act of brutality” “in illegally occupied territory” –
Also emphasizing that the proposed site would be “next to the well-known prisons of torture and illegal detention."[]
And then, the ACLU saying this would be a “disastrous mistake” and adding:
“Sending scores of immigrants to an inaccessible military base in Cuba could enable the government to deprive them of basic human rights, far from lawyers, the press, and Congressional oversight. Unfortunately, that appears to be the point.”[]
A point also made by a lawyer who actually sued the government for the indefinite detention of Haitian refugees at Guantanamo back in the 90s, saying:
“Guantánamo is a black hole designed to escape scrutiny and with a dark history of inhumane conditions. It is a transparent attempt to avoid legal oversight that will fail.” []
And finally, you have people like the head of the Center for Constitutional Rights saying:
“President Trump’s decision to use Guantánamo – global symbol and site of lawlessness, torture, and racism – to house immigrants should horrify us all. Like many of Trump’s authoritarian attacks on human rights, this one has shameful precedents in U.S. history.”.
“The order…sends a clear message: migrants and asylum seekers are being cast as the new terrorist threat, deserving to be discarded in an island prison, removed from legal and social services and supports.” []
Now with all that, newly appointed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has seemingly tried to offer some reassurances –
Emphasizing that migrant detainees would not be held in the military prison. []
Also claiming that migrants would not be held indefinitely..[]
"This is not the camps. You're not putting criminals in camps where ISIS and other criminals…This is a temporary transit, which is already the mission of naval station Guantanamo Bay, where we can plus-up thousands and tens of thousands, if necessary, to humanely move illegals out of our country, where they do not belong, back to the countries where they came from in a proper process.”
But with all that, going back to Trump’s announcement? (BYTE: 3:03-3:25).
He seemingly he was open to indefinite detention, when if you remember, he said:
“Some of them are so bad we don't even trust the countries to hold them because we don't want them coming back. So we're going to send them out to Guantanamo.”
And in fact, Trump has in the past pushed for policies to allow the indefinite detention of migrant families and children.
And as far as the whole thing that this would be about going after criminals?
Well, that was supposed to be true with these ICE raids.
But on Sunday, for example, only about half of 1,179 arrests made were considered “criminal arrests.”[]
And then, we’ve even US citizens getting caught up in some cases.
And with that, this week you even had Trump floating the idea of imprisoning Americans overseas if they’re repeat criminal offenders.
And of course, all this as Trump has expanded a process known as expedited removal, which some say enables the deportation of migrants without due process.
And with all that, this is why some have said Trump’s mass deportation plan echoes concentration camp history even before this Guantanamo order.
And there, I’ll add, that that announcement isn’t the only immigration update we have today.
Right, one, the Guantanamo announcement came as Trump signed the Laken Riley Act into law –
Which requires undocumented immigrants who are arrested for theft or violent crimes to be held in jail pending trial.
Something that critics say violates immigrants’ basic rights by allowing them to be detained even if they haven’t been charged with wrongdoing, much less convicted.[]
And two, Trump has ended Biden’s extension of temporary protected status for hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan migrants.
With Kristi Noem, the new DHS secretary announcing the decision on Fox and saying:
“The people of this country want these dirtbags out. They want their communities to be safe." (BYTE: 1:20-1:24)
But with all that, I gotta pass the question off to you. What are your thoughts here?
-
Donald Trump is trying to make big changes to education in the US.
Yesterday, signing three controversial executive orders that we really need to talk about.
Right, one of them, it’s entitled “Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling.”
Although, arguably, it could also be entitled “Starting Conservative Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling.”
Right, with the order claiming that “parents have witnessed schools indoctrinate their children in radical, anti-American ideologies while deliberately blocking parental oversight.”
And going on to argue that, in many cases, “innocent children are compelled to adopt identities as either victims or oppressors solely based on their skin color and other immutable characteristics.”
And finally, suggesting that “young men and women are made to question whether they were born in the wrong body and whether to view their parents and their reality as enemies to be blamed.”[]
And with all that, the order threatens to withhold federal funding in order to prevent schools from recognizing transgender identities or teaching about concepts such as structural racism, “white privilege” and “unconscious bias”
And then, beyond that, the order reestablishes the President’s Advisory 1776 Commission with the aim of promoting “patriot education.”
Which is defined as a presentation of the history of America grounded in, for example "an accurate, honest, unifying, inspiring, and ennobling characterization of America’s founding and foundational principles.”
As well as the ideas that the US “has admirably grown closer to its noble principles throughout its history.”
And that “the concept that celebration of America’s greatness and history is proper.” []
And of course, with that, there’s a lot of people worried about the curriculum that Trump and Republicans may be trying to promote.
Right, a whitewashed version of American history that downplays the country’s greatest shames and ultimately leaves them less informed and worse off for it.
But with that, moving on to the second order?
It’s entitled “Expanding Educational Freedom and Opportunity for Families”
And it’s basically about expanding access to private school vouchers.
With the order calling for new guidance regarding how States can use Federal formula funds to support K-12 educational choice initiatives.[]
As well as talking about “Expanding Opportunities for Low-Income, Working Families”; “Helping Military Families”; and “Helping Children Eligible for Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) Schools.” []
And with that, you have school choice activists praising the move, but others taking issue.
For example, the president of the American Federation of Teachers, saying the plan is “likely illegal” as well as a “direct attack on all that parents and families hold dear.”
And adding: “This order hijacks federal money used to level the playing field for poor and disadvantaged kids and hands it directly to unaccountable private operators.” []
And so really, both of these orders reflect trends we’ve been seeing in conservative states over the past few years.
Right, more than 20 states have reportedly restricted how race, gender and American history can be talked about in schools.
While states and local school boards have banned literally thousands of books.
And then, on the school choice front?
Over just the past five years, the number of children using taxpayer money for private education or home-schooling has doubled to one million. []
But at this same time, all this is seemingly at odds with Trump’s past calls for the federal government’s role in education should be reduced – which included pledging shutting down the Department of Education.
And beyond that, it’s not clear what real-world effect the new executive actions might have.
Right, states already making these changes will keep making them, but it’s not gonna be so easy elsewhere.
And that’s because, one, it’s generally understood that states have the sole power to set curriculums, tests, teaching methods and school-choice policies —-
Again, something conservatives are generally big on.
Two, states and localities provide 90 percent of the funding for public education anyways — meaning Trump may not have all that much leverage. []
And three, even if he did, the question of whether the president has the power to block spending that Congress has authorized?
That’s one that’s yet to be settled by the judicial system, though it could end up making its way to the Supreme Court.
But of course, this question on education specifically? And what can the federal government can do?
That could very well end up being litigated too.
Right, I will say, the Biden administration? It’s not like it didn’t get involved.
It promoted diversity and equity as well as directed schools to respect transgender students’ rights –
But it never tried to condition federal funding on what was taught in classrooms. []
And with that, you have people like Jonathon Zimmerman, a UPenn professor who studies the history of education, saying:
“Whether the federal government can influence curriculum in this way is a completely open question.”
“If they were actually able to compel school districts to alter their curriculum, that would be the first time the federal government had done that. Ever.” []
But with that, we gotta move on to the third and final executive order, which is a bit disconnected from the other two because it’s not just focused on K-12 education.
And this one’s entitled “Additional Measures to Combat Anti-Semitism.”
Which says it will now be the policy of the US to “prosecute, remove, or otherwise hold to account the perpetrators of unlawful anti-Semitic harassment and violence.”[]
With that being especially worrisome many because of the heated debate over what constitutes antisemitism.
And with that, this order seemingly targets pro-Palestinian activists, including by paving the way for those who come from abroad to have their student visas cancelled.
Some saying this is a clear violation of free speech, others – including the Anti-Defamation League, for example – applauding the order as a key step in fighting what it described as “rising antisemitism.”
And with that, it is against the law for students to have their visas cancelled for past or current beliefs or statements that are lawful. []
But that law also says foreign nationals who are associated with or endorse terrorist groups could lose their visas.
And that’s potentially the legal basis we’d see used to justify this. []
But with that, I gotta pass the question off to you. What are your thoughts with all this?
-
You know, Trump and the liberal media are locked in a really strange love/hate relationship.
Officially, they despise each other, but in reality, he gives them content, and they give him attention.
And caught in the middle are the viewers, who have finally found it within themselves to stop crying and turn their televisions back on.
That’s according to Nielsen, which just released January ratings numbers for the major cable news outlets showing that the post-election slump may be ending. [Image]
Right, because after Trump won in November, CNN and MSNBC both reportedly Hemorrhaged roughly half their viewers. [Headline]
With about two-thirds of American adults reportedly saying at the time that they felt the need to limit media consumption about politics and government because of overload. [Quote, find “two-thirds”]
But apparently Donald Trump’s blitzkrieg through the U.S. government was too spectacular to resist.
Because reportedly, since the inauguration, MSNBC’s weekday primetime viewership shot up 60% compared to the three weeks prior. [Quote, find “61 percent”]
With a reported 1.3 million total viewers tuning in each night, up from 800,000 the week before. [Same quote]
And for CNN, it said its primetime viewership jumped 56% from December. [Quote, find “56%”]
And it’s not surprising; right, the same dip and recovery happened for them in 2016, as well as for Fox News in 2020.
And these networks don’t just deliver the news; they provide their viewers with a familiar face to help them find order and hope amidst the chaos and despair.
Which, for anyone on the left, everything feels incredibly chaotic right now.
You’ve got the executive orders, the mass deportations, the spending freezes, the worker buyouts, the firings, the pardons, the appointee confirmations, the assault on birthright citizenship, the appeals to Greenland, the antics with Elon Musk — did I forget anything?
It’s enough apparently for Rachel Maddow to return to her 9 p.m. show five nights a week, as opposed to just Monday nights like she’d been doing since 2022. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 01:16 - 01:18] Caption: “Good morning America. How are ya?”
So she’s reportedly supposed to keep up the new schedule for the first 100 days of Trump’s term, and if her viewership doesn’t lag, the network’s got a lot to look forward to. [Continue B roll]
Because she reportedly averaged 1.7 million viewers the first week and topped two million on the best day. [Quote, find “1.7”]
But with all that said, neither CNN nor MSNBC have fully recovered their pre-election viewership yet.
And as The Independent pointed out, their numbers are meager compared to those of Fox News, which reportedly just had the highest rated January ever in cable news history. [Quote same link, find “news history”]
Right, with 2.8 million average primetime viewers, it reportedly grabbed nearly 70% of the entire cable news market. [Quote same link, find “2.8”]
Leaving the so-called “mainstream” liberal media, which really makes up a minority, to clamor over the rest.
Meanwhile, I’m just sitting here trying to get the stain out of my shirt before I turn the camera on so I can put out this humble little show four days a week.
But it’ll be interesting to see how these trends play out over the next four years, because the media industry enjoyed a boom in traffic during Trump’s first term.
And then, while exceptional outlets like The New York Times weathered the bust of Biden’s term, most others, at least on the left, struggled to stay afloat.
So perhaps the tide is rising again, or maybe Trump’s lawsuits and attempts at censorship will limit their success … only time will tell.
Links:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/msnbc-ratings-trump-bump-maddow-b2688457.html
