Latest / The Real News Podcast / The Election Interference Evidence No One Is Talking About

Transcript

The Election Interference Evidence No One Is Talking About · The Real News Podcast

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Could President Trump and his MAGA Congress be planning to
• 0:02
  Speaker 1: interfere with the upcoming midterm elections? Well, we have some
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: evidence that might surprise you, which we will unpack on
• 0:09
  Speaker 1: this episode of the Capitol Hill React Report. Hello, this
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: is Tedo Graham Myself, along with my reporting partner Stephen
• 0:19
  Speaker 1: janis our Capitol Hill correspondence for the Real News Network.
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: We report regularly on what's happening in the nation's capital,
• 0:26
  Speaker 1: but with a twist, we examined the process of governance
• 0:29
  Speaker 1: through the prism of the most powerful force in today's politics,
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: economic inequality. Now, before you say tell you that seems
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: sort of limited, just let me explain a little bit
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: before we get to the first video. Economic inequality is
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: at its highest point in recent history. Just take a
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: look at the latest report that showed American worker's share
• 0:48
  Speaker 1: of the economy has fallen to its lowest level since
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: nineteen forty seven. That's right, In twenty twenty five, the
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: share of the economy that went to the people who
• 0:57
  Speaker 1: actually make it run was fifty four pers sent, a
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: historic low. Okay, so why is this context essential for
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: reporting on politics? Well, because all that wealth accumulating in
• 1:07
  Speaker 1: fewer and fewer hands, translates into concentrated power, and that
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: power now flows into our elections in the form of cash, cash,
• 1:15
  Speaker 1: which translates into victories at the ballot box for the
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: purveyors of an increasingly extractive economy, insulating it from ballot
• 1:22
  Speaker 1: box accountability, which ultimately means that you can't understand politics
• 1:26
  Speaker 1: on Capitol Hill unless you comprehend what currently defines it, namely,
• 1:30
  Speaker 1: the rich getting richer. Steven, how am I doing so?
• 1:33
  Speaker 2: You're doing great?
• 1:33
  Speaker 3: I mean, one of the things we have to think
• 1:35
  Speaker 3: about is we got to look at democracy as a
• 1:37
  Speaker 3: whole here, functioning through its prism of inequality, the idea
• 1:40
  Speaker 3: of democracy that delivers a certain amount of freedom to
• 1:43
  Speaker 3: the people we're part of it now. Freedom is a
• 1:45
  Speaker 3: limited resource, so as people get richer and richer, they
• 1:48
  Speaker 3: hoard that freedom, and so there's less freedom to go around,
• 1:51
  Speaker 3: freedom to do what you want, freedom to educate yourself.
• 1:53
  Speaker 2: Freedom to live where you want.
• 1:55
  Speaker 3: All those things sort of translate into the affordability crisis
• 1:57
  Speaker 3: we're seeing now, which means that there's less freedom for
• 2:00
  Speaker 3: the working people, and more and more freedom for the
• 2:03
  Speaker 3: richest one percent, and more and more freedom to control
• 2:06
  Speaker 3: how we live, and that's why we have this sort
• 2:08
  Speaker 3: of crisis on Capitol Hill, and that's how we have
• 2:10
  Speaker 3: to view what goes on on Capitol Hill.
• 2:12
  Speaker 1: Stephen. That is such a great point and brings us
• 2:15
  Speaker 1: right back to the topic at hand, the incredibly tense
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: state of American elections and why wealth and quality will
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: play a key role in that autocratic calculus. So first,
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: let's be honest, Stephen. The mainstream media has, in my opinion,
• 2:28
  Speaker 1: been misreading Trump, specifically his pronouncements that he doesn't care
• 2:32
  Speaker 1: about gas prices or the quagmire in Iran. Let's listen
• 2:35
  Speaker 1: to him talk about it, and then discuss when we're.
• 2:37
  Speaker 3: Are negotiating with Iran as the president, what extend our
• 2:41
  Speaker 3: air game, financial and maintain motivating you to make it?
• 2:44
  Speaker 3: Me on, not even a little bit.
• 2:46
  Speaker 4: The only thing that matters is when I'm talking about Iran,
• 2:49
  Speaker 4: they can't have.
• 2:50
  Speaker 2: A no blue weapon.
• 2:51
  Speaker 1: I don't think about American financial situation, I don't think
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: about anybody.
• 2:56
  Speaker 2: I think about one thing. We cannot let Iran have
• 3:00
  Speaker 2: no clue.
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: That's the only thing that Okay, So the interpretation from
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: the TV pundits has been that President Trump is just
• 3:08
  Speaker 1: inexplicably toned off or detached or just disinterested. But we
• 3:13
  Speaker 1: think Trump is telegraphing something much more insidious. So Steven,
• 3:16
  Speaker 1: let me ask you a question after watching this video.
• 3:19
  Speaker 1: Is Trump just really disengaged, as a mainstream media says,
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: or as they say, he's unhinged, or is there something
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: else a little more troubling going on here.
• 3:27
  Speaker 3: Well, you know, Telly, this is one of many clips
• 3:28
  Speaker 3: where Trump is kind of downplayed midterm elections or voters
• 3:32
  Speaker 3: concerns or you know, gas prices or whatever. He doesn't consistently,
• 3:35
  Speaker 3: and of course it would be suicide for a politician
• 3:38
  Speaker 3: and a functioning democracy to say something like that, right.
• 3:40
  Speaker 2: Because this would directly affect how people.
• 3:43
  Speaker 3: But I really think for some reason, gas prices, well,
• 3:45
  Speaker 3: I kind of understand that gas prices are one of
• 3:47
  Speaker 3: the biggest motivators for people when it comes to.
• 3:50
  Speaker 2: Elections, So it would be suicide.
• 3:52
  Speaker 3: But what he's really trying to say is I'm not
• 3:54
  Speaker 3: worried about the midterms because I got this locked down,
• 3:57
  Speaker 3: and look at what happened in the last presidential election.
• 4:00
  Speaker 3: He tried to overturn it with he lost, but he
• 4:02
  Speaker 3: wasn't really prepared. He has been preparing for two years
• 4:06
  Speaker 3: now to be able to interfere with the elections. He
• 4:08
  Speaker 3: subpoena ballots all over the country, including Fulton County and Georgia.
• 4:12
  Speaker 3: He has set up this election integrity system run by
• 4:17
  Speaker 3: a person who actually denied the twenty twenty election. He
• 4:21
  Speaker 3: has increased the funding for ice in Borderptrobe, which we'll
• 4:24
  Speaker 3: talk about later. He has just simply put people in
• 4:26
  Speaker 3: place who will be able to do.
• 4:29
  Speaker 2: What he needs to do.
• 4:30
  Speaker 3: The Justice Department itself does whatever he wants. They'll prosecute anybody,
• 4:33
  Speaker 3: so they will certainly be willing to weigh in on this.
• 4:36
  Speaker 2: He is prepared.
• 4:37
  Speaker 3: He's declared emergencies in so many situations. He is prepared,
• 4:40
  Speaker 3: and he is trying to say I'm not worried about it,
• 4:43
  Speaker 3: because no matter what happens, I'm going to make sure
• 4:46
  Speaker 3: that I come out on top. And I think that's
• 4:48
  Speaker 3: what we're missing here. When he says he's disinterested, what
• 4:52
  Speaker 3: he's saying is I've got this in the bag.
• 4:54
  Speaker 1: You know, Steven. I think you put your finger right
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: on it here. The real danger here isn't just what
• 4:58
  Speaker 1: Trump is saying, but the fact that everyone keeps dismissing it.
• 5:01
  Speaker 1: And you know what, Trump hasn't even ruled out paying
• 5:03
  Speaker 1: the people who stormed the capitol and those who tried
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: to halt the counting of the electoral votes in twenty twenty,
• 5:09
  Speaker 1: despite the fact that his ministration said the fund is dead.
• 5:12
  Speaker 1: He was literally just quoted as saying, I think they
• 5:15
  Speaker 1: should be reimbursed by a crooked government. Now, his remarks
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: regarding the controversial one point seven billion dollar weaponization fund bolster.
• 5:25
  Speaker 1: I think the case he believes he can alter the
• 5:27
  Speaker 1: mid term outcome, it would have set aside money for
• 5:29
  Speaker 1: people who believe they were unjustly prosecuted, namely the Jan
• 5:33
  Speaker 1: six insurrectionists. I mean, critics say, if Trump has his way,
• 5:37
  Speaker 1: he will literally be able to assemble a pertrorrean guard
• 5:40
  Speaker 1: to disrupt the elections. And I'm alluding to the elite
• 5:43
  Speaker 1: corps of the Roman military officers who guarded the emperor
• 5:46
  Speaker 1: but who eventually just took power themselves. Stephen, what does
• 5:50
  Speaker 1: it mean if he gets his way?
• 5:52
  Speaker 2: Well, what it means because ways he has what you need.
• 5:54
  Speaker 3: The first, the most important element of any sort of
• 5:57
  Speaker 3: autocratic takeover is having the money to people and having
• 6:01
  Speaker 3: the freedom to pay people any way you want. Now,
• 6:03
  Speaker 3: this one point seven billion dollar fund would be an
• 6:05
  Speaker 3: easy way just to dole out cash to people who
• 6:08
  Speaker 3: had done his bidding before. Now he has other ways
• 6:10
  Speaker 3: of doing this that we'll talk about, but the main
• 6:12
  Speaker 3: thing is it gives him the power of the purse
• 6:15
  Speaker 3: in a way that's totally up to his discretion and
• 6:18
  Speaker 3: the justice part, which is an extension of him. Now,
• 6:20
  Speaker 3: what's interesting about is I don't really think they need
• 6:22
  Speaker 3: a fun Those Jay sixers can consue and then Trump
• 6:25
  Speaker 3: can approve the payoffs, so he'll get it one way
• 6:27
  Speaker 3: or another. But the point is he wants to signal
• 6:30
  Speaker 3: to the people, Hey, if you help interfere with an election,
• 6:33
  Speaker 3: I will pay for it and I'll reward you. Because
• 6:36
  Speaker 3: these settlements could be used. Seven billion dollars is a
• 6:40
  Speaker 3: lot of money, So I think that's what he's trying
• 6:42
  Speaker 3: to telegraph, is saying, help me out with this and
• 6:44
  Speaker 3: you'll get paid.
• 6:45
  Speaker 2: Stephen.
• 6:46
  Speaker 1: That is not only spot on, but it's actually really scary.
• 6:50
  Speaker 1: But what's even more concerning to me is how much
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: this election interference plan is hiding in plain sight with
• 6:56
  Speaker 1: little or no pushback. Because he can't do this alone.
• 6:59
  Speaker 1: He needs help from his ever loyal contingent in Congress,
• 7:03
  Speaker 1: and for the most part, they are in lockstep with Trump.
• 7:05
  Speaker 1: And that was more than evident when the MAGA Congress
• 7:08
  Speaker 1: started to plot a strategy to get more money to ICE,
• 7:10
  Speaker 1: Customs and Border Patrol for purposes that we're going to
• 7:13
  Speaker 1: touch on a little bit later.
• 7:14
  Speaker 2: Now.
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: Their plan was to use a tactic called reconciliation, which
• 7:17
  Speaker 1: allows legislation to bypass the fulibuster provided it has significant
• 7:22
  Speaker 1: fiscal impact on federal spending. Now, this was an unprecedented
• 7:26
  Speaker 1: power graph because the funding bill was intended to provide
• 7:29
  Speaker 1: routine annual appropriations and that's a measure that is usually
• 7:32
  Speaker 1: passed with bipartisan support. Which brings me to an interesting
• 7:36
  Speaker 1: encounter we had on Capitol Hill with Republican Congressman Mike Lawler,
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: who didn't seem to want to answer our question when
• 7:42
  Speaker 1: we asked why ICE and CBP need an additional seventy
• 7:46
  Speaker 1: billion dollars in funding. But his reluctance is also revealing.
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: Let's stick a listen to what happened.
• 7:51
  Speaker 2: Fuck that up contry? Why does ICE need an additional
• 7:54
  Speaker 2: seventy five billion dollars? Why is that funding?
• 7:55
  Speaker 3: How do you adjustment with that to the American people
• 7:57
  Speaker 3: who now are suffering with high.
• 7:59
  Speaker 2: Gas parses and things?
• 8:00
  Speaker 4: Why, as I see more, Well, that's the cost of
• 8:02
  Speaker 4: funding the department. Are you for abolishing ice?
• 8:05
  Speaker 2: I'm just asking the question. They already have one hundred.
• 8:08
  Speaker 4: Well, you understand that that is the You understand that's
• 8:12
  Speaker 4: the appropriated amount, right, that's been appropriated of christ But
• 8:15
  Speaker 4: I'm asking for the reason additional funds. That's the base
• 8:19
  Speaker 4: budget for ICE and CBP. Right, you understand that I do. Okay.
• 8:23
  Speaker 4: So the additional funds that came through the Working Family's
• 8:26
  Speaker 4: tax cut bill were to increase border security. Why because
• 8:30
  Speaker 4: Joe Biden let in ten and a half million people
• 8:33
  Speaker 4: into the country.
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: So we okay, Steven, Just for the record, are you
• 8:37
  Speaker 1: for abolishing ice because you didn't answer the congressman's question.
• 8:41
  Speaker 3: Yeah, I'm for abolishing politics to be able to answer
• 8:43
  Speaker 3: a question with a question and answering the question I asked,
• 8:47
  Speaker 3: I'm for abolishing that. But you know, one thing I
• 8:49
  Speaker 3: want to just say before we move on, is that
• 8:50
  Speaker 3: his sort of argument that that's the appropriate amount for
• 8:53
  Speaker 3: ICE is actually wildly inaccurate. You know, I look back
• 8:56
  Speaker 3: into the ICE funding and what ICE and CPP have
• 8:59
  Speaker 3: been spending roughly eight to ten billion dollars a year.
• 9:01
  Speaker 3: They already have one hundred and forty billion dollars. This
• 9:03
  Speaker 3: is not an appropriate amount for anything. That's an absolute
• 9:06
  Speaker 3: freaking lie. You know, ICE and CBT do not need
• 9:10
  Speaker 3: that much money. This is excess cash, taxpayer cash, your
• 9:13
  Speaker 3: taxpayer dollars that are simply being spent without accountability.
• 9:17
  Speaker 2: I think there's a reason for that. We'll talk about
• 9:19
  Speaker 2: in a second.
• 9:19
  Speaker 3: But really he was just fos on that, okay, And
• 9:22
  Speaker 3: I just want to point that out because it really
• 9:24
  Speaker 3: was infuriated. I couldn't really I was trying to get
• 9:26
  Speaker 3: his answer, but I couldn't sit there and get into
• 9:28
  Speaker 3: an argument with him about you know, what he was
• 9:30
  Speaker 3: saying was actually patently false.
• 9:33
  Speaker 1: You know, personally, when a politician answers a question with
• 9:35
  Speaker 1: a question, in my opinion, that's a sign they don't
• 9:38
  Speaker 1: have an answer, or they have an answer they don't
• 9:40
  Speaker 1: want the public to know.
• 9:41
  Speaker 2: And he definitely have an answer in this point. So yeah,
• 9:43
  Speaker 2: good point too, thank you.
• 9:44
  Speaker 1: But I mean the question you were asking was not insignificant.
• 9:48
  Speaker 1: I mean, in fact, it was a really big piece
• 9:49
  Speaker 1: of the puzzle. Let us to think that the threats
• 9:52
  Speaker 1: to the midterm elections are widely underestimated. Now, the crux
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: of the matter is funding. Now, what you asked is
• 9:59
  Speaker 1: whyublicants want to give ICE, Customs and Border Patrol another
• 10:03
  Speaker 1: seventy billion dollars. And what makes us so unusual is
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: that the big beautiful bill drop roughly one hundred and
• 10:09
  Speaker 1: forty billion dollars on both agencies just last year, both
• 10:12
  Speaker 1: ICE and CBP spending at best twenty billion dollars annually.
• 10:16
  Speaker 1: It begs the question why so much? What is it
• 10:19
  Speaker 1: really for? And Stephen, you have a theory about this,
• 10:22
  Speaker 1: tell me about it.
• 10:23
  Speaker 3: Well, I think the thing you have to think about
• 10:25
  Speaker 3: is that they're moving towards a more autocratic form of government.
• 10:29
  Speaker 3: Autocracies and democracies have different incentives, basically different incentive systems.
• 10:33
  Speaker 3: You know, technically speaking, a democracy wants to award beneficial
• 10:36
  Speaker 3: policy for constituents, so, you know, to get elected, you
• 10:39
  Speaker 3: got to do that. People like, right, Autocracies don't work
• 10:42
  Speaker 3: that way. They need to punish people who might push back.
• 10:46
  Speaker 3: They need to crush the scent, and that's through a
• 10:48
  Speaker 3: system of incentivization of punishment, and so in my opinion,
• 10:52
  Speaker 3: this money, which can I guess when you add all
• 10:55
  Speaker 3: two and ten billion dollars for a law enforcement agency,
• 10:59
  Speaker 3: is about construction being a great American punishment regime to
• 11:03
  Speaker 3: prepare Americans for a more autocratic government. You know, this
• 11:08
  Speaker 3: money is you know, when I looked into the records
• 11:10
  Speaker 3: and tried to figure out how much money does ICE
• 11:13
  Speaker 3: and CPP still have on the books, it's really hard
• 11:16
  Speaker 3: to figure out because the federal government really isn't oriented
• 11:19
  Speaker 3: towards reporting on multi.
• 11:21
  Speaker 2: Fiscal year cycles about how much money it have.
• 11:24
  Speaker 3: But I looked, I found at least seventy three billion
• 11:26
  Speaker 3: dollars that had been unallocated so far, and that's after
• 11:30
  Speaker 3: they've already built all these warehouses, these prisons where they're
• 11:33
  Speaker 3: incarcerating people. So they literally have what would be for
• 11:37
  Speaker 3: those agencies. Unlimited funding and unlimited funding for law enforcing
• 11:41
  Speaker 3: gives you a way to institute punishment throughout all levels
• 11:45
  Speaker 3: of governance. I mean, those detention centers can be used
• 11:48
  Speaker 3: to detain people for a variety of reasons. They've already
• 11:50
  Speaker 3: detained Americans, they'll detain more, you know, having an unlimited
• 11:54
  Speaker 3: amount money to swarm you know, CPP and swarm ice
• 11:59
  Speaker 3: into the cities gives you this ability to do what
• 12:02
  Speaker 3: Trump did in Minneapolis, Los Angeles, Chicago. And when these
• 12:06
  Speaker 3: elections come and when Trump is trying to say, hey,
• 12:09
  Speaker 3: they weren't fair, they're going to need these guys and
• 12:12
  Speaker 3: women to come into cities and to try to disrupt
• 12:15
  Speaker 3: the people who will be pushing back or to seize
• 12:17
  Speaker 3: ballot box. I really think this excess money is insulating
• 12:21
  Speaker 3: both institutions, and that's for a reason to create a
• 12:24
  Speaker 3: punishment regime that will be reflective of the autocratic values
• 12:27
  Speaker 3: that the Trump administration is espousing through their policy choices.
• 12:30
  Speaker 1: You know, Stephen, you did the classic thing every reporter
• 12:33
  Speaker 1: should do and actually anyone watching should do, which is
• 12:36
  Speaker 1: follow the money. You follow the money, you figure out
• 12:39
  Speaker 1: what's really going on. So let me just ask you
• 12:41
  Speaker 1: a question about this. I was thinking back to the
• 12:43
  Speaker 1: first time it really hit home with us that something
• 12:46
  Speaker 1: was afoot with regard to democracy during the shutdown last year.
• 12:50
  Speaker 1: So last year, Democrats want to extend the Obamacare tax
• 12:53
  Speaker 1: credits and Republicans refused. But what struck me at the
• 12:56
  Speaker 1: time was how the majority party approached the entire conflict.
• 12:59
  Speaker 1: They simply shut down Congress. They simply stop town halls
• 13:02
  Speaker 1: and talking to their constituents. No debate, no work, just silence.
• 13:07
  Speaker 1: And of course all of that was just to deny
• 13:09
  Speaker 1: people health care. And that seems like a pretty anti
• 13:12
  Speaker 1: democratic strategy. So how does it play into that theme
• 13:15
  Speaker 1: you're talking about about the punishment regime theme.
• 13:18
  Speaker 2: What do you think?
• 13:19
  Speaker 3: Well, the thing is, if you shut it down, you're
• 13:20
  Speaker 3: kind of punishing with people because you're taking away the
• 13:22
  Speaker 3: deliberative legislative body that's supposed to represent their interests, where
• 13:25
  Speaker 3: you are supposed to hash these things out and figure
• 13:27
  Speaker 3: out how to get people health care. So what you're
• 13:30
  Speaker 3: saying is, we don't care you don't have health care.
• 13:32
  Speaker 3: You're being punished. We're gonna punish you by not doing
• 13:34
  Speaker 3: anything and showing you that we don't have to do
• 13:36
  Speaker 3: anything and disengaging from our constituents.
• 13:39
  Speaker 2: And so I think it's a big part of that.
• 13:40
  Speaker 3: I mean, a functioning legislative body should be an accountability
• 13:43
  Speaker 3: mechanism to make sure things like ICE and CBP don't
• 13:46
  Speaker 3: get out of control. But now when they shut it
• 13:48
  Speaker 3: down and turn it into this you know, absolute desert,
• 13:52
  Speaker 3: desert of democracy, well then you don't have a little
• 13:55
  Speaker 3: bit legislative body to represent you. Without representation, you know
• 13:58
  Speaker 3: you're done. I mean when people don't. And I think
• 14:00
  Speaker 3: you've talked about this really really well, is that democracy
• 14:04
  Speaker 3: is a culture that infiltrates all levels of government governance.
• 14:07
  Speaker 3: When you change that to a punishment regime, to an
• 14:09
  Speaker 3: autocratic culture, everything changes. You know, your your ability is
• 14:14
  Speaker 3: a constituent and to vote and to have some impact
• 14:18
  Speaker 3: and some say in how you live diminishes quite quickly.
• 14:21
  Speaker 3: And I think that's what we're seeing here.
• 14:23
  Speaker 1: You know, Stephen, that's a really really good point. And
• 14:26
  Speaker 1: you touched on constituents actually having a voice, and this
• 14:31
  Speaker 1: this is something we caught at a press conference where
• 14:33
  Speaker 1: that idea that you're touching on right there was absolutely
• 14:36
  Speaker 1: front and center. Now it was an announcement by Senator
• 14:38
  Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders and Representative Summerly to announce a bill that
• 14:41
  Speaker 1: would shut down super PACs. Now, super PACs are, of course,
• 14:46
  Speaker 1: the campaign behemoths that can spend unlimited amounts of money
• 14:49
  Speaker 1: basically to buy elections. Super PACs are like the corporate
• 14:53
  Speaker 1: love child of Citizens United, that famous decision that allowed
• 14:56
  Speaker 1: corporations to also spend unlimited amounts on electing people to
• 15:00
  Speaker 1: subject us, the working class to the extractive tendencies of
• 15:03
  Speaker 1: our current economy. Now, this union between them was so
• 15:06
  Speaker 1: fruitful that it gave birth to political organizations with unlimited
• 15:10
  Speaker 1: spending power and an insatiable appetite for television ads, digital marketing,
• 15:14
  Speaker 1: robo calls, and anyone who's willing to rent out a
• 15:17
  Speaker 1: swing state's airwaves. Now, Sanders and Lady basically want to
• 15:21
  Speaker 1: undo all that with a limit on how much super
• 15:24
  Speaker 1: PACs can raise their bill, with limit contributions to five
• 15:27
  Speaker 1: thousand dollars per individual or corporation, essentially disabling the super
• 15:31
  Speaker 1: pac system that allowed Elon Musk to dump two hundred
• 15:35
  Speaker 1: and eighty million dollars over a quarter of a billion
• 15:39
  Speaker 1: dollars into President Trump's campaign, which resulted in the mess
• 15:42
  Speaker 1: that we're currently living with. But I asked Senator Sanders
• 15:45
  Speaker 1: a question and he had an interesting answer. Let's take
• 15:47
  Speaker 1: a listen and you can react on the other side.
• 15:49
  Speaker 5: I don't want people to think this is just another issue.
• 15:53
  Speaker 5: You know what someone said is right. It is the
• 15:54
  Speaker 5: most of the one issue. If you are if we
• 15:58
  Speaker 5: are the only major country on Earth not to guarantee healthcare,
• 16:01
  Speaker 5: well why is that you think it may have something
• 16:04
  Speaker 5: to do with the power of the pharmaceutical industry and
• 16:07
  Speaker 5: the insurance companies who spend zillions of dollars making sure
• 16:11
  Speaker 5: we don't move to a Medicare for all system. Do
• 16:14
  Speaker 5: you think the fact that we have a starvation minimum
• 16:17
  Speaker 5: wage has something to do with the fact that a
• 16:20
  Speaker 5: lot of these corporations and business people don't want to
• 16:23
  Speaker 5: pay their workers a living way, don't want workers to
• 16:25
  Speaker 5: join unions.
• 16:26
  Speaker 2: So the point here.
• 16:27
  Speaker 5: This is not another issue. This is an issue that
• 16:31
  Speaker 5: touches every bloody issue facing working people in this country.
• 16:35
  Speaker 1: Okay, Steven, I really want to hear your thoughts here.
• 16:38
  Speaker 1: Is Senator Sanders like connecting the right dots?
• 16:41
  Speaker 5: Yeah?
• 16:41
  Speaker 3: Absolutely, because money, cash power adulter rates democracy, and the
• 16:46
  Speaker 3: way you adulterate it is to be able to deliver,
• 16:48
  Speaker 3: to allow people who have the concentrated wealth to throw
• 16:51
  Speaker 3: it all into the election. The whole idea of campaign
• 16:53
  Speaker 3: loves is the limit influence of one individual or corporation. Right,
• 16:56
  Speaker 3: you can only donate so much, no matter how rich
• 16:58
  Speaker 3: you are. Now, with super PACs, you can put everything
• 17:01
  Speaker 3: you have into it if you want, and that gives
• 17:03
  Speaker 3: you disproportionate power, and that creates an inequality basis for elections.
• 17:07
  Speaker 3: So absolutely, and I want to point out one thing.
• 17:09
  Speaker 3: You know, you were the one who asked the question
• 17:11
  Speaker 3: that set out that answer, and I think it's really
• 17:13
  Speaker 3: vitally important because Sanders is connecting the dots. You can't
• 17:17
  Speaker 3: afford housing, look at a super pac, you can't afford healthcare, superbacs.
• 17:21
  Speaker 3: All these superbacs create disproportioned influence for the smallest number
• 17:25
  Speaker 3: of people possible. It turns an election into really a
• 17:28
  Speaker 3: choice of the oligarchy to decide who's going to be
• 17:31
  Speaker 3: in power and what policies they will implement. So it
• 17:33
  Speaker 3: was a great answer and it's absolutely spot on.
• 17:36
  Speaker 1: You know, Steven, I asked the question because I felt
• 17:38
  Speaker 1: like sometimes we meaning journalists, don't really connect the dots.
• 17:42
  Speaker 1: And as we've discussed, as you've said, the Great American
• 17:46
  Speaker 1: Punishment regime is a product of President Trump's desire to
• 17:49
  Speaker 1: diminish democracy. But it's a political transformation that wouldn't be
• 17:53
  Speaker 1: happening if the system itself hadn't failed to deliver for
• 17:57
  Speaker 1: the majority of people who live under it. So what
• 17:59
  Speaker 1: Sanders did is make the connection between big money and
• 18:02
  Speaker 1: bad economics, palpable and easy to see. He cut through
• 18:06
  Speaker 1: the noise and made the argument that the wealth imbalance
• 18:08
  Speaker 1: and the cash hoarding that it enables is cycled back
• 18:11
  Speaker 1: into elections and fines, forms and things like the affordability
• 18:14
  Speaker 1: crisis or the housing shortage, and of course our unresponsive
• 18:18
  Speaker 1: and overly expensive healthcare system. These connections are crucial if
• 18:22
  Speaker 1: political mechanisms like super PACs are both to be understood
• 18:26
  Speaker 1: and mitigated. If you don't connect the accumulation of obscene
• 18:29
  Speaker 1: wealth with the fact that you can't pay your monthly
• 18:32
  Speaker 1: utility bill, then it will be nearly impossible to sustain
• 18:35
  Speaker 1: a movement to reform all of this. So, Steven, how
• 18:38
  Speaker 1: does Sanders and Lee's idea fit into your theory of
• 18:42
  Speaker 1: a punishment regime?
• 18:43
  Speaker 3: Well, you know, I want to say one thing first though,
• 18:45
  Speaker 3: before I answer the question, becase it's a great question,
• 18:47
  Speaker 3: But I want to say this. I want to be
• 18:50
  Speaker 3: the boy who cried wolf here right. I am not
• 18:53
  Speaker 3: saying this to be some sort of paranoids conspiracy theorises.
• 18:55
  Speaker 3: I just see the tea leaves sitting up on Capitol Hill,
• 18:58
  Speaker 3: like we talked about how they shut down, like we
• 19:00
  Speaker 3: talk about how Republicans don't show up on the Triangle anymore,
• 19:03
  Speaker 3: where most press conferences are held. I want to be
• 19:06
  Speaker 3: wrong in this case, but I can't ignore what I'm seeing.
• 19:10
  Speaker 3: And you know that when Senators Sanders talked about superpacks,
• 19:13
  Speaker 3: you know, there wasn't that much media there, and there
• 19:15
  Speaker 3: really wasn't that much media coverage of what he did
• 19:18
  Speaker 3: and what summer Lee was proposing Congress. Will summer League
• 19:21
  Speaker 3: excuse me?
• 19:22
  Speaker 2: So?
• 19:22
  Speaker 3: I really think, you know, these elements are all connected.
• 19:26
  Speaker 3: That's why we did the show to connect them. You know,
• 19:28
  Speaker 3: the superpacks fuel the oligarchy, and the oligarchy fuels autocracy.
• 19:34
  Speaker 3: You can't have descent when few people want to hold
• 19:37
  Speaker 3: onto all the wealth. It's not just and people are
• 19:39
  Speaker 3: going to push back against it. But the only way
• 19:41
  Speaker 3: you can stop it is to incentivize punishment, to say,
• 19:44
  Speaker 3: you know what you speak up, you're in trouble. And
• 19:47
  Speaker 3: the way to use that mechanism is to diminish, you know,
• 19:50
  Speaker 3: the value, the integrity, and of course just create uncertainty
• 19:54
  Speaker 3: around elections. Trump has sort up a lot of uncertainty.
• 19:57
  Speaker 3: You know, he's got a limited amount of cash spend
• 20:00
  Speaker 3: to bolster it. I am extremely concerned. I just wish
• 20:03
  Speaker 3: more people would listen to Senator Sanders and Congresswoman Lee
• 20:07
  Speaker 3: on this issue. It's critically important and you're right, you.
• 20:10
  Speaker 1: Know, Stephen. I'm so glad you connected the dots for
• 20:12
  Speaker 1: us in this way, because once you see it like this,
• 20:15
  Speaker 1: you can't unsee it. So thank you so much, Steven.
• 20:17
  Speaker 2: You're welcome.
• 20:18
  Speaker 1: Okay. So that's the end of this edition of the
• 20:20
  Speaker 1: Capitol Hill Inequality Watch React. So thank you so much
• 20:24
  Speaker 1: for joining us. We are going to keep reporting for
• 20:26
  Speaker 1: you on Capitol Hill while discussing how wealth inequality influences
• 20:30
  Speaker 1: our politics, our economy, and our lives. I'm Tea Graham
• 20:33
  Speaker 1: along with my reporting partner Stephen Janis. People, please keep fighting,
• 20:37
  Speaker 1: keep voting, and most of all, please keep caring. Our
• 20:40
  Speaker 1: democracy needs you.