#RolandMartinUnfiltered - 12.17: McConnell asks House not to impeach #45; NJ expands voting rights; Find our missing children

Episode Date: December 22, 2019

12.17 #RolandMartinUnfiltered: Sen. Mitch McConnell urges the House not to impeach #45; NJ expands voting rights; Black children and being taken and not enough people are asking why or trying to get them back; Curtis Flowers of Mississippi is a free man after 22 years behind bars; New York City woman who had her baby ripped from her arms by NYPD is awarded $625,000; University of Cincinnati's board voted to change the name of a college that once held the name of a slave owner; Judge has thrown out the hate-crime charge in the murder trial of Sean Urbanski, #RolandMartinUnfiltered partner: 420 Real Estate, LLC To invest in 420 Real Estate’s legal Hemp-CBD Crowdfunding Campaign go to http://marijuanastock.org Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an iHeart Podcast. Never lick your thumb to clean their face. And you'd never let them leave the house looking like less than their best. You say you'd never put a pacifier in your mouth to clean it. Never let them stay up too late. And never let them run wild through the grocery store. So when have one aisle six. And aisle three. So when you say you'd never let them get into a car without you there, no, it can happen. One in four hot car

deaths happen when a kid gets into an unlocked car and can't get out. Never happens. Before you leave the car, always stop. Look. Lock. Brought to you by NHTSA and the Ad Council. I know a lot of cops, and they get asked all the time, have you everought to you by NHTSA and the Ad Council. I know a lot of cops. They get asked all the time,

have you ever had to shoot your gun? Sometimes the answer is yes. But there's a company dedicated to a future where the answer will always be no. This is Absolute Season 1. Taser Incorporated. I get right back there and it's bad. Listen to Absolute Season 1. Taser Incorporated on the iHeartRadio app, I get right back there and it's bad. I'm Clayton English.

I'm Greg Glott. And this is season two of the War on Drugs podcast. Last year, a lot of the problems of the drug war. This year, a lot of the biggest names in music and sports. This kind of starts that a little bit, man. We met them at their homes. We met them at their recording studios. Stories matter, and it brings a face to them.

It makes it real. It really does. It makes it real. Listen to new episodes of the War on Drugs podcast season two on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Today is Tuesday, December 17th, 2019. Coming up on Roland Martin Unfiltered, Senator Mitch McConnell made an impromptu,

last-minute appeal to House members on behalf of Donald Trump. Also, Senator Chuck Schumer took to the floor to take Mitch McConnell to task as to why he and Republicans don't want the truth, nothing but the truth, to come out as related to Donald Trump and his articles of impeachment. In New Jersey, they've adopted a bill

to significantly expand voting rights. We'll tell you who is going to benefit. Also, black children are being taken and not enough people are asking why or trying to get them back. Also, in Mississippi, Curtis Flowers is a free man. After 22 years behind bars, we'll give you those details. Also, a New York City woman who had her baby

ripped from her arms by the NYPD got a major settlement from the city. The University of Cincinnati's board voted to change the name of a college that once held the name of a slave owner. And a judge has thrown out the hate crime charge in the murder trial of a Maryland man, a black man who was stabbed by white supremacists.

We'll cover all of that right here on World of Mark Unfiltered. It's time to bring the funk. Let's go. He's got it. Whatever the piss, he's on it. Whatever it is, he's got it. He's rolling with Uncle Roro, y'all. It's rolling, Martin, yeah.

Rolling with rolling now. He's funky, he's fresh, he's real the best, you know he's rolling, Martin. Donald Trump has whined and whined and whined about not getting a fair trial in the House. In the floor speech today, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell appeared to be making a last-minute appeal to House Democrats when it came to the articles of impeachment. Here's what McConnell had to say.

All signs seem to suggest that later this week, the House Democrats are finally going to do what many of them have been foreshadowing for three years now and impeach President Trump. It appears that the most rushed, least thorough, and most unfair impeachment inquiry in modern history is about to wind down after just 12 weeks and that a slapdash work product will be dumped on us over here in the Senate. I'll have much more to say the and avoid setting this toxic new precedent. The House can turn back from the cliff and not deploy this constitutional remedy of last resort to deliver a predetermined partisan outcome. Okay, I'm sorry, did he just say predetermined?

The same guy who said, I'm coordinating with the White House? The same guy who said, I'm coordinating with the White House? The same guy who has suggested that after they gavel in the proceedings, he will immediately go to a vote? Is this the same guy, Mitch McConnell? Lindsey Graham, who says, I'm going to try to make this as short as possible? Hmm. But here's also something very interesting here. When you talk about

where Republicans are on these very issues, what's interesting is that Donald Trump, as I said, lamented, didn't get a fair shot, but then he chose not to participate in the House inquiry. He also would not

let all Republicans talk about, oh, we haven't heard any firsthand testimony because Trump would not let the people who could offer that testify. Senator Chuck Schumer, Democratic minority leader in the Senate,

took to the floor and asked the question, why is Mitch McConnell so afraid of witnesses in the Senate? Go to my iPad, please. I just listened to Leader McConnell's lengthy response to my letter proposing the outlines of a fair impeachment trial in the Senate.

Leader McConnell was apparently upset that I sent him the letter on Sunday, saying the first step was for the two leaders to meet and then discuss a resolution. Well, if we were allowed to show a video here on the Senate floor of the Republican leader's appearance on Sean Hannity's program last week, it would expose the fallacy of his argument. Leader McConnell unfortunately skipped his first step

when he began publicly talking about the rules of a Senate trial, telling Hannity that he'd be taking cues from the White House, and his idea for how to conduct a trial long before any conversation which he still hasn't had with me. My letter was intended as a good-faith proposal to kick-start the discussions that leader McConnell has so far delayed in scheduling. I still expect we'll sit down and discuss trial parameters despite his public appearances on Fox News. But let me say this, I listened to the leader's speech I did not hear a single sentence, a single

argument as to why the witnesses I suggested should not give testimony. Impeachment trials, like most trials, have witnesses. To have none would be an aberration. Why is the leader, why is the president so afraid of having these witnesses come testify? What are they afraid the witnesses would say? I'd like to hear Leader McConnell come to the floor and give specific reasons why the four witnesses we've asked for shouldn't testify. I don't know what they'll say.

They might have something. They're President trump appointees. They might have something exculpatory to say about president trump or they might not. But they certainly were the four key people who saw exactly what was going on. What is leader mcconnell afraid

of? What is president trump afraid of? The truth? But the American people want the truth. And that's why we have asked for witnesses and documents to get at the whole truth and nothing but. Why are Republicans afraid of the truth?

Now, the House, you still had Congressman Collins. He's going nuts. He's yelling. He's screaming. But here's what Republicans have to contend with. Donald Trump continues to say he did nothing wrong. So why in the world, world then would he send Nancy Pelosi this strange, rambling, six-page letter

that I swear was written by a sixth grader? Y'all, a six-page letter talking about, oh, my God, how this is just so unfair. It's just so wrong. This is his opening paragraph. I write to express my strongest and most powerful protest against the partisan impeachment crusade being pursued by the Democrats in the House of Representatives. powerful protests against the partisan impeachment crusade

being pursued by the Democrats in the House of Representatives. This impeachment represents an unprecedented and unconstitutional abuse of power by Democrat lawmakers... Should be Democratic. Lawmakers should be lowercase. Unequal in nearly two and a half centuries

of American legislative history. Allow me to woosah. Y'all, President Andrew Johnson was impeached. Impeachment proceedings were underway, and they were going to vote when Richard Nixon resigned. Bill Clinton was impeached.

Remember, the House impeaches. The Senate holds the trial. He said, this impeachment represents an unprecedented and unconstitutional abuse of power. In order for it to be unprecedented, it would have to be the first time. It's the third.

Okay. He says this is an unconstitutional abuse of power. Y'all, it's in the Constitution. It's literally written in the Constitution. Donald Trump, flails his arm, oh my God, he always talks about the flag and the military and the founding fathers and all

of that. So you would think in the spare time he has watching Fox News, he would get out his phone and stop tweeting. Matter of fact, he would just ask somebody to bring him

a copy of the U.S. Constitution. And y'all, guess what? When I say it's in the Constitution, it's Article 1, Section 2, Clause 5 of the actual Constitution. It says it, like, kind of right here. The House of Representatives shall have the sole power of impeachment. Y'all, this man is not the brightest bulb

in a dark room. I go back to this strange and unbelievable, crazy letter that he sent Nancy Pelosi. Y'all, it went on for six pages. Six pages. Now, why would you write a letter to Nancy Pelosi protesting the impeachment when you actually

could have shown up and had folks testify. Y'all, this is the second paragraph, y'all. Y'all, it's six pages. This is paragraph two. The articles of impeachment introduced by the House Judiciary Committee

are not recognizable under any standard of constitutional theory, interpretation, or jurisprudence. They include no crimes, no misdemeanors, and no offenses whatsoever. You have cheapened the importance of the very ugly word impeachment, y'all. The Constitution says

that only Congress can determine what high crimes and misdemeanors are. They can actually determine it themselves. See, Donald Trump actually believes that the penal code, which he's very familiar with considering Mueller got 36 convictions and including folks like his campaign chairman and his assistant who went to prison today, got sentenced today, 45 days in prison.

Y'all, it lays it out right there. He calls the abuse of power disingenuous, meritless, baseless invention of your imagination. He says he had an innocent phone call. He starts quoting. He says you're turning a policy disagreement between two branders of government into an impeachable offense. No, when you choose to withhold information from Congress, which constitutionally they have oversight,

it's kind of your job. Yo, he goes on and on, talking about Zelensky. Then he mentions the electoral college landslide. Wasn't a landslide. Then he goes on and on and on. Talks about Adam Schiff. Talks about, oh, my God, the economy is booming. NAFTA.

Pimps black folks by saying lowest ever unemployment rate for African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans. Well, hell, why don't you mention white folks, too? I'm just saying. Y'all, he got NAFTA in here, USMCA. He got Israel, the Golden Heights, Catch and Release. Did he put his golf game in here?

I mean, he mentioned everything else. Border wall. I mean, he goes on and on and on. And on. And on. Oh, sorry. Call this impeachment hoax. Russian witch hunt.

Let me see. Let's see what else is good in here. Ooh, FISA warrants. Can't leave that one out. I love this one. Worse still, I have been deprived of basic constitutional due process from the beginning of this impeachment scam right up until the president.

I have been denied the most fundamental rights afforded by the Constitution, including the right to present evidence, to have my own counsel present, to confront accusers, and to call and cross-examine witnesses like the so-called whistleblower. Y'all,

can somebody tell Dum-Dum that an impeachment is not the same as a courtroom. Impeachment in the House is essentially a grand jury proceeding. For those of you who don't know, when a DA is looking to indict you, witnesses are called before the grand jury.

If Malik wanted to testify, he would have to be ordered to, and he can't bring his own lawyer into the grand jury proceedings. That's one. Number two, after you have been indicted, then it goes to trial. That's, I'm talking real slow in order for Dum Dum

to understand all of my words you then go from the house to the Senate the Senate is where there's a trial the person who oversees the trial is the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. Donald Trump says, I haven't gotten due process. Y'all, he declined to participate in the House proceedings. This literally is a man who is utterly and shamefully clueless, who can't even read basic things in the Constitution.

My panel, Malik Abdul, Republican strategist, Kelly Bethea, communications strategist, and also Dr. J.C. Nichols, Department of African American Studies, University of Maryland. Malik, can your boy read? Yes, um, Donald Trump can read, and... Where is the evidence he can read? I'm pretty sure that Donald Trump

didn't get to be 73 years old. But in the six-page letter, clearly that man ain't never read a book. the evidence he can read. I'm pretty sure that Donald Trump didn't get to be 73 years old. But in his six-page letter, clearly that man ain't never read the Constitution. Because all he did was just lie, lie, lie. That was, you know, the letter itself, you know,

it was classic Donald Trump. Classic and comical. Classic Donald Trump. It definitely was that. Which means lies, full of lies. Well, I won't co-sign that. But what I will say is that this is classic Donald Trump. And welcome to Malik Tuesday, by the way.

This is a- Hold on one second. I think you're Mike Schmip. The irony. Yeah, go on. Let me get out of here. Yeah. As soon as I said anything.

It's underneath your tie. It's underneath the tie. Underneath the tie. Uh-oh. I hope that's not an omen. Yeah, it's. Let me get out of here. As soon as I said anything. It's underneath your tie. It's underneath the tie. Underneath the tie. Uh-oh. I hope that's not an omen. Yeah, it's an omen. But to your point about that you were making earlier about Mitt Romney, I mean, I'm sorry, Donald, um...

Mitch McConnell. Yeah, Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer. I'm pretty sure that you saw earlier today, I'm pretty sure all of us saw the video of Chuck Schumer from 1999 Essentially making the opposite Essentially making the opposite argument than what he's making now Sorry folks I'm pretty sure that everyone saw the argument that Chuck Schumer was making in 1999,

where he literally repeated what Democrats or Republicans were saying. So as I always say, what was that? I see it. Well, there were videos of Chuck Schumer being quoted talking about the need, criticizing the need to actually have witnesses appear. And Mitch McConnell made the exact other argument. Right, so, which, my point, and I always say this, you guys always say I'm going down rabbit holes, but I always say this, when we're talking about politics,

this is truly political at this point. Because what Democrats said in 1999, they're not saying now. What Republicans said in 1999, they're not saying now. What Republican said in 1999, they're not saying now. So this is just part of... First of all, first of all, first of all, remember, impeachment has always been political. Right. Yeah, it's a political process.

Impeachment by its very nature, Kelly, is political because you put it in the hands of whoever's in control of the House of Representatives. And who's in control of the House of Representatives. And who's in control of the House of Representatives? And... Politicians. If they impeach, it goes to the Senate, and so whoever's in control of the Senate is there. Now, what the framers had hoped and prayed for

is that you would have individuals who would take their job seriously and factor in the evidence, because remember, when the Constitution was written it didn't have parties exactly exactly but to Malik's point about how it seems as though the roles have been switched in terms of who's saying what and in what regard also look at the context in which they were saying that so yeah Schumer may have said those exact same things

that McConnell is saying now, but look at the context. It can be argued that the perjury that the president committed, President Clinton at the time committed, did not rise to the level of impeachment, because all he did was say something contradictory under oath. About?

About something incredibly personal. Which was a crime. Oh, now hold up, hold up. Hold up, hold up, hold up. He was under oath and he lied about having oral sex. Correct. Okay, that's what he did. Now, the question then is,

do you say lying about oral sex, is it on the same level as trying to get a foreign government to investigate your rival? Exactly. Now, is it true that lying is lying? Yes. But it still goes to what did you lie about?

What did you lie about? That's like saying I did not take that piece of candy. And you did. I did not steal $100 million. But you did. Piece of candy. $100 million. Just saying.

And that's the point. So again, with McConnell, Schumer, and those people, because it really has, the roles have been reversed in terms of rhetoric. But the rhetoric and context is actually kind of sort of the same. So something does not rise to the level of impeachment. In Clinton's case, it could be argued that lying about having oral sex is, you know, does not rise to the level of impeachment.

But for Trump to admit repeatedly, even in this diatribe of a letter, that he made that phone call. And we now have evidence from testimony and investigations that that phone call was essentially solicitation to commit a crime. That rises to the level of impeachment. It can be argued strongly that that rises to the level of impeachment. So for McConnell to say that it doesn't, or to imply that it doesn't, and for the Republicans to just be so hard set on not saying anything regarding the grovement of this offense,

that is what's most problematic to me because... Okay, say that word again. Problematic? No, the grove... What was that word? Grovement. Oh, right. All right word again problematic no the grove what was that I know right yeah so the point I want to make it may sound like a pretty common talking point but the point that I want to make is that not every crime is an impeachable offense exactly and not every impeachable offense is a civilian crime so i think a lot of times like you know of course the the best example if donald trump sees rolling

on the street and takes a swing and he connects that's a crime that's assault and battery but that's not necessarily impeachable correct but that's... But yet, when you are doing what Donald Trump did, which is not necessarily an impeachable... You know, you could argue bribery, you could argue extortion, but for the most part,

you know, I think that it's a gray enough area that it may not be a crime, but it certainly is an impeachable offense. No, no, no. an impeachable offense. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.

Wait, wait, wait, wait. See, see, this is the mistake. This discussion right here is akin to the electability question. When somebody says so-and-so was unqualified for president, first, the Constitution only has two requirements for elective...

Are you eligible for being president? Age, or you're a natural-born citizen. That's it. That's it? There are no other qualifications. None. Now, anything else is a judgment that we make as voters. The reality is the House representatives can impeach

the president for any reason that they deem. So, this notion that, well, this doesn't rise, that simply doesn't exist. Because it's relative. No, it doesn't exist. The Constitution

put places sole authority among the House. No, it doesn't exist. The Constitution put places, sole authority, among the House. Now, that then says the House must make a judgment. Okay, does this rise to that level? So the reality is it didn't matter

if Clinton lied about getting oral sex. The House determined that it rose to that level. That it rose to that level of impeachment. Just like right now. So for folks to say, oh, this is not right. No, no, no. The actions, and then all this,

oh, the bar is being lowered. No, actually it's not. I dare say. If anything, it's being raised. It's being raised. I dare say that this is, this is, because here's a piece. ProPublica has done

a whole expose on how Donald Trump has lied on federal documents when it came to the assessment of his own properties. For the purpose of tax breaks,

he said the value was lower. For the purpose of a breaks, he said the value was lower. For the purpose of a loan, he said it was higher. And that's everywhere. That's covered everywhere. But I'm pretty sure we've seen people do that many times. No, no, no. No, no, no. I can show you

former Attorney General Dan Morales of Texas lied on applications where he inflated his salary. Dan Morales of Texas lied on applications where he inflated his salary. Dan Morales went to prison. Went to prison. So the point is, for Trump and Republicans to say, oh, this doesn't rise, it's there.

But the biggest problem here is this here. If you didn't do it, why are you afraid to let your people testify? So I don't think that the Trump administration is afraid of allowing people to testify. They are. I don't think that's the case. They won't let them.

I don't think that's the case at all. And if... So what's the case? If we go back to 1999, what Senator Schumer had said at that time, he was arguing against the need for more people to actually testify. No, no, no. Now, personally...

I'm asking you a question. First of all, the ABC poll that came out today, 64% of Republicans, 72% overall, say that Trump should have his aides testify. 64% of Republicans say they should.

But the White House is afraid of letting them testify. Well, I'm actually one of those who thinks that these people should testify. So why is the White House afraid? Well, I think this is because we're in the political climate that we're in. But if the witnesses could corroborate what you say is the truth, why won't you let them testify?

Well, just personally, and I think this is an education on impeachment for the entire country. Now, personally, I actually believe, and whether it was Democrat or Republican, that the witnesses that... that if you draw up articles of impeachment, which is what the House did, then the witnesses that you use

to draw up those articles of impeachment should be the same witness. I don't think that you have to introduce new witnesses when the articles of impeachment are already... But that doesn't make any sense. Hold up. First of all, what you're saying, the Constitution... I totally...

No, no, no, no. The Constitution allows the Senate... Absolutely. See, remember. See, remember. Let's go back. I understand. Let me do a comparison again. Yeah. That's an inquiry.

Let me do a comparison again. Two different things. Grand jury. Mm-hmm. Right. Trial. Exactly. There are individuals who can testify before a grand jury. Mm-hmm.

There may be more individuals who are called as witnesses. There is no prohibition on... There's nothing in the law that says if you were not called for the grand jury, you cannot be called in the trial. And that doesn't make any sense if it did, because if you look at it... So the point is, just like that,

when it comes to impeachment in the Senate, just because you get witnesses called in the House don't mean other witnesses can't be called in the Senate. But there's a difference between doesn't mean and something actually being written into law. So I think that, and I'm, and I'll, I think I know where you're going, but if we're

talking about, as you said, you know, this is a judgment call for people. So me. No, actually they're rules. The Senate determines the rules. Right, but in 19, which is why we have to go back to what Senator Schumer said in 1999. In 1999, Senator Schumer

argued against more witnesses testifying. And who determined those rules? And he said the very same thing that I'm saying now. And who determined those rules? In the Senate? The Senate did. Precisely. And so this Senate is the same. And it? And so this Senate, it's the same.

It's not the same Senate, though. I get what you guys are saying, but for me, this is the, these are political arguments, and they change according to... No, actually, look at it, but Malik, look at it from a perspective not necessarily congressional, but just simply in terms of an indictment and a trial.

So we are in trial mode right now. Why wouldn't the president want to put on his best defense? Why wouldn't the president want people who should intimately know the facts that didn't make it to the indictment process? You now have an opening. Yeah, well, I'll give you one example why. As I mentioned on the show last week, John Bolton.

So the reason that John Bolton did not testify is because the House did not want to wait until a judge ruled on whether or not he could be compelled to testify. That's why John Bolton did not testify. No, no, no. That's really, that's true, Roland. I, I, I, I, I, I, I.

Wait, wait, wait. In a way. No, wait, wait, wait. No, no, no, no. You're not completely wrong. No, no. But the White House. No, no, no. No, no, no, no. You're not completely wrong. No, no. But the White House... No, no, no.

No, no. No. You're wrong. Tell us what happened, Rowling. You got to roll it back. Mm-hmm. First, John Bolton refused to testify unless a judge ordered him to do so.

No, no, no, no. Which he has a right to do. No. You said, first of all... Kind of. It's BS. Now, you said... Subpoena.

You said the Democrats refused to wait. No. The Democrats, John Bolton, couldn't have testified. John Bolton said, I will not comply with the subpoena unless a judge tells me. So Democrats were forced to go to court to do that. That's Don McGahn.

No, Bolton. No, that's Don McGahn. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, excuse me. Don McGahn, Trump asserted executive privilege. Right, and a judge ruled on that. The Democrats took them to court. Don McGahn, Trump asserted executive privilege. Right. And a judge ruled on that. The Democrats took them to court. McGahn was executive privilege.

Bolton said, I'll testify if a judge makes me. Okay. So it wasn't that the Democrats were waiting. Bolton forced them to have to go to court because he chose not to comply with the civilian law. But that's on the executive privilege argument. The federal judge... No, no, no, no. The federal judge who ruled ruled on Don McGahn.

She didn't... There hasn't been a ruling on John Bolton. Because it wasn't executive privilege. Yeah, Don McGahn's an attorney. That's a little bit different. But he was White House attorney, so that was an executive privilege argument. Yeah, no, Don McGahn, but you're talking about two different things. There is no blanket executive privilege.

Bolton versus Don McGahn are two different things. The problem we have is that there's... There needs to be some more compulsion to...to, uh, comply with a subpoena. How these people are just like... Because they have the backing of the president who's not even gonna listen to the subpoena. And Democrats are unwilling to slap handcuffs on them. But they don't have a sergeant at arms. No, actually, they do.

Yeah, they do. No, actually, they do. Yeah, they do. No, no, no. If you refuse to comply with a subpoena, the Speaker of the House has the same authority as a district attorney. They can send the Capitol Police to arrest your ass and bring you to that small jail

in the basement of the House of Representatives. Yes, they can. They've chosen not to. So you guys argued against it last week, and I'll repeat it again because it's a fact that you guys said it wasn't true. When the Obama administration obstructed Congress by not complying with the subpoenas

in the Fast and Furious case, it was a federal judge ruled several years later, and you guys admitted that the Obama administration eventually turned over those documents. Okay, got it. Now, that was an obstruction of Congress argument that Republicans could have made. Republicans could have said,

well, you know what, we're going to draw up articles of impeachment because the Obama administration obstructed Congress. Okay. Because that's exactly what they did. Got it, got it. But they didn't do that. well, you know what, we're going to draw up articles of impeachment because the Obama administration obstructed Congress. Okay. Because that's exactly what they did. Got it, got it. But they didn't do that. One of the articles here is an obstruction, not an obstruction of justice charge,

but an obstruction of Congress charge. Because what you also have here is a president who asked a foreign entity for assistance. Here's the reality. The Democrats would not be pursuing impeachment if he did not make that request. But they already... No, no, no.

Al Green, they've been following these articles. Excuse me, excuse me. Nancy Pelosi refused to allow anything to proceed. It was not... She did not allow it to go forward after the Mueller report, after the previous obstruction. It was only after this call to Zelensky where she said that rises to the level of impeachment.

So Trump can run his mouth all day. This is real simple. They don't want the full truth to be out. They don't want witnesses to testify. They want to play this game. And here's the deal. A man sitting there in the Oval Office has given us 15,000 lies.

The man lied in the letter. I give Donald Trump no benefit of a doubt... And that's okay. ...when it comes to the truth. That's okay. Because he has proven he will lie and lie again. Tomorrow, we're likely gonna see Democrats vote. And then, of course, after the first of the year,

we'll see what happens in the Senate when it comes to the actual trial. Coming up next, we'll talk about marijuana being legalized in New Jersey. But more importantly, voting rights extended to formerly incarcerated in New Jersey as well as Kentucky. Next, Roland Martin Unfiltered. forward slash Roland S. Martin. And don't forget to turn on your notifications so when we go live, you'll know it.

Alright, folks, it's the holiday season. This is when you think about spending time with family and friends. It's also when you can count your blessings and support those less fortunate. This year, you can be a holiday hero and change someone's life forever. Right now, hundreds of thousands of Americans

are sitting in jail without being convicted of a crime. Why? Because they lack the financial resources to pay their bail. Now, think about it. If you are arrested for any minor offense, you'll be taken directly to jail. If you don't have bail money, you will stay there until a court date is scheduled. That could be days, weeks, or even months. So the folks at the Ebony Foundation have partnered with the Bail Project, and they are sponsoring Home by the Holiday campaign. The goal is to help build 1,000 people out of jail between now and the first of the year. Now, here's all you got to do, folks. If you want to participate, just simply go to homebytheholiday.com,

homebytheholiday.com, to become one of the folks to donate. All right, folks, in New Jersey, the governor has signed, says he's gonna sign a bill into law that's gonna legalize marijuana. But he also, they also approved the bill that expands voting rights for those formerly incarcerated folks

who are on probation or parole. Some 80,000 people will do so. New Jersey is the third state in 2019 to do this. It's already been done in Colorado and Nevada and also in Kentucky. The governor there signed an executive order giving voting rights to 140,000 people. Jason, in Louisiana,

that was a huge deal of bill passed there. That made a pivotal difference in this last election. We're seeing more states realize that you can't just be taking everything from people. You should be giving folks the right to vote back. Absolutely. We've had, you know, a lot of things happening recently in terms of, you know, voting rights. You know, Wisconsin, I think they're purging, what is it, 7,000 people? Wisconsin, Georgia's going to purge, what is it, 7,000 people? Wisconsin, Georgia's going to purge.

300,000. 300,000. Wisconsin, it's almost 200,000. 200,000. I was way off. 7% of the eligible voters in that state. Right. So that's where I got the 7 from.

But, yes, there's been, you know, these efforts to take people's votes away. And, again, we know that this is coming from one side of the aisle. This is coming from people who absolutely want a truncated and smaller body of voters because it benefits them. And this is something that I think people across the country and people who are, we've been talking a lot about the Constitution and what it says you know the Constitution at times can be vague but but one thing that I think we all agree is that we want to expand the rights of all Americans in terms of their ability to cast a ballot but it seems that there are certain people who left that and want fewer people to vote and it's about maintaining power.

And there's something that we definitely have to fight against. And call upon our Republican friends and say, look, this is, you know, this is anti-American. This is against what we say we stand for and what we say we want as a nation. How can you take away other people's votes? What's up, Malik? What's wrong with your party?

Well, this story is about... I don't think there's a Republican governor in New Jersey nor Kentucky. Right. I don't think. Yeah, not anymore. And so we can... And at one time, the bill into law in Louisiana was Democrat.

So we can appreciate and be happy about the fact that they're expanding voter rights. So we can appreciate and be happy about the fact that they're expanding voter rights. Why won't Republicans do it? Well, you have a Republican on your show who can explain that. No, it's your party. I don't speak for the Republican Party.

Okay, ask somebody who is a Republican. Roland, we've had this conversation. No, no, no, but here's the deal, though. When you're having conversations with your fellow Republicans, do you ask them, why is our party so adamant against providing voting rights to formerly incarcerated, and what do they say? Well, the Republicans that I actually talk to

about anything dealing with voter suppression, they are totally against it. I'm pretty sure that they are happy with what they're hearing. So do y'all ever have any... Okay, but as Republicans, do y'all go to those who are supporting voter suppression and say, yo,

this is foul? Well, I personally don't have those type of connections with the people in the party who are actually making those decisions, but I do know, talking to the Republicans that I do know who are active even at the grassroots level, all of them, to a person, are against voter suppression efforts,

and they would be ecstatic for what we're seeing, what's happening in Kentucky and in New Jersey. So you have to get a Republican on the show who has those type of connections with the party that can explain that, but I can't. Kelly, the Republican Party, this is part of their M.O. to not provide voting rights

to those formerly incarcerated. It's the Republican Party in Florida, the legislature, the Republican governor, who's blocking the will of the people with Amendment 4. 1.4 million people. They're trying to stop them

from getting the right to vote by saying, oh, you got to pay all your fines and penalties completely before from getting the right to vote by saying, oh, you got to pay all your fines and penalties completely before you get your right to vote back. And while I'm not necessarily a Republican in any respect, I could surmise as to why the Republican Party or the Republicans in those respective jurisdictions support things that are...

Why? Because the demographic makeup of those people who are coming out of prison don't look like them, and likely, if they were to get their full citizenship back and that they have the right to vote again, they likely wouldn't vote for somebody who, frankly, supported them staying in prison. And that's why they're full of shit.

Because if you... No, they're full of shit. If this is about democracy, if this is about what's right, if it's about what's fair, then you do it. You don't say, oh, well, we're not gonna benefit. Well, maybe if you knew how to make an argument to those people as to why they should support your party,

they might consider it. And my thing is, there is such an, especially now, a great opportunity for Republicans to open up their mindset and come up with some really creative, necessary things to appeal to minorities in this country. Because frankly, in terms of the Like, because, frankly, in terms of the Democratic Party as a whole,

it's quite saturated when it comes to issues, such that a lot of these issues that are truly important to specific demographics aren't necessarily getting answered. So what do you do? Like, there's an opportunity there. Okay, no, no, no. There's an opportunity

if you're not trying to appeal to those white folks who don't support those issues. And that's my point. So it's like... So, no, they made their choice. No, and that's what I'm saying. It's just unfortunate that they made that choice because the opportunity is there.

Do you have... Have you ever had any Republicans on your show defend voter suppression? Yes. I had Rice Priebus on the Tom Jordan Morning Show. Who I'm talking about on this show. Yes. Any black Republicans?

Oh, yeah. I had, as a matter of fact, who was that brother I destroyed? Remember that fool who was from Tennessee? And he said, oh, this don't even exist. Raynard Jackson says, this does not exist. I've had black Republicans come on this show and on my show News 1 Now and say voter suppression is a myth. It doesn not exist. I've had black Republicans come on this show and on my show News 1 Now and say voter suppression is a myth.

It doesn't exist. We're just making it up. Yes. Well, I know Raynard, but I doubt very seriously that the people on this panel personally know people, Republicans, who are pro-voter suppression. I don't know...

They're not going to say they're pro-voter suppression. But we have to... But my point in saying this is that oftentimes when we talk about be it Democrat or Republicans... Now, one thing that I can say for myself, you guys never hear me come onto the show and characterize

the Democratic Party, because I know Democrats. And so when I hear Republicans even, members of my own party, talk about the Democratic Party, talk about, you know, just make personal attacks on people, saying that they're on plantations and stuff like that, I do not co-sign that, because all of, basically all of my family and friends are Democrats. Because it's racist? Or, you know? That has nothing to do racist or yeah that has nothing to do with being that has nothing to do with it to

say that you're on a plantation a white person telling a black person you know I think black people say that yeah oh they say that you've never heard black people oh man you never heard well you've never heard black republicans talk about I've heard so many damn black Republicans use plantation language and in their life so that's what but my point laughing. But my point is that I don't use that type of language. So you guys have never seen me, and your audience can actually Google it if they want to. You've never seen me come on the show and attack Democrats because I know Democrats. So I don't use this blanket, well, this is just how Democrats are.

When it comes to Republicans, it doesn't matter if we on the set may know a Republican or may know many Republicans who don't ascribe to some of the negative things about the party. We still say, you still hear out there, well, this is just how the Republicans are. No, this is not how the Republicans

are. This is how some Republicans are. This is how the Republican agenda is. That's the issue. I understand. I believe that you really want... On this one right here, on this issue, the reason I can say it is the party apparatus because the late Tom Heffler,

when his daughter let us know about... Oh, gosh, down in Florida. No, when his daughter let us know about it, it was on that hard drive. Numerous Republicans across different states hired him to rig their maps and also to rig the vote. Okay? We can go state by state by state.

You can't show me a single press release from the Republican National Committee condemning voter suppression. You can't show me a single, a single press release from Rona McDaniel Romney, yeah, that's your damn name, calling out North Carolina.

You can't show me a single time where they have stood with black Republicans who oppose voter suppression. But who are they? Their silence, what do you mean? I'm saying, but who are the black Republicans that are vocal as far as opposing

voter suppression? They are individuals and I have challenged them on this show, my previous show, to stand up as a collective and call the party out, but they won't. But because we can't even get, the black Republicans can't even get along with each other. So, I mean,

it's not surprising to me. I mean, it's not a... But until they do, you still have a conglomerate in your party who is way more vocal than those who aren't. Why can't you get along with one another? Hold on, hold on. Now, remember he asked, remember he asked, have you ever had one on the show?

Uh-oh, you're about to pull it. Oh, Lord. Oh, Jesus. If people would have, if Martin Luther King Jr. would have said the same thing about Lyndon Johnson, who many have said he was a known and open racist, I'm not going to sit across the table from him and work for the betterment of black people.

Hold up, bro. That's not his question. Bro, bro, bro. Do I need to play some audio tapes? Of what? Of what MLK said when he was in the room? He had a seat at the table. No, no, no, no.

He was in the room. See, this is the mistake you keep making. You keep focusing on, I had a seat. No. Not enough. The issue ain't the seat. It's what you're saying when you're in the seat. You can't sit here and say...

Now, y''all first of all we were talking about kanye and then the conversation went to voting let's see if i can pick it up on the voting part that's right big mom but let me let me let me first say this let me first say this i hope no one misconstrues the fact that i am trying to compare any of the men that you mentioned to kan West, because they're not. But let me tell you what Big Mama would have told me, and let me show you the example that she set. On voting day, she got away to the polls.

She could not drive. She could not read. She could not write. Did you skip what I said? No. You asked me a question about what she would say. I'm telling you. I'm telling you.

Bruh, Dorothy Cooper wanted to go to the polls. Can I finish? Dorothy Cooper voted her entire life, but she was denied the right to vote because of Republican voter suppression efforts. You ask me a question, I'm giving you the response of what my great-grandmother taught me. Actually, no, but you didn't answer the question.

I'm answering the question. She made sure, and before anybody took her to the polls, months before, she made sure everything was buttoned up from her end. And she always told us that. Did you not just hear what I said? They said you need your marriage certificate. The woman got married like 60 years earlier. Right, right.

What are you talking about? Do you know how many old people in Wisconsin, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida couldn't vote because they said, I can't find my marriage certificate? Or I don't have a birth certificate. I was born at home. The point I'm trying to make is we need to, just like Nick Mama did, we need to focus the conversation on voter education so we can teach our young men and women the importance and the responsibility of your right to vote.

No, what we have to do is go after Republicans who say that you can't submit a certificate from the Bureau of Vital Statistics. You need to submit the birth certificate with the raised seal. That's the only one we're going to accept. Bruh, don't try that. The reality is this here. If this woman, this sister, 96 years old,

she said, I don't know what my marriage certificate is. Their deal is if you don't have the raised seal, that's the only one we're going to accept. Why would they only say the raised seal? Even though when you go get a copy, you're getting it from the state. They said, no, you can't use that one. We want the raised seal.

They don't have access to it. No, no, no, no, no, you can't use that one. We want the raised seal. They don't have access to it. No, no, no, no, no, hold on. I want you. Are you implying, just out of curiosity, I've heard you talk about this issue on your segment or not. Do you imply that these type of raised seals or photo ID and these laws are only just for black people?

No. They don't impact black people? No, no, no, no. What I'm saying is the studies show disproportionately who they impact. What I'm showing is the studies show disproportionately who they impact. What I'm showing you is that in Philadelphia in 2012, the head of the Pennsylvania Republican Party stood in front of the cameras and said, Mitt Romney is going to win Pennsylvania because of voter ID. And what they did there was they said, OK, we'll offer you a free ID.

Well, you know what the elderly had to do? The elderly had to go to the office, sign an affidavit to get the free ID, go back home, wait for it to be approved, go back to the office to pick up the voter ID, and then come back home. Now, how many elderly folks do you know have the ability to go from home, office, home, back office, home. Here's the reality. Republicans across this country, I can go down the line because I've been covering this, bro, for the last decade, have systematically attacked. And surgically. Surgically. In fact, we got a federal judge in North Carolina that they use laser-like precision to target black voters. Bruh, it's in the federal ruling

that North Carolina Republican Party use laser-like precision to target black voters. So to answer your question, it's yes. But look at Georgia, though. We haven't talked about Georgia yet, but look at the current Georgia law. They ain't been back since. Now, I know Omari, and... But look at Georgia, though. We haven't talked about Georgia yet. But look at the current Georgia law.

They ain't been back since. Now, I know Omari. He ain't been back since. He got his ass lit up. But, Roland, there's a reason why people don't come on your show. Because if you lie, if you lie, I can't let lies stay. No, Roland, everybody is not comfortable with the tone that this show sometimes takes. Now, you set that up saying that, you know, this is no. Not in that particular segment. No, that's more of it. He literally said those things don't happen.

He kept going back, my grandmama can vote. And I'm like, bruh, do you understand that your grandmama ain't the only person who vote in this country? So this is... He, in his mind, what I was saying didn't exist. Okay, and so this is, and we're talking about why people won't feel comfortable coming on this show. Because if you lie...

It's not a matter of lying, Roland. It's that sometimes you have to actually listen to what actual conservatives are saying, not just allow Democrats to talk. Now, there's... Oh, I won't let you talk, but you can't lie. I think that there's a valid conversation to be had. Like, me personally, I do not think

that voter ID laws are inherently racist. I just don't. I don't think that requiring ID laws are inherently racist. I just don't. I don't think that requiring you to go to the poll with an ID is racist. It doesn't mean that in those places where those laws may exist, that they shouldn't do things to make it as easy as possible for people to get whatever documentation that they need. But when you start at voter IDs are racist, there's really nowhere else to go. First and foremost, if you pass

a voter ID law in Texas where 600,000 people will be denied access to the voter ID law because of the restrictions. If you pass a law in my native Texas where you say I can use my gun registration to vote, but I can't

use my state-issued college ID. That's a problem. So now you've got to ask the question, why did Republicans exclude some IDs and not others? What was the intent? Five federal judges determined there was indeed racist intent. The Obama administration sided with the plaintiffs. Trump wins. Who does Jeff

Sessions side with? State of Texas. Republican legislature. Republican governor. Now you tell me what was the whole point of it. But again, my point here is that there's a conversation to be had about voter IDs. But if we start at

requiring someone to show their ID at the polls is racist, for a conservative who actually believes that, there is nowhere else to go with that argument because the rain is coming down on them. Here's what I find to be amazing. That you are excusing or

defending voter suppression. Republicans can talk about voter ID. They love voting purges. They close down polling places. It's amazing how Republicans, Republicans, could sit there and go,

okay, how many different ways can we constrict folks from making it harder? When a Wisconsin clerk in 2012 says she didn't like the fact that so many college folk on the campus were voting early, so she said, I purposely moved the early voting location

to a further place out with a smaller parking lot because too many college Democrats voted. And that's BS. Wait, hold up. Republican. That's BS. When you have Republicans in North Carolina who limited early voting because

they asked when the black folks vote early, 70% did North Carolina. So they said, we're going to have one early voting location in the whole county for the first several weeks designed to restrict the vote. All I'm saying is this here. I find it a coincidence

that every time there is a scheme to constrict and restrict voting rights, it's the Republican Party sitting at the table doing the lead. That is a very valid argument to make. I don't disagree with that. The fact that it always happens to be Republicans, I don't disagree with that. So fact that it is, it always happens to be Republicans, I don't disagree with that. So if it always happens

to be Republicans, how is that not the policy of the party? But my point is that if we're not allowed to have a nuanced discussion about things like, well, you know what? Voter ID laws. If we're not allowed to have a discussion on, well, do you believe

that people who have not... What's the nuance that we're missing? Yeah, like, I'm just trying to... But I'm not finishing my point. But if we're not able to have a discussion on, well, if you haven't voted in X number of years and you are purged, is that something that's inherently racist?

If we're not allowing ourselves to have... But that's not what's happening. But that is what's happening. No, that's part of what's happening. Yeah, that is. No, no. What is racist is when you are purging voters that disproportionately are black

and they are still living at the damn address that you purging. That's racist. Racist is when Chris Kobach had this system where if your name was John Smith and you live in Louisiana and your name is John Smith and you live in Louisiana, and your name is John Smith

and you live in Mississippi, Crosscheck said, y'all the same person. As if somehow there couldn't be a John Smith in Mississippi and Louisiana. So what happened? Crosscheck wiped out thousands upon thousands of people. A glitch in Florida under Governor Rick Scott took people off the polls.

Folks were still living there. Folks had not moved in 30 years. All I'm saying is, it's amazing how every time there's an issue with voting, it's the Republican at the helm who are making it happen. Kelly, go ahead. But the other thing is, when we have this conversation, it

always assumes, for whatever reason, that there aren't precautions in place to register people to vote. It's like, people just automatically forget that you already have to have a voter registration card. They forget that you already have to literally sign up to vote, where all of that stuff is already processed and cross-checked and everything.

So this added layer of whatever you want to call it, either voter suppression or voter protection or anything like that, it's not necessary if you're already doing your job correctly at the base level. Yeah, the only thing that I would add, I don't think that we're missing any kind of nuance. The thing that I would add is that there was no evidence of voter crimes or, you know, impropriety going on. There was no evidence of that.

It was so small. And people have done study after study. In fact, the Texas Attorney General, Texas Secretary of State, Republican, straight up lied. Straight up and lied when he asserted massive

voter fraud took place in Texas. Guess who didn't get confirmed Secretary of State because he lied? That Republican. If he lied about that, then he shouldn't have been. But Malik, here's my point. Any Republican,

any black Republican who's scared to come on here, I can show you any number who don't come on here and lie. But it's not a matter of lying. Hold on. And I'm speaking as someone who's actually talked to these people.

Let me say it again. There are black Republicans who I have put on the air for a decade. The ones who don't have a problem are the ones who don't consistently lie. Now, when them other fools come on here, like your boy, who was lying and got... You talking about Omari? Blame Big Mama. If I press play, you're gonna see more. And here's the deal.

Here's the deal. If you come on here and you lie, I'm gonna check your ass. If you a Democrat and you lie, I'm gonna check your ass. Here's the deal. You're not equal opportunity in that role.

No, no, no. Hold on. If you come on this show, Jason just sat there and said 7%, and I said, no, it was 200. No, he said it was 7,000 people in Wisconsin. What did I say, Jason? No, 200,000. He's a 7% of the population.

He said, I got the numbers mixed up. The problem is when you lie and then you defend the lie, then you stand on top of the lie and go, I'm not lying. I'll even go farther with it. As someone who is a black conservative, who's talked to other black conservatives, not just people who may or may not come onto the show, what you guys have to understand is that,

and even for the people out there, there is one of me. Sometimes there are three of you. Sometimes there are four of you. So if we're trying to articulate a point of view or whatever, in the minute, because, you know, you're good for cutting people off, the minute that we say something that we could misquote it or something, just some type of error. You guys ascribe it to us. Let me help you out.

Let me help you out. Let me help you out. And so we have nowhere to go. Let me help you out. Because it's like the rain comes down on us. Let me help you out. Let me help you out. It's not an environment.

One America, Newsmax, Fox. I mean, this is part of the game, and you know that. But what happens on here does not happen on any of those other shows. You know why? You know why? I disagree. I've yet to see a show for you on Fox where there are personal attacks. Did you see me with Sean Hannity? No, I didn't see you with Sean Hannity. But I've seen, but I watch it all the time

and so I see you on Fox. I don't think I got a word at all. I see you on Fox all the time, but the way that the conversations against conservatives are personalized here, you just Fox all the time. Allow me. But the way that the conversations against conservatives are personalized here, you just don't see elsewhere. And so, yeah, people don't feel comfortable. Let me help you out.

But it's also uncomfortable. They're going to have a personal attack against you. Let me help you all out. Let me help you all out. Just real simple. I ain't got no tea. But let me be real clear. Oh, Lord.

If you bring your ass on this show and you make shit up, I'ma check your ass. Especially if you're a Republican. And if you come on this show and you defend bullshit that we know is against black folks, I'ma check... I'm not done. I'm not done.

I'm not done. I'm not done. I'm not done. I'm not done. Put the camera back on me. Let me be real clear. I'm going to check your ass. If you sitting at home, here's my suggestion. And I can show you any number of Black Republicans.

Elroy Saylor, Chris Messler. I can go on and on and on. Republicans who are smart enough not to come on here with some bullshit. But if you come here and you start lying, it ain't gonna end well. Now, now, now, if your little feelings get hurt,

I'll give you a lollipop. But I'm going to tell you right now, don't start lying. Because see, here's how I roll. And this is very simple. If you're watching and you're listening, and if a lie is being stated, and if I allow the lie to circulate,

and see, I watch the other shows, and see, the problem is on those shows, those hosts are not well-read. So when somebody lies, they don't check them right then. They got to go call a producer to do a fact check the next day. No, I do live fact checking. I do that because I can't let you at home watch a conversation

and you say, well, Roland didn't say nothing. So clearly what so-and-so said is the truth. No, that wasn't the case when I had my show on WVON. It wasn't the case when I had my show on WVON. It wasn't the case when I had my signal for 11 years on Tom Joyner. It wasn't the case with four years of Washington Watch. It wasn't the case for four years of News 1 Now. It wasn't the case

for the six years I was on CNN. It's real simple. If your feelings are so fragile, black Republicans, if you can't handle this kitchen heat, yes, stay at your meatloaf

eating table. But when you come here, it's gonna get spicy. It's gonna get fired up. But the deal is, don't start making stuff up and start lying, because see, then I'm gonna check you. But, if you want to make a point, go right ahead.

But if you make up and come up with some BS, you are going to get checked. A Democrat on your show just did that last week. Did what? The lie. Who? Which is a lie that, and I take that back. I don't know if he's a Democrat or not,

but he's definitely independent or a Democrat. I can't think of that. Hold on. Now, Dan, which one is he? Is he a Democrat or independent? Last Tuesday when we were on the show, I can't think of what my brother's name is. I don't know. I know that he's not a Republican. How do you know that?

Well, because we've been on the show together. But anyway, when he said... He ain't Democrat. He ain't independent. When he said... Then what group left? When he said that on the night of Obama's inauguration, Mitch McConnell had a conversation about

our number one goal is to make Barack Obama one-term president. That's just factually incorrect. It did not happen. I was the only one who challenged him. What did not happen? No, that did happen. That came from a conversation that, because I went back after the show and looked it up, that came from a conversation that, because I went back after the show and looked it up,

that came from a conversation that Mitch McConnell had, I think, in November of 2010, where he talked about Obama being a one-term president. That is a fact. You guys can go online, look it up. So who met on inauguration night saying, we're going to make him a one-term president? Don't know.

Haven't been able to find that. Yeah, okay. But see, that's what I'm just saying. All right, hold up, hold up. We'll see if that's true, because first of all, I ain't been able to find that. Yeah, okay. But see, that's what I'm just saying. All right, hold up, hold up. We'll see if that's true, because first of all, I ain't taking your word on that. I can pull it up. Coming up next, we're gonna talk about

a couple of cases black girls are missing. One of them we now realize was a hoax. It's next to Roland Martin Unfiltered. The Dream2Funk fan club. Every dollar that you give to us supports our daily digital show. There's only one daily digital show out here that keeps it black and keep it real. As Roland Martin Unfiltered, support the Roland Martin Unfiltered daily digital show by going to RolandMartinUnfiltered.com. Our goal is to get 20,000 of our fans

contributing 50 bucks each for the whole year. You can make this possible. RolandMartinUnfiltered.com. You wanna check out Roland Martin Unfiltered? YouTube.com forward slash Roland S. Martin. And subscribe to our YouTube channel. There's only one daily digital show out here that keeps it black and keep it real. It's Roland Martin Unfiltered.

See that name right there? Roland Martin Unfiltered. Like, share, subscribe to our YouTube channel. That's YouTube.com forward slash Roland S. Martin. And don't forget to turn on your notifications so when we go live, you'll know it. You want to support Roland Martin Unfiltered? Be sure to join our Bring the Funk fan club. Every dollar that you give to us supports our daily digital show.

There's only one daily digital show out here that keeps it black and keep it real. As Roland Martin Unfiltered support the Roland Martin Unfiltered daily digital show by going to RolandMartinUnfiltered.com. Our goal is to get 20,000 of our fans contributing 50 bucks each for the whole year. You can make this possible. RolandMartinUnfiltered.com. All right, some good news.

Five and six-year-old Braxton and Brea Williams were reported missing by a family member at about 1.30 p.m. Sunday after they had last been seen about 11.30 a.m. playing in the front yard of their home in Jacksonville, Florida. Well, today, in what their family is calling a Christmas miracle, the children were found in the woods near their home.

But remember, there's also this case out of New York, though, that it perplexed some folks, that Carol Sanchez said she was walking down the street with her mother in the Bronx when four men jumped out of a van and snatched and tossed her into that van. The whole thing was captured on video. Now, watch this video.

This, of course, shocked many people. Well, now police say Kara made it all up. Talk about being sad here. The reality is a lot of black kids are snatched, many of them not found. Joining us right now is Derricka Wilson, CEO of Black and Missing Foundation.

Derricka, the case of this Sanchez girl is a problem for folks like you because you're out there trying to get cops to take these stories seriously. Absolutely. And what happens is

when this happens, story blows up, goes national, there's video, and now it's, wait a minute, you actually when this happens. Story blows up. Goes national. There's video. And now it's, wait a minute. You actually set up four people snatching in front of your mama because your mama was too strict?

That makes your job harder. It makes it very hard. And it's a total disgrace. I mean, this right here is terrible, what happened, because we have so many children that are actually missing. And we are pounding the pavement trying to get the media to cover the stories, trying to get law enforcement to put more resources on these cases.

I mean, just last year alone, over 400,000 kids under the age of 18 were reported missing, and 37 percent are black. However, they only make up 14% of the population. And then you have this Sanchez young girl who staged this. I mean, think about all the resources. The fact that we already have, it's already played against us that we can't get the coverage. She got the coverage. She got a lot of resources only to say that this is a hoax. That is a total disgrace to the community,

to law enforcement, to media, to organizations such as myself, because we're putting a lot of time and effort in finding our missing. You know, this is... You know, we've covered many of these cases. Yes. Because, frankly, unless you're a white girl, mainstream media not gonna jump on it.

Black folks gotta yell, scream, protest to get mainstream media to pay attention to these stories. And unfortunately, what's now happening with human sex trafficking, I mean, this has... I mean, it's unbelievable the number of black folks who are missing it, especially black girls. Absolutely, and it's happening right here in our own backyards.

You know, when you have this conversation with the community and people, you know, in your circle, they think that this is happening abroad. This is happening here. You know, Maryland rates in the top five where human trafficking is a problem. And we're not talking about it. We are so desensitized, thinking that,

oh, this is happening in these third-war countries. We don't get to know our neighbors. We're not having these conversations with our kids at the dinner table to talk to them about the dangers, to give them the signs of things to look for. You know, social media has been a blessing and a curse because a lot of people are using it to recruit, especially the ones that have ill intentions. So they're recruiting, they're luring our kids, and

these dating apps. I mean, we've had so many cases that come to us because they've been lured, you know, just from the dating apps. You know, so we're telling people, meet them in public places. You know, don't invite them to your homes. And this is what we're seeing on a regular basis. But also, I think it's also teaching

um, teaching young folks to understand that when you're taking photos, don't take a photo in front of your house with the address being invisible. Turn off your location. I mean, what's happening with social media, you literally are telling people,

-"This is where I am right now." -"Absolutely." -"I'm alone. I'm by myself. I'm at this party." -"Absolutely." I mean, you is where I am right now. Absolutely. I'm alone. I'm by myself. I'm at this party. I mean, you know, I turn my notification off all the time. Well, just think about it. I mean, a way that a burglar could enter your home or someone could enter your home,

not even coming through your front door, is through your devices and through your computer. So you are allowing strangers to come right through. They're embedded in these apps. They're embedded in these gaming systems. You know, you need to be that nosy parent. Also, just to see who your kids are engaging with. They have all of these chat groups.

Who are they chatting with? You know, think about this door camera where they hacked into that and they were actually talking to this little girl. So it's all around us. And then a recent report even came out with the smart TVs, where they're actually hacking in that as well. So people have to be very careful,

and we need to have these conversations, these uncomfortable conversations in our household. It's not a one-time deal. Anyone? Oh, so as a native DMV person, and specifically regarding the Maryland situation, what precautions are there any precautions being put in place either by government, by organizations like yours? Like what is the plan? What's going on in that regard?

How are you bringing more awareness? So this is what we have seen. So Black and Mason has been in existence for going on 12 12 years and we started the organization because it is a problem my background is law enforcement my sister-in-law is in public relations and those are the two critical professions needed to bring awareness the fact of the matter is it becomes trendy and then it dies down so when it gets hot everybody hops on it. But what they're hopping on is something

that we have seen for years and years and years, which, you know, we wanted to, you know, make a difference, be a change agent, pound the pavement. And what we're trying to do is get more people involved in the movement because, like, two years ago, there was the hysteria in D.C. with the missing girls. Everybody was in the uproar. And then guess what? Two or three months later,

it died down. Nothing changed. In fact, the numbers increased of the ones that have been reported missing. When we started the organization in 2008, 30% of missing persons in the United States were persons of color. That number has increased to 40%.

Okay, so it's not decreasing at all. We have been seeing this year after year after year. And what's going on now, because it is that uproar, and it is, I mean, we do have an issue with human trafficking. We have an issue with domestic violence because there's a correlation between missing persons and domestic violence and mental health. What's going to happen is it's going to die down again,

and then in the coming months or coming years, it's going to creep right back up. But this is something that we've known. The studies have shown this. I just want to... Well, as a father, I want to thank you for the work that you do. Thank you.

What I'm going to say now is probably not going to be the most popular thing. But I know that this young woman, Sanchez, she made Carol Sanchez, she made your job harder. But I also think we should have a little bit of empathy for her and for some of these kids

because we don't know the situation. Like, a lot of the kids that we see actually ran away from home. We don't know their... And, you know, people were saying, oh, well, you know, didn't they get kidnapped off the street? Wasn't there some crazy racist person that was snatching them? And it was like, no, they had a difficult home situation, and that's what led them to run away,

and so we can't start blaming them, particularly kids that are young. And so I just beg a little bit of caution with, you know, making Carol Sanchez's name mud when she's 16 years old. She's thinking with a 16-year-old brain, and she made an error that made your job a lot harder, but we don't know what her situation at home was. We don't know.

When we say strict, strict can mean a lot of different things. You know, I can go back to Tawana Brawley when people came down and said terrible things about Tawana Brawley when people came down and said terrible things about Tawana Brawley and, you know, used the word hoax. But she was also had a difficult situation with her stepfather. So I think I just want to put that out there.

No, I can't accept that. Okay, when you... This is not somebody who ran away. Right. Four dudes in a van. No, I understand. Walking with your mama.

No, no, no. See, see, see. No, this was strategically planned. Damn. No, no, no. The reason is by deal. I'm definitely not saying it wasn't. I cannot imagine.

I cannot imagine the terror to be a mama. Mm. You so... And to be a mama. Mm. You so... And to be walking... Yeah. ...and four dudes roll up and snatch... Your child.

...your child. I understand. And force. When they say force, that's a key word. Was it a weapon? Force. That woman could have had a heart attack. She could have.

Absolutely. See? And I understand... Look, that ain't running away. That's like sitting with, okay, I'm going to walk with my mama, I'm going to try to be in the van, and come snatch me.

Hey, hey, me and her going to have something. Let's just say she might want to go live with some cousins. But think about, but this was premeditated. This was premeditated because it was a camera. There was a van. There was four people.

Look, just the whole, just how it was all set up. But, and I understand where you, I hear where you're coming from. But I need for someone to explain that to me with Ariana Fix, the two-year-old that went missing. And she's not getting any media coverage. Or some of these other cases that we're working on that's not getting any national coverage. The fact that this right here, the crime itself, this abduction in broad day, well, at nighttime,

in a view of a camera, where this kid was snatched by force and thrown in a van and been missing, what did her mother go through? But think about all the resources. Somebody up on YouTube, what did her mother go through? But think about all the resources. Wait, why is this here? Somebody uploaded on YouTube. What if her mama was packing? Right.

Her mama could have pulled a gun out. She could have. And killed these cats. And then we would have found out. See, I'm... All I'm saying is this here. Hard to get a license in New York. If Ro...

First of all, it's a whole bunch of folks in New York that ain't got no license. All I know is this here. If I had done something like that as a kid, I still wouldn't be able to sit down. Because the ass whooping would have been permanent.

I understand. I want to be clear. I'm not trying to justify what she did. You know what I mean? I'm not saying it was the right thing. I feel you. This is just a bad example for your point. All I'm saying is to justify what she did. You know what I mean? I'm not saying it was the right thing. I feel you. This is just a bad example for your point. Yeah, all I'm saying is let's have empathy for young black girls who make mistakes.

I totally... That's all I'm saying. I don't disagree with that. I think that we should have... If she ran away... Right. And we found out that she ran away and wasn't abducted, I would have some empathy.

That is... It's a little hard for me to have some empathy for something that was set up. If four dudes jump out of a van and snatch you off a street with your mama standing right there... Somebody's not thinking logically. Five people there are not thinking logically.

I don't even think... Exactly, and that's my point. All I'm saying, doc... Think logically. Yeah, maybe they weren't thinking logically, but they did something that was essentially criminal. And they may be charged as an adult, too. I actually compared this to the Jussie Smollett situation. Oh, here we go.

No, let me finish. And in that situation, what he did, he took advantage of the sensitivities that black people have about whether this administration or Trump supporters or whatever, and he actually played into that. She literally, this 16-year-old, did the very same thing that she took advantage of.

She preyed upon the sensitivities of a nation because we're all concerned about human trafficking. Because when I first saw it, I said, no. Especially in New York because New York is one of the top city in the state, New York, New York, where they are trafficking. I think she preyed upon the apathy. She didn't think this was going to be as big a story as it turned out to be. But think about all the other families in New York that have their missing kids

that they're still trying to find. And the resources that got wasted. And speaking of that, speaking of that, I want to pull some of those up. Hold on, hold on. One second, one second. Speaking of that,

pull the graphics up, please. Some of the kids that are out there that are still missing, please. All right. Who is this? This is Montgomery, last seen Wednesday, December the 11th,

in 200 block of North Simpson Street. So she's been missing since Wednesday, the 11th. Philadelphia. All right, next one. She's missing out of Franklin County, Ohio, last seen November 13th, before Thanksgiving. And what's her name? Her name is Navea Stralter.

All right, next one. This young lady was actually found deceased. This is crazy. So she was a Domino's pizza driver. Domino's pizza driver. She went missing on Friday. And if you go back and do the search, there was no national coverage

where she went missing four days ago, okay? Now, if you search her name, everybody is running articles today. But she's dead. She's dead. But no, no, no, before her body was actually... Before it was identified, because it was found this morning,

they started running stories on this young lady... Right. ...late yesterday and early this morning before her body was actually confirmed. Like, they confirmed her identity. But she went missing four days ago. So they found her car. They found her car abandoned about five miles away.

She had just left work. Her manager hasn't confirmed whether she was going on a delivery or if she was going home for the day. And the only reason that I know about that is that I'm from Mississippi and this happened. And I saw people from home on my timeline. That's the only reason that I knew about that is that I'm from Mississippi and this happened and I saw people from home on my timeline That's the only reason

Yeah, that's why we exist. This is the problem This is exactly why black and missing foundation exists because of these stories not getting the attention And I understand with the whole runaway situation We talk about this all the time when someone someone is running away, we, as a society, need to understand what are they running from and who are they running to. And then going back to the young girl in New York, her whole situation and circumstance

is a little bit different. We have two more before we go. Go ahead and show them. Greenbelt, Maryland. This is Hannah Garrett. She's been missing since December 3rd. Mom is having such a hard time dealing with the Greenbelt police

regarding her case. They're trying to say, oh, that she ran away. The mother is like, she did not run away. This is not my daughter. I live in that area, and I don't even see anything posted. I don't hear anything at all. But we're pushing the envelope to get her story out there.

And what's the next, last one? The last one, um, her name is Autumn. She was last seen December 6th. She's missing out of Arnold, Maryland. That was, you know, almost two weeks ago. Three or four girls from Maryland alone. This area alone. This area alone.

Derricka Wilson, we appreciate it. Thanks a lot. Thank you so much for having me. Thank you. All right, folks. The boy at the University of Cincinnati

voted to have the name of Charles McMicken removed from one of their largest colleges. McMicken was a philanthropist who donated property to help establish the university.

He was a co-founder of the university. He also was a slaveholder whose very name is offensive to some in the current climate. Now, they're going to keep his name in some of the places there,

but the college will not be named after him. Alright, folks, in Prince George's County, Circuit Court Judge Lawrence Hill has thrown out the hate crime charge in the murder trial of Sean Urbanski, who was charged with fatally stabbing a black university student in May of 2017.

He said that prosecutors had failed to show 24-year-old Urbanski, who was white, stabbed U.S. Army Second Lieutenant Richard Collins III, specifically because Collins was black. Collins, of course, was upset to graduate from Boise State University, and so that charge is going out. The prosecution, they've rested.

Now the defense will put on their case. Let's go to Mississippi, where Curtis Flowers, the man whose murder conviction was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court, racial bias, was released from custody yesterday for the first time in 22 years. Curtis Flowers walked out of the regional jail in the central town of Louisville

hours after a judge set his bond at $250,000. Now you might remember, this is the guy, or the DA, repeatedly threw black folks off of the jury because they were black. He got slapped down by numerous courts, but he kept doing it. Here, of course, is flowers after he got released. I'm happy I'm out.

I've been spending time with family. Looking forward to Christmas. Did you think this day, what were your thoughts? Did you think this day would ever come? I knew it would, but I didn't know when. Yeah, but I always knew it would. Yeah. What are you looking forward to now?

Spend time with family. Yeah, and talking with Miss Madeline soon. Yes, and... And see how the holidays go. Well, the person who you can blame is that racist D.A. in Mississippi. Again, Malik, your home state has got repeatedly. He specifically threw black people off.

He was busted for it. Conviction thrown out. Did it again. Convicted. Appealed. Thrown out again. And the guy kept doing it. Now, of course, I'm going to defend my home state.

I don't think this obviously is not a... I'm very happy, first of all, that this guy is out. But whether it's DAs or judge, and not to diminish this particular incident right here, but I even think about the Meek Mill, the judge in Philadelphia with... about the Meek Mill the judge and was Philadelphia With was it Meek Mill? Yeah, I think it was Meek Mill

you know the Conversation that they were having around that where the judge kind of continued to make him go through all of these loops and was just Basically harassing him really these type of things should not happen and we had a lot of people it was Diddy and Stop no, I mean Really? These type of things should not happen. And we had a lot of people. It was Diddy and a lot of... is where it meet meal his actions while on probation mm-hmm he kept coming back in front of her and she essentially was throwing the book at him and adding more years to him being on probation because of his actions no that's that that part of what happened I remember this judge actually you know she actually made him sign up for, I think it was etiquette classes or something,

and they even found him. Yes, and what I'm saying is, in this case... No, I totally disagree. The district attorney struck jurors... Right. ...from the jury because they were black. Yes. His case, he was convicted.

It was overturned because of racial bias. In the second trial, he did it again. The same thing again. He has done it repeatedly. When this case went to the Supreme Court, they smacked him down for clear racism by this district attorney. As they should have.

But my point is that these type of things, whether it's a DA or a judge, definitely they're not isolated to Mississippi. In fact, this asshole DA, when Curtis Flowers was released, I'm reading right here, Judge Loper, go to my iPad, ended the hearing on Monday with words of reprimand for Don Evans,

who the judge said was expected to be at the hearing but did not show. Loper said it was a troubling fact that the state of Mississippi had taken no action to further the case, ignoring a court order for the prosecutor to file written responses. Quote, I want to caution the prosecution that if it continues its dilatory conduct and or if it continues to ignore orders issued by this court,

the state of Mississippi will reap the whirlwind. The judge said to Evans' assistant, since your boss chose to be somewhere other than here today, I expect you to convey that to him. I think he should have been disbarred. I think those are grounds for being disbarred. I agree. Personally, I think so.

Whatever Evans is doing, he should... But, Kelly, this is the crap that white DAs have done. There was a case in Georgia where they were so dumb to put a B right next to the name of what jurors to strike for black. It's absolutely ridiculous. But in this particular case, the fact, this man has been tried for the exact same crime,

or yeah, six times. And my understanding is that that is the most times in U.S. jurisprudence history that somebody has been tried for the same crime six times and overturned every single time. Because of the same racism by Doug Evans. Right. So for me, I understand that, you know, it's not double

jeopardy or anything like that for legal reasons that I won't get into. But at the same time, there's something to be said about you trying a case and it was a hung jury like twice or three times or something like that. And it's just like there's always something that shows

you that maybe he didn't do it. That beyond a reasonable doubt, he probably didn't do it. And you just have to... He didn't care. Right. It's just disgusting. Evans eliminated 41 of 42 potential

black jurors for whom he was allowed to issue preemptory challenges. Now, it was a seven to two decision by the Supreme Court. Y'all know who one of the two was? Clarence Thomas. Go ahead, Jason. Yeah, I mean, that's obviously not a shock and not a surprise.

Um, it's kind of sad that, you know, Clarence Thomas would be, uh, you know, in dissent when you had people who were other conservatives, like, you know, like the Chief Justice, John Roberts or Gorsuch or any of these other guys. You would be kind of shocked that, uh, well, it's really not shocking, but it should be. Oh, you're going to love this one.

Thomas theorized that the court took Flowers' case, quote, because it has received a fair amount of media attention, which he said, quote, will encourage litigation and relitigation of criminal trials in the media to the potential detriment of all parties, including defendants. Quote, if the court's opinion today has a redeeming quality, it is this, the state is perfectly free to convict Curtis Flowers again.

Otherwise, the opinion distorts our legal standards, ignores the record, and reflects utter disrespect for the careful analysis of the Mississippi courts. Oh, well, Grant... This is my... This my... disrespect for the careful analysis of the Mississippi courts. On what ground? This month. So let me just say one thing. I'm a straight cuss. I think, first of all, you know, the putting the, you know,

the person in Georgia that you mentioned. That's your boy. That put the letter B by people's names in a jury pool reminds me a lot of what Trump and the Trump organization did when they were putting the letter C

for colored. By the way, by the 1970s the term colored was very much antiquated. But that's something that they did that was very similar. But, you know, the idea... I'm trying not to curse Clarence Thomas' punk ass out for that dissent.

Yes, let's not curse him out on the show. I mean... It's ridiculous. No filter. The reality is that I'm glad that there were other conservatives on the court who had sense of not to follow. The only goddamn black man on a Supreme Court and his punk ass cannot see racial damn bias.

Him and Neil Gorsuch were the two. Neil Gorsuch, the one, the seat stolen by Mitch McConnell, that Neil Gorsuch, well, the two, Neil Gorsuch, the one, the seat stolen by Mitch McConnell, that Neil Gorsuch, that... It does not matter if they were black or white or whatever the case may be, to not look at this case and decide

in the minority, well, to look at this case and decide as a minority if you are a white person, if you are a Hispanic or Asian and did not see the egregious behavior here and say that we need to overturn this, doesn't matter what color you are, you shouldn't... I honestly think if you can't convict somebody...

Six times! So, as a matter of fact... And Clarence Thomas basically wrote, go ahead, do it again. Marilyn Mosby tried that guy for Felicia Barnes' murder five times, you know, and it was like, everybody in the city wanted to see somebody convicted for it, but if you can't get the conviction,

it just becomes, like... Y'all, y'all, let me go on, because I'm about to straight cuss Clarence Thomas' punk ass out. I'm going to let y'all know right now. All right, y'all remember this case in New York? Jasmine Headley was confronted by New York City police workers. The video was captured by the workers. NYPD snatched her kid out of her arm.

She was arrested, spent four days in jail before Brooklyn D.A., Eric Gonzalez, dropped the charges of obstructing governmental administration, resisting arrest, endangering the welfare of a child, and trespassing. Gonzalez said he was horrified by the violence depicted in the video. Said the situation should have been handled differently.

Well, guess what? New Yorkers now paid 625 grand, taxpayer dollars, for this woman. As they absolutely should. The idea that you would pull a child, that could have been handled in a much different way, but the idea that you would pull a child from a mother's arms, or parent arms, period,

that is disgusting, and I'm glad that New York... And it's not Mississippi. And I'm glad that New York is paying out for that, because... Is that the same at the border? So... Oh, you said snap the baby out of people... Mama's arms. I'm not doing... I'm not doing...

Trump folks did it at the border. I'm not going down that foxhole road. No, I only asked you. Is it the same... Is the same at the border? I'm not going down that rabbit hole, bro. Baby in a mama's arms... No, I'm not going down... Ishole. No, I only asked you. Is the same at the border? I'm not going down that rabbit hole. Baby in a mama's arm. No, I'm not going down that.

Is a baby in a mama's arm. No, we're not going down that rabbit hole. Kelly? I mean, it's unfortunate that this even had to take place. You know, this is just something that was wholly unnecessary because she did nothing wrong. She did absolutely nothing wrong. And not only is there a racial component here,

but certainly an elitism classism component here because she's there for public services and the public services are in every way against her in this regard. Like she's coming to the state for help. She's coming to the city for help. She's coming to the city for help. And what do you do? Take away the thing that she actually needs help for?

For what? And, you know, I'm glad that, you know, she got her just due, but it shouldn't have even gotten this far. Jason, this is the BS that happens. Taxpayer money wasted because of rogue cops? Absolutely. You know, and again,

he brought up, uh, Jussie Smollett, but we also have to bring up Chicago paying out like 30 million a year... A year. ...for, you know, uh, you know, in a city where, you know, Lawndale and the west side of Chicago could use a whole lot of that 30 million that they're using to pay out for stupidity,

you know, by-by rogue police officers. One of many for stupidity, you know, by rogue police officers. One of many cities. And, you know, so I think, honestly, this is something that most all these, you know, fiscal conservatives, they should be outraged. Don't say nothing. They should be outraged. Don't say nothing.

Well, I'm speaking out against that. Don't say nothing. That was a town in Michigan where a white cop brutalized a black man, caught on a dash cam video, planted drugs in his car. They had to raise the property taxes to pay the settlement. Wow. Oh, my God, I would go nuts.

And the fiscal conservatives were quiet. All right, y'all, I got to go. I'm gonna see y'all tomorrow on Roadmark Unfiltered. Don't forget to join us while bringing the Funk Fan Club. Every dollar you give goes to support this show and what we do. The show that only one has the courage to call Clarence Thomas a punk ass

for them trifling ass rulings like that. Talking about a waste of a day. That man is an embarrassment to black America. Dog, six times, bro. The only black man on the Supreme Court can't see the racial bias. We don't have to call him a weak-ass Roland. Sorry-ass.

We don't have to. Weak-ass. Fake-ass. I'm not doing that. Country-ass. None of that. Okay, country-ass. Just a man you don't agree with him.

Anybody can be country. That's a lot. Don't. Tell y'all. Go to RolandMartUnfiltered.com. I'm going to see y'all tomorrow. Power. Power.

You know how many cases this man. You say you'd never give in to a meltdown. Never let kids' toys take over the house. And never fill your feed with kid photos. You'd never plan your life around their schedule. Never lick your thumb to clean their face. And you'd never let them leave the house looking like less than their face. And you'd never let them leave the house looking like, uh, less than their best.

You'd say you'd never put a pacifier in your mouth to clean it. Never let them stay up too late. And never let them run wild through the grocery store. So when you say you'd never let them get into a car without you there,

no, it can happen. One in four hot car deaths happen when a kid gets into an unlocked car and can't get out. Never happens. Before you leave the car, always stop, look, lock. Brought to you by NHTSA and the Ad Council. I know a lot of cops. They get asked all the time,

have you ever had to shoot your gun? Sometimes the answer is yes. But there's a company dedicated to a future where the answer will always be no. This is Absolute Season 1. Taser Incorporated. I get right back there and it's bad. Listen to Absolute Season 1.

Taser Incorporated, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Clayton English. I'm Greg Glott. And this is Season 2 of the War on Drugs podcast.

Yes, sir. Last year, a lot of the problems of the drug war. This year, a lot of the biggest names in music and sports. This kind of star-studded a little bit, man. We met them at their homes.

We met them at their recording studios. Stories matter, and it brings a face to them. It makes it real. It really does. It makes it real. Listen to new episodes of the War on Drugs podcast season two on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

This is an iHeart podcast.