#RolandMartinUnfiltered - 12.5.19 RMU: Impeachment charges against Trump; 700k to lose SNAP; Birthright citizenship threatened

Episode Date: December 7, 2019

12.5.19 #RolandMartinUnfiltered: House Judiciary committee votes to draft impeachment charges against Donald Trump; Nearly 700k families to lose food stamps; New report outlines the ways black voters are disenfranchised; Senate passes the Future Act; #StillSeekingFreedom: Birthright Citizenship, a History of Race and Rights in Antebellum America. - #RolandMartinUnfiltered partner: Ebony Foundation | Home by the Holiday Home by the Holiday aims to reunite Black and Latino families separated by bail, while challenging racial injustice and mass incarceration. For more info visit https://www.homebytheholiday.com/ Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an iHeart Podcast. 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. 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.

Here's the deal. We got to set ourselves up. See, retirement is the long game. We got to make moves and make them early. Set up goals. Don't worry about a setback. Just save up and stack up to reach them. Let's put ourselves in the right position.

Pre-game to greater them. Let's put ourselves in the right position, pregame to greater things. Start building your retirement plan at thisispreetirement.org, brought to you by AARP and the Ad Council. Thank you. Martin! Today is Thursday, December 5th, 2019. Coming up on Roller Mark Unfiltered, Donald Trump doesn't give a damn about poor kids and those who need food. Of course, this administration, they are cutting benefits in the SNAP program.

We'll talk with Congresswoman Marcia Fudge of Ohio. Also, Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House, comes out and says that they are, the Democrats are going to draft impeachment charges against Donald Trump. Republicans are losing their damn minds. We'll show you exactly what Nancy Pelosi had to say. Also, a new report outlines the way black voters are being disenfranchised. A federal judge blasted the attorneys for Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, saying they're trying to run out the clock to keep former felons from being able to vote. I'm going to explain to you exactly what took place.

Also, the Senate finally passed the Future Act, a bill that will renew funds to colleges, including HBCUs. And also, in our Still Seeking Freedom series, a conversation with birthright citizens, a history of race and rights in antebellum America. And as promised, yes, another crazy-ass white woman acts a fool, and we got the video. It's time to bring the funk. I'm Roland Mark Unfiltered. Let's go. He's got it. Whatever the mess, he's on it.

Whatever it is, he's got the spook, the fact, the find And when it breaks, he's right on time And it's rolling Best belief he's knowing Putting it down from sports to news to politics With entertainment just for kicks He's rolling It's on go-go-royal

It's Uncle Roro, y'all It's Rollin' Martin Rollin' with Rollin' now He's funky, he's fresh, he's real The best you know, he's Rollin' Martin Martin folks donald trump is an evil despicable human being this is a man who has given 28 billion dollars to farmers who have been hurt because of his tariff tizzy with China and other countries. Yet now what he wants to do is cut the food benefits to 700,000 Americans. It's part of the SNAP program called Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Under current rules, people between the ages of 18 and 49

are required to work at least 20 hours a week for more than three months over a 36-month period to qualify for food stamps. They want to change that. Joining us right now is Congresswoman Marsha Fudge of Ohio. She is the chair of the House Agricultural Subcommittee on Nutrition Oversight and Department Operations. So, Congresswoman, exactly what is it the Trump folks want to do? They want to change the work requirements? Yes, and thanks for having me on, Roland. You hit the nail on the head. They have spent $28 billion primarily giving money to millionaire farmers, not the poor farmers, the millionaire farmers. And not loans. This is...

Not loans. Giving them, just giving them taxpayer dollars. What they want to do now is to put it make the work requirements stronger. They want them to work more hours. They want them to prove that they're looking for work. They want to they want to put them in training programs. By the way, I've never known USDA to be an expert at training people for jobs. But this is the worst part of it, though, Roland. Currently, more than 30 states have waivers to make sure that their people are not out here in the streets with no food.

They're now taking away the state's ability to waive some of these requirements. These same people that believe in states' rights rule that are saying to the states, no, we're not going to let you waive this rule because there are no jobs for these people. We're not going to let you waive this rule because these people may have PTSD or may be emotionally not able to work. They've just decided they're going to punish every single adult between the ages of 18 and 49 that doesn't work. Now, here's what Sonny Perdue, the agriculture commissioner, said, quote, we're taking action to reform our SNAP program in order to restore the dignity of work to a sizable segment of our population and be respectful of the taxpayers who fund the program.

Americans are generous people who believe it is their responsibility to help their fellow citizens when they encounter a difficult stretch. That's the commitment behind SNAP, but like other welfare programs, it was never intended to be a way of life. First of all, what's the total cost of the SNAP program? It's about 70 billion. Okay. But this is the thing though, Roland,

this is what is so ridiculous about that. These people only get three months worth of benefits anyway. So it's not like it's a way of life. They get three months at a time, as long as they are in compliance, all right? They get three months, so it's not a way of are in compliance. All right. They get three months. So it's not a way of life. And even outside of just the A-bots, the average person stays on food stamps less than one year.

Okay. So explain that to folks when you say for three months. And so what happens is you can only qualify for food stamps for a period of three months. And the guidelines say you must look for work, blah those different things like that so it's in three month increments correct that is correct they make they would make you believe that these people are getting benefits every day and it is just not true now they claim that this is according to this is what they claim. They say they found 2.9 million adults on the snap rolls were able bodied and did not have dependents and 2.1 million were not working. But they don't know who these people are, Roland.

They don't know. Many of these people are people who really cannot work. They either do not have the mental capacity. A lot of them are veterans who have come home with PTSD. Many of them are people who may be handicapped in other ways that they don't know. They don't know who these people are. So they are just assuming that all of these people don't work because they don't want to work. They never consider the fact that they don't work because they don't want to work. They never consider the fact

that they don't work because they can't work. And that's the other fallacy of this whole food stamps program, this whole SNAP, is that most people who are eligible to work and can work do work. There are more people who work on SNAP today than people can even imagine. They need to just stop telling the lie. They have the authority. The Robert Wood Foundation study said that 97% of SNAP participants who

will be affected by this live in poverty. 88% have household incomes at or below 50% of the poverty level or less than $600 a month. These people are... Trump has given below 50% of the poverty level or less than $600 a month. Correct. So Trump has given rich-ass farmers $28 billion, but they're tripping on folks who are bringing home less than $600 a month.

Correct. And to make matters worse, the smaller farmers are experiencing more than 250% increase in bankruptcies. And guess what? They could do better if they continue to bring in food to these people that they take off food stamps. But the crazy part is many of the people affected are from red states, rural areas. And look, I use the hashtag. We tried to tell you, anytime Trump does something that's going to affect these people, and this is where I would hope that any Democrat running for office

will go to these white folks and say, look, these are not just black folks, Latinos, who are going to be screwed. It's y'all too. And this is what Reverend Barra has been talking about with the Poor People's Campaign. No question about it. The majority of them are from red states. Congresswoman Marcia Fudge, we certainly appreciate it. Thanks a lot. No, thank you for having me. I appreciate you.

All right, folks, I want to talk about this with our panel, Dr. Julianne Malveaux. She's economist, president emerita, emerita Bennett College. Also, Dr. Greg Carr, chair, Department of Afro-American Studies, Howard University. And she's supposed to be talking about voting issues, but I'm like, what the hell? She could talk about this here. Yeah, Howard University. And she's supposed to be here talking about voting issues, but I'm like, what the hell? She can talk about this here. Yeah, you can. Yeah, that's right.

Thanks, Roy. I mean, look, y'all cover it. Right. Y'all cover this stuff. And so, Julie Brown-Diana is, of course, the director of the Advancement Project. I keep, I use the hashtag, Julian, for that reason. And it's like, we tried to tell you.

These broke white folks should listen to black people. We told you this man was evil. We told you he didn't give a damn about y'all. He lied to y'all about coal, lied to y'all about these steel plants, lied to y'all about opioids, and now you have these fools who are trying to make this adjustment. But these are the same

people who earlier wanted to actually reduce, they wanted to get rid of food stamps totally and put the food basically in a box and deliver it to the doorstep. Going back to the 1960s when they did that then with

food assistance. The thing about it, Roland, is that most of these people who are working, they get food stamps because they are not earning a living wage. If we raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour, some of those people will come off of SNAP. So you have people who are working every day, and they still are getting SNAP. It's called the working poor.

Yes. And some of these people are holding two jobs. And, you know, the hook for Sonny Perdue is, well, they don't have any dependents. You know, they don't have kids. They're single people without kids. But, you know, single may be single, may not be single. So you have people who are living together, et cetera.

But the bottom line, as Fudge said, is that this is mean-spirited, ugly, and it's going to affect not only black people, but also white people. It's going to affect poor people. And Reverend Barbara has said that the number of poor people in this country is 140 million, using an alternative measure than the measure that the census uses, Talking about the people who are just at the poverty line or a little bit above. This is going to be far-reaching. They're also rolling, planning to throw some young people off of school loans, loans, school lunches, school lunches, excuse me. But they're planning to throw young people off school lunches again for the same reasons their parents work. Well they have school lunches because they're below the poverty line or at the poverty line.

So this is just a scam by 45, and there are so many scams by 45, but nobody seems to want to check him. Also joining us is Eugene Craig, CEO of the Eugene Craig Organization via Skype. I want to go to you, Eugene. Look, you're a Republican, and this, this to me shows how callous and shameful these people are we had nearly what two or three trillion dollar tax cut that benefited rich folks in this country benefited major corporations none of those those companies did not reinvest that money in their companies did not increase the pay of workers. They basically did stock buyback. And they said, we ain't building new buildings or putting that money into the workers' pockets.

And here you have the targeting of folks over food. Yeah, I mean, this is just the harshness and the cruelty of the Trump administration, right? And this is how dumb this thing is, right? And that's how dumb this thing is, right? So on one end, you know, the way the food program works, it's a double, it's really a double win for the agriculture industry. On one end, they get the direct subsidy. On the other end, the product is being bought by, you know, essentially dollars provided by the federal government. So the federal government's essentially buying the product twice. And what, you know, Team Trump is doing here is that, you know that they're taking care of farmers. And a lot of times these are farmers that aren't even being affected by the Trump trade

war. Soybean farmers, all those payments are going to farmers in the South whose products aren't necessarily being affected by tariffs from countries that we trade with. But what you're seeing here is Trump doesn't care about poor people, Trump doesn't care about black people. But the issue is that your typical Trump voter who's going to be terribly affected by this is not, you know, they haven't

woken up. And maybe now they'll wake up a little bit when they're, you know, they're looking at, you know, they can't go and eat because, you know, their leader decided that they want them to starve. Judith, I want to read, there was a November 2017 article in Vanity Fair I read a couple years ago

that really explains how ignorant Trump and his people are. To prepare for the... Go to my iPad, please. To prepare for the transition after the 2016 election, the USDA staff had created elaborate briefings for the incoming Trump administration. The written material alone came to 2,300 pages in 13 volumes. A lot of people who work in the Department of Agriculture grew up on or around

farms. They like to think of the Department of Agriculture as a nice down-to-earth bureaucracy. They consider themselves more bipartisan, less ideological than people of the other federal agencies. Quote, our plan was to be as hospitable as possible, said one of the transition planners. We made sure the office space was gorgeous. To make the Trump people feel at home, the USDA people have set aside the nicest rooms on the top floor of the nicest building with the nicest view of the National Mall.

They had fished out of storage the most beautiful photographs from the USDA's impressive collection and hung them on the walls. They had brought in computers and office supplies and organized a bunch of new workstations. When they heard that Joel Lefwich, the guy Trump wanted to lead his USDA transition team, had been a lobbyist for PepsiCo, they brought in a mini fridge stocked with Pepsis. That was just the way they were at the USDA. They didn't think how the fuck can people pay to push sugary drinks on American kids

be let anywhere near the federal department with the most influence on what American kids eat. Instead, they thought, I hear he's a nice guy. No one showed up that first day after the election or the next. This was strange. The day after he was elected, Obama had sent his people into the USDA as had Bush. At the end of the second day, the folks at the Department of Agriculture called the White House to ask what was going on. The White House said they'll be here Monday. On Monday morning, they worked themselves up all over again into a welcoming spirit. Again, no one showed. Now for the entire

week, on November 22nd left which made a cameo appearance for about an hour. Quote, we had thought rule America is who got Trump elected so he'll have to make us a priority but then nothing happened. The USDA did not respond to questions for Vanity Fair.

They didn't give a damn about these people. And this was the first month of his presidency. Right. I mean, first of all, appointing someone to that position is all about like a friend who needed a job that you were expecting. You know, people have expectations if I helped you out. But I think the important thing here is that when we think about rural America and especially poor white folks, poor white folks in this country have always voted against their economic interests, right? Because of race, right? Racism has been the driving force. They don't care that, you know,

we're not getting our food stamps. We're not getting health care. We actually don't want to be in the same boat with y'all. No health care, no dental care, bad education, no food, but then we ain't with y'all. And guess what? They're going, it doesn't matter if this all happens, they're going to vote for him again. Because it's like, it is the thing of

I don't want to be with you all, and part of what's happening with you all, I don't want to be with black folks, right? And our narrative around poor people in this country is a black narrative. Right. White folks and the media has trumped. I hate to say that one has has come up with this story around poor people being black. Not true. Mostly white. Right. But they, again, are always going to vote against their interest, their economic interest, because they would instead rather be with white folks and also with Trump, like, oh,

maybe I can be like him. You know, I can be like him. He's had failed businesses. I've had failed businesses. He's got he's got no money, but he's you know, and he's ignorant and he became president anyway. So there's a little bit of I see him in me, and I aspire to be that instead of being with black folks. Greg, this is why I have said, Reverend Barber talked about this all the time as well, this is why Democrats have to, one, stop being scared of broke-ass white people

and go to broke-ass white people and say, yo ass broke. That's right. Your schools are broke. You broke people and say, yo ass broke. That's right. Your schools are broke. You broke. You ain't got no food. Guess what? LBJ launched the war on poverty

to some broke-ass white people in West Virginia. He was not in Mississippi Delta. Democrats have got to be willing. Look, I told Obama to his face. Man, stop going to damn suburban areas touting the Affordable Care Act. Go to the brokest, sickest part

of Mississippi and Alabama and say, I passed this damn law for y'all. To me, that's where Democrats, if you want to sit here and hit Trump, go to those places. Those coal miners who Mitch McConnell wouldn't meet with. Put them on.

If you Joe Biden, put them at a table with you and tell the media, come on in. Bring in, do the same thing to these broke white folks. All the broke white folks who said, oh, he's going to help us with opioids. Do the exact same thing. They have to be willing to tell them to their face, yo ass broke. I just want to let you know that. Well, I think this would very easily fit into another

Roland breaks down, except this time Roland breaks down electoral strategies. And that is, again, why people need to donate to Roland Martin Unfiltered, because this is the only place on a daily basis where we're not just breaking down race issues. This is the elevated conversation about something that may ultimately be unsolvable.

And the cable networks ain't discussing it. They still stuck on the TV. Well, they can't discuss it because the same people on cable networks are the ones behind this BS. I mean, that's why I really do appreciate Director Brown and you all's report and the We Vote, We Count report because you're getting at the heart of this question.

As far as I'm concerned, you know, and and and you know at my age I'm just old enough to have worked on Jesse Jackson's first campaign in 84 where he went to Appalachia where he went to the west that's why Bernie Sanders stand up you know these young people now Bernie Sanders no no no no no it's been done before exactly many times before what you say you lay this is Ron Walters laying this electoral strategy out in the 70s this is the congressional black caucus from the late 60s. We were just talking about Mervyn Domini. I mean, this is the whole point. But as far as I'm concerned, and then beginning to read the report, and I can't wait to hear you talk about this, because this is a valiant effort to try to persuade these people to embrace our common humanity. But quite frankly, there is no we in this country. There has never been a we in this country.

When, and I don't even put this on Trump, because when you look at the map of people who will be affected by these changes, and there are three changes, by the way, the third of those changes is the ones that say, and in fact, I had this here says, the rule would also prevent households with more than $2,250 in assets or $3,500 for a household with disabled adult from receiving food stamps. That's the one that would throw a million children off of reduced or free lunch in the schools. These people, this hasn't been just driven by race hate, because this is these poor whites.

You're absolutely right. When you look at the map of the people who are going to be affected, it is surgical. The Northeast states, California with 12% of the homeless population, a couple of states in the South, Georgia being one, but you see the least affected states are those Midwestern states, although people will be affected. Clearly, this is electoral politics.

This is a plutocracy that is trying to break the back of the citizens of this country and drain all the wealth of, like you said, a trillion point nine tax cut, trillion point six in student debt, her Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Capitol Hill today, assailing this Steve Mnuchin, another criminal who got away with all kind of stuff out there in California. They are draining the public coffers and they don't give, not only don't they give a damn about anybody in this country, they are depending on the race hate that you're talking about to allow them to get away with this. And don't forget, the tax cut specifically targeted blue states.

That's right. This does too. And they were public. That's exactly right. And hit, you know, hit the blue states. That's why all Republicans lost in California. That's right. Because the people are like, oh, y'all asked, along with this but watch this wrong but they didn't let me just

wait right quick when you see they couldn't get this through in the congress because the farm state representative right with the liberals always said no so what did this mean we had janice mathis on here exactly when was going through the hearing y'all gotta support this place it's only place talking about this. So what did this man, who is clogging his veins every day with fast food, do? He makes an executive order so that people who can't get 20 hours a week working fast food in these places, so they can't qualify for food stamps,

can't get their food stamps. Go ahead. You know, the other thing is that Republicans are always talking about fiscal responsibility. They always talk about balancing the budget. 45 has essentially knocked the budget all out of whack, not only for this year, but it's a 10-year trajectory. So even if a good Democrat gets in, the first thing they're going to have to do is tackle the issue of debt. And that means that their hands are going to be tied based on some of the legislations that have passed about how much increase the Pentagon

and war should get based on some of the other things that they've done. So he has really tied the hands of the next administration and the one after that. And they don't give a damn. I mean, let's just be real clear. They don't care. Eugene, again, this

to me is one of those issues where Democrats got to be real specific. I'm talking about if you're running for president, if you are Biden, Buttigieg, Warren, Klobuchar, Booker, and other 15 people still hanging around, Castro, they have to be specific, Eugene, with the language. Sanders, I'm telling y'all, I told Bernie Sanders to his face in a meeting in his office a year ago. Just so y'all, so let me be real clear, all you punk asses out there who are on YouTube talking about who I'm supporting,

no, I check everybody. Sanders to his face. I talked to Blue Judge three times on the phone. Twice in the past two months. Talk to Harris. Text Booker. Don't act like I ain't there. I told Bernie Sanders, you have got to go talk to broke-ass white people and say white people.

Don't say working class. You've got to say white people. Because, Eugene, that's the only way to slap him in the face to go, I ain't talking black, Latino. I'm talking to broke white people. That, to me, should be a clear Democratic strategy for 2020. I agree, right? Especially if the Democrat strategy is going to be okay, hey, look, we've got to target Pennsylvania,

Michigan, and Wisconsin, and probably not throwing Georgia and Arizona in there as well. If your, quote-unquote, swing vote that you're targeting are broke white people, or as politically correctly stated, working class white people, you got to go in there bluntly

and bluntly have the conversation. And if you're unwilling to or if a candidate is unwilling to, I think you need to check the credibility of the candidate. You know, campaigning one-on-one is being able to have the conversations, the blunt conversations

of the voters to earn their vote. But my point is this here. Don't come talk to black people and feel comfortable saying black. But you don't want to go in front of white people, Judith, and say white. I mean, somebody has to say to white voters,

because if you stand in front of women and say women voters, and you stand in front of women and say women voters, and you stand in front of gay folks and say LGBTQ, if you stand in front of black people and say black, Latino, damn it, stand in front of white folks and say, listen up, white voters.

See, to me, you've got to be explicit because broke white people have not been called out and they've danced around, yeah, working class, yeah, working class, yeah, real America, all those terms. But that's because they want to make them different.

Right. Again, it's like, don't want to be in the same pool with y'all, so we're working class, y'all poor black folks. That's right. So, I mean, again, this is the divisive politics that have always existed in this country.

And while I think, yes, the Democratic Party needs to go out there and do that, I also want to say that this wouldn't be the first time that it has been tried and that it may fail again. But here's the piece. Even if it fails, the fact that you do it, here's what may happen. You actually might wake up some broke white folks. Oh, that's true. But the point is, if you never say it, they just walking around like, we good?

You're like, no, you're not. That's what Reverend Jackson did. He went to, I mean... And that's what the poor people's campaign is. Exactly. Look, they've gone to Kansas, Idaho, the hills of North Carolina, West Virginia, Kansas, Mississippi,

and they have been very explicit. They've been saying, broke white people. Well, you know, Reverend Barber... We all broke. ...is a genius in terms of how he's constructed the New Poor People's Campaign in terms of his co-chair,

Liz Theoharis, a white woman minister. I mean, he basically is fighting for the soul of America. So if you say there's no us. Well, yeah, there's no us, and America has no soul. But what he is fighting for. No, no, no, he's trying to create a soul for America. Here's something I think we haven't stated enough in this.

And this goes back to the 19th century. Think about the Know Nothing Party, the nativist movements in the 1920s and 30s. There is a fetishization of ignorance in this country. So when we talk about the common people, there's this elevation of this idea that I'm dumb, I'm stupid, I'm proud. And when you feel, no seriously. Absolutely. So in other words, because as you were talking, I'm thinking which of these candidates in

the Democratic primary has really began to gesture toward that? Immediately I thought it was the Warren. Because Warren talks about, you know, her mama had to put the dress on, go get a job, and her daddy had a heart attack, and then she had a baby and they got rid of it. And I'm thinking, that should resonate, but here's Warren's flaw. She's intelligent. See, these white people want to be dumb.

So when Stacey Abrams is telling them, if we give them a dollar, the federal government is going to give us nine back and your hospital doesn't close, they can't hear that because she went to college. In other words, whiteness and justice is fused. So do we have to fight the dumbest candidate? Yes. Well, no. Reverend Barber, that's why I agree with you, is genius.

Barber is as intelligent as any human being walking the planet. But the way he crafts his message, he can resonate because he doesn't come off like that. I don't know that a person who comes off as smart can ever convince these stupid white people to do anything. And you're right, because first of all, for what was warned, they're going to say, well, you taught at Harvard.

Exactly. And you see, but see, but here's, but see, again, perfect example, because you talk about, let me find it, you talk about how dumb works. Perfect example. So after you had the hearing yesterday, you had this fool from Texas. Damn, I hate he graduated from Texas A&M.

I don't think he even graduated. Louie Gohmert. Oh, my God. But I want to show you dumb. They had a news conference, and when it was over, Louie Goldmer came out there and... Oh, man, I'm trying to find... He came out there and he says, essentially, whatever y'all do, don't send your kids to Harvard or Yale.

Every damn Republican who was on that Supreme Court... Come on, brother. ...from Harvard or Yale. That's right. Then somebody on Twitter named all of the damn folks in Congress who were Republicans who went to Harvard or Yale Law School. But again, so they played as all these elitists when they got the same elitists sitting over there. And Trump always touting how, you know, he got his Ivy Leagues from the Wharton School of Business

pin, Ivy League. That's my album, Modern Ops. Right, right, right. He didn't know he bought that Wharton. Hold on, hold on. Here it is again. This is playing to stupid. Go to my iPad. So all I got to say

is if you love America mamas don't let your babies grow up to go to Harvard or Stanford Law School. Wow. Right there. No, but to Greg's point, they are. And Texas A&M is a major research university. And not only that, Texas A&M is an extremely conservative university. Yes.

And I'm sitting there going, fool. But here's the deal. And here's the deal. And here's the piece. Them same broke white people, I'm telling you, when they challenged the Hopwood decision, you know how the top 10% got passed in Texas?

The black and Latino legislators got, y'all, I was there, got with the white rural legislators who were upset because the white kids from rural Texas were not being accepted at the University of Texas or at Texas A&M, the two major institutions in Texas. So the black and Latino legislators got with the broke rule white legislators and said, we don't create the top 10 rules. So if your kid graduates in the top 10 percent of your high school class, regardless of the high school, you are automatically admitted to the state institutions. And guess what? It was the suburban legislators who went there and said, no, okay, we're getting too many kids, who changed this top 10% in Texas to limit it to the top,

only like 50% of the class. Oh, no, it changed it. Because what happened was Texas was saying, and we're losing too many of our bright students. No, it was saying we're losing too many of our bright white students who were not in the top 10% and their white parents were saying, well, my child goes to Austin-Westlake,

which is more rigorous than O.D. Wyatt, the black high school in Fort Worth. So it's unfair that the valedictorian O.D. Wyatt automatically get admitted, but my kid doesn't. And that's how they got the rule changed. But the point is, the black and Latino legislators went to the white folks and said, y'all kids ain't getting

in either. That's the point I'm making. You gotta go to them and say, you know y'all broke too. You know y'all hungry too. So that's why, if I'm a Democrat, I ain't bringing no black or Latino person impacted by SNAP.

I'm going to roll up a whole bunch of broke, hungry white people. And I'm going to hold news conferences with them. I'm telling you, that's what you do. Because it's the same thing I've been saying. Look, when affirmative action is always under attack, I'll put it on the right. When I ran a Chicago defendant, I'll put a white woman

on the front page. I said, I need y'all to say something. Because every time affirmative action came under attack, it was black folks who was out front, Latinos right behind us, and the white women were off camera getting most of the contracts. I'm like, no, bring your ass in front of the camera. Stand right here and fight for this because you're getting the most contracts. If you're going to be explicit in talking to us, damn it. Be explicit in talking to them. And that's what I think where Democrats have failed. All right. I want to talk about this next story.

And that is. So before we go to Julius, the report y'all did. Y'all, let me tell you something. federal judge goes off on governor ron desantis and the attorney for the secretary of state in florida when it came to amendment four now y'all remember we talked about it on this show amendment four was passed in florida nearly 70 percent of the folks now i told y'all don't trust them republicans because they down with voter suppression. I told y'all, hashtag we tried to tell you, I told Desmond right here on this show, Desmond, don't trust them. I remember that.

And Desmond came back like, yeah, Rowland, you did tell us that. I said, don't believe they're going to let this thing fly. You can't put almost 1.4 million people with the power to vote in their hand and Republicans going to sit here and just be quiet about it. So what do they do? DeSantis beats Gillum. Sidebar. All you punk asses who didn't

vote. Elections has consequences. I tried to tell y'all this too. So what do they do? Republican legislature passes a law that says, oh, no, no, no, no. Amendment 4 only goes into effect if you could pay all your fines and penalties completely back.

Well, they get sued. They go to federal court. The judge declares that law unconstitutional. So they go into the court. They go into the court, and the judge goes off Judith on the attorneys, just snapping. Then he says, I need to know, I need to,

he told the attorney, I need to hear you say out your mouth that what I ruled was not proper. The attorney for the governor tried to say he could not speak for the governor. He's like, you the attorney for the governor. The judge snapped on them all throughout and accused them of trying to run the clock out because here's the problem. The primary in Florida is in March. That's right.

Those are the games that they're playing in Florida when it comes to the voting power. Right, right. No, this, I mean, this has been an ongoing battle, right? I mean, Amendment 4 was transformational, right? We're talking about a part of the Constitution of Florida that has been in place since right after slavery, right? As an effort to reduce the political power of newly freed black folks. And so here we have someone who was formerly incarcerated leading this effort to allow folks the 1.4 million to vote. Republicans like not so

fast, not so fast. Now voters voted for it, including Republicans, including Republicans, including white people. Right. Like they I mean, they and you had to get more than 60 percent of the vote was not to get it passed. Right. And so it passed. But the deal is that they kept in place that you have to pay fines and fees. Now, if anybody knows anything about Florida, Florida is number one in incarceration. They do very well on fines and fees. As you know, there's whole cities and counties that run off of fines and fees. That money is important to them.

And so they wanted to have everybody pay fines and fees. When I was out doing canvassing for Amendment 4, I met a brother who had been convicted of drug trafficking and had to pay restitution of $250,000. And he said to me, I will never be able to vote. Right. Because I'll

never be able to pay that. And so I think what is... That was a white woman I read a story. She said the same thing. She said, I'm not going to be able to pay back. And so I think what is... That was a white woman I read a story. She said the same thing. She said, I'm not going to be able to pay back half a million dollars. Right. She said, so I shouldn't be able to vote? There's a woman with insurance for it. So, I mean, the thing that comes down, and this is

in many other states, too, is this problem of fines and fees continuing to be a barrier to vote. But the problem here is, though, that the voters knew what they were voting for. What the Republicans are saying is that, no, no, Judge, the voters really didn't quite understand

that what they were voting for. And the federal judge was killing them, saying, really? Right. So this was something that, first of all, you had to get petitions. That was a long process. I mean, it was a 10-year process.

Two, it had to be certified by the Supreme Court for the state. Right. So the federal judge is saying, wait a minute, so you went through this whole process, and now you're trying to say the voters didn't know what they were doing? Right. So the language in Amendment 4 says you have to have completed sentence, and that's where the fight is, because Republicans are saying completed sentence means you paid everything. Right. That's not what the voters thought. The voters thought,

look, once you out, you out. Right. And you get to have your right back. And so this is a you know, this is DeSantis was waiting for this. You know, he was glad to be elected so he could execute on making sure that that one point four million wouldn't make it. And he, of course, danced around this issue during the campaign. That's right. Even after he was elected, said, well, I'll take a look at it, you know, when I become governor. But also but this also was a mistake. And I told Desmond this. They're lawyers.

When this went before the Supreme Court, the Republicans actually laid this trap. During the hearing before the Supreme Court that certified this, the issue of the fines came up, and the lawyers sort of just tried to quickly dismiss it like it wasn't a big deal, but that's exactly

what they're using, and that's why I keep saying you've got to understand what your opponent is doing, the game that they're playing. In the report we're talking about, of course, the Racial Equity Anchor Collaborative, a coalition of national and racial civil rights organizations released this report called We Vote, We Count. This,

Judith, is one of those issues. How Republicans are specifically trying to disenfranchise people of color. We saw the impact in Louisiana. 140,000 formerly incarcerated got the right to vote. John Bel Edwards wins by 40,000 votes in Louisiana. The guy who just, the Democrat who just won in Kentucky

says he's going to restore the voting rights to formerly incarcerated in Kentucky. That's going to have an impact as well. What these Republicans are seeing, and this is where they're stuck, because they're out here championing Van Jones with the CPAC saying, you know, Republicans, y'all leading the effort now on criminal justice reform, but

here's the problem here. Okay, they want to, oh, criminal justice reform, but don't want to deal with this other part. That's right, that's right, because this is about power. There you go. This is about power. Now, I can, you go. We can reduce the population in prison because it's going to save us money. But we're not

too good on that giving you back your right to vote because it's a political equation for them and their political equation is if we do that we lose. Even though they got no problem counting prisoners as a part of congressional gerrymandering as well as the census.

So it's like, oh, we're going to use these prisoners to get money for our state. But, yeah, y'all ain't get that vote when you get out. The 200 percent compromise. You know, it's like a three-fifth. You took one body from one place, took another place, denoted the right to vote, which meant you made two people against that person. Exactly. It's 200%. Not three-fifths.

It really does hawk back to the three-fifths of a person. Yeah. And it hawks back to the way that black people have been basically marginalized in terms of elections. The report is a very good report because you have a list of some of the things that people have done to exclude people from the right to vote. And this goes back to Jim Crow. It goes back to grandfather clauses.

It goes back to... My great-aunt, she died when she was 102. Mississippi. Moss Point, Mississippi. One time, before she was... When she was like in her 40s, she wanted to vote. They made her read some Latin. And she didn't know how to read Latin.

So she didn't get to vote. Neither did they. Right. You're right. But she used to tell us about that, about all the little tricks. So they started, the sisters who were going. Or poll tax, which is what this is.

They started going and studying. Yeah. Well, that's Scepter McClark. That's, yeah, Dorothy Cotton. Right. As if you can beat these people as if there's a common set of rules. That's why I thought this report was so brilliant because

you all enumerate every strategy. And then you went out and traveled around the country. Because the thing is, it's new stuff, right? We're not counting bubbles any longer, right? We're not having, right? We're not doing the Constitution. The Jim Crow stuff has just changed. In fact, go to my iPad. This is from the site.

We vote. We count that or to that point, Judith stores of voter suppression. I was purged from the rolls. First time voter was denied. He didn't realize they said, well, you need a voter registration card and an I.D. There's voter suppression in Cleveland ticketed for putting nonpartisan electoral information on cars. Issues with the address. And look, every time Malik is on here, he wants to deny this. Raynard, that fool, wants to deny this.

But any Republican with a brain like Eugene, Eugene, I'm going to bring you in right here, understands this. The Republican Party, this is by design the strategy of the Republican Party. I don't want to hear that crap that no official vote was taken by the RNC. It is the Republican Party, national and state. It is their strategy to absolutely find legal ways to prevent folks from voting, specifically targeting black people, Latino people, old people and young people. Yeah, I mean, look, up until up until the last election cycle, there was an actual literal

consent decree in place that prevented the RNC from, you know, doing their typical ways to define new creative legal ways to engage in voter suppression. When you couple that with the lack of resources that historically the RNC and many state parties would put towards voter engagement with minority communities. This is what you get. But it's something that's dirty, something that's disgusting. I don't think anyone should lose the right to vote, incarcerated or not. You know, and I don't think purges should ever take place.

You know, if I decide not to vote in a couple of elections because I hate my choices, that's my right. You know, you shouldn't go in and, you in and try to remove me from the voter rolls only for me to find out when I decide to vote in a particular election. But it's a playbook that's been used time and time again. issue is that because of the heightened environment that we're in and the activity around, you know, you know, getting folk engaged and getting folk registered to vote, it's becoming harder and harder for, you know, conservatives and Republicans to, you know, engage in voter suppression and denying people the right to vote. So what happens is this. Republicans understand as long as they don't engage, when young people come out and people of color come out, they lose. You know, so they're terrified in Georgia right now. They're terrified in Arizona.

They're terrified in Texas. You know, they're terrified to see what Amanda Everest can do if she gets a nomination. And so, you know, that's what's going on. Judith, to the point that Eugene made about that consent decree, when Donna Brazile was chair of the Democratic National Committee. I sued under that consent decree.

I sued the RNC under that consent decree. And what happened there was she went to Reince Priebus, who was then chair of the RNC, and said, let's extend this. They would not even answer. So that decree expired after. Well, there's a different story. Actually, both parties, the DNC and the RNC, actually agreed to get

rid of that consent decree. So we started using that consent decree. It's an agreement because the RNC basically had engaged in voter suppression in New Jersey back in the 80s. We actually sued the RNC in 2011 under that

same agreement because they were doing the same thing in Ohio. This was in Ohio. Remember the year that we had the long lines, the next election, we went back and sued them and the DNC and RNC decided they were going to shut down that way of going at the RNC. They agreed upon it so that no outside parties like us could get involved in their mess okay so first of all so the first step the first step they took this was 2000 this 2014 the first step they did was that they said to the court no outside groups can intervene hold up hold up hold up we don't don't that being gonna like speed past the end Let's talk about the dance.

No, no, no, no, no, no. So what you're saying is, and I told y'all this, and as tape, I told y'all, under President Obama, he didn't give a damn about the Democratic National Committee.

Hell no. I told y'all that. Y'all can call it hate, but it's a fact. So what you're saying is, under President Barack Obama, who, the person who is president, who is

over the party, the Democratic National Committee partnered with the Republican National Committee to keep third party groups from being able to sue other parties, because what people don't realize is that the courts have declared that these parties

are private. Right. Right. Right. So these two parties. So we were outside party in 2014. Right. But 2014. Right. We were an outside party and we and we had done this case before Obama was elected. And then they came back and said, no, we're not allowing any other outside parties into this case. Agreed it in front of the court. Then they came back and they agreed with the judge, who now has passed away, to actually do away with the consent decree. So now this was our only way of going at the RNC for in a fast way around voter suppression. Right. And and I'll tell you, I mean, I sat through depositions in our case,

and the DNC folks were clear, like, they were not going to ask questions. So this was before Obama was elected. They were not going to ask questions about voter suppression. They were just there to hear the questions that we asked. So understand that there, you know, we may not have, and this is why outside groups like Advancement Project and others are really important. Right. Because

we're not dealing with the politics of stuff. What we're dealing with is black folks, Latino folks, Asian folks, Native American folks, vote. Can we vote? Who wins is up to the candidates to make the case to be the one to win. So part of what

we did with We Vote, We Count was to make sure that the stories of impacted voters are collected and that people understand that there are new tools for voter suppression, that it's the cutting of polling places, getting rid of polling places like Mount Zion Baptist Church is no longer a polling place all of a sudden. It's also the cutbacks to early voting because black people have started using early voting as a tool, right? We've got souls to the polls. North Carolina was documented. Republicans

in North Carolina specifically said when are black people voting? And they discovered that 70% of African Americans were voting during early election and most of them were voting during the first week. So that's why they whacked the first week. They go back and reduce it to one polling

location in a whole county for the first two or three weeks, and they said, we'll add a few more. And they got busted because they were so dumb, the dumbasses put it in the email. And when they got sued, the federal court... But that's how they get... Native American people, right? masses put it in the email. Right. And when they got sued, the federal court... Right, it's in the email.

Native American people, right? What did they do to Native American people? They had... Was it in Wyoming? Yes, South Dakota. South Dakota. Where South Dakota said, because the Democrat had been elected to Congress, South Dakota they decided that you had to have a street address. Well, people that live on

Standing Rock Res do not have street addresses. So, they wouldn't be able to vote because they're on the street. So, they had to have a street address. Well, people that live on Standing Rock Res do not have street addresses. So they wouldn't be able to vote. So they had to scramble the last second to get them some kind of information that shows a street address. You talked about it on this show. Remember, they had a machine, they were printing IDs. Right, well, IDs, right.

So these are the kinds of voter suppression tactics that we need to be worried about. And tomorrow, I'm sure you know, that the bill, the Voting Rights Advancement Act, will go to the floor in the House. H.R. 4 is going to be on the floor for a vote. We expect that it will pass. Congresswoman Marsha Fudge, I will say, has been incredible around this issue. She had field hearings to bring out issues around voter suppression. We had people's hearings in several states that were just regular voters talking about their problems.

And it's all culminating in this vote tomorrow. And this is going to be a vote to fix what the Supreme Court did to the Voting Rights Act back in 2013. Likely to get passed by the House and watch Mitch McConnell don't even bring it up in the Senate. But this is also why Eugene, Greg, and Julian, why when I listen to these people out here

and let me be as explicit as possible. When I hear these dumb punk asses who talk about not voting, again, when did most of this crap really take off? It was after the Supreme Court decision of Shelby County versus Holder. Before that, it was in 2010. County versus Holder.

Before that, it was in 2010 when folks did not vote in 2010 midterms like they did in 2008 to elect Obama. What happened was I was sitting on the set of CNN. That night,

state legislatures flipped. Republicans took control of a number of gubernatorial mansions. And it was at that point because they saw black and Latino and young and old turnout in 2008. North Carolina, if you read Reverend Barber's book, The Third Reconstruction, North Carolina was at the bottom of voter turnout prior to 2008. They fought like hell to get people to vote, change the laws. Vaulted to the top percentile of voter turnout. Republicans in North Carolina said, oh, hell no, we got to change this to do to depress the vote after Shelby v. Holder in 2013

your report says Alabama Florida Georgia North Carolina North Dakota Ohio South Dakota, Texas immediately began to launch voter suppression in all of these different ways. And the report says witnesses attested to go to my iPad. Witnesses attested to, among other things, having to wait in long lines to cast a ballot, being denied bilingual ballot language assistance, having to restore their registration status after an illegal voter purge, and having to stand up against last-minute changes to polling locations and hours of operation. Additionally, voters have had to adjust to increasingly scarce polling places with ever-changing locations, which presents a huge burden for those without easy access to transportation and with inflexible work schedules.

You know, Roland, you mentioned 2010, the Republicans taking over state houses. That was a pivotal election because it was also a census election. Now we're going to have that again in 2020. As you say, all these people who say they don't want to vote, I don't know what's wrong with them. I truly don't know what's wrong with them. As you said, elections have consequences. Somebody's going to win.

Whether you vote or not, somebody's going to win. You might want to be saying, okay, out of all the stuff out there, if you can't figure out any stuff, you might want to say which one of the two candidates is more likely to protect my right to vote?

And to Dr. Malvo's point is that this election is huge because, well, not just because of who's in the White House, but because it has consequences on redistricting. Redistricting, it will happen. First of all, census is going to happen, then redistricting. And so state legislatures will have people in them who are going to decide how power gets split in this country. That's what redistricting is. It's a pie. We have a power pie, and we figure out how to split it up. But it has implications for decades. That's right.

If they get to draw the lines and get to have the power, they will continue to have that power. And, Judith, we have to add, because Trump is in there and they control the Senate, the federal judges that they are appointing are going to affirm those decisions. And that's their Department of Justice. When y'all are trying to sue, you're going to have to go to a federal judge. If they've been appointed by Trump, they're going to qualify. They're going to sit there and say they're going to sit there and say no. And so that's why voting impacts that.

That's because whoever wins the White House, whoever controls the Senate controls the federal bench. Final comment, Greg, Julianne, you know, before I got to go to my next guest, this open question. I mean, every election we've talking about, I don't ever say that they won an election. They've stolen them. Remember 2004 with Kerry? There was a black attorney, Secretary of State in Ohio, Ken Blackwell. A real piece of work. Now, they stole the federal

election of 2016. Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Detroit, Michigan. They got it close enough to steal through voter suppression. Stacey Abrams should be the governor. And today, Brian Kemp, who just appointed another racist to fill the seat that just got vacated in the Senate by retirement, they suppressed the vote. And DeSantis in Florida is not the legitimate governor. They suppressed the vote. They didn't even count all the votes.

Everything you've written in this report led to two governors directly to the last legislature and the president of the United States. These are stolen elections. Voter suppression. And you've had Greg Palast on here many times. this report led to two governors directly to the last legislature and the president of the United States. These are stolen elections, voter suppression, and you've had Greg Palast on here many times. But this report, really, we really have to focus on it. This is a war, and we're not prepared to fight. Besides, that's right. Julianne, go ahead. Go ahead.

Stolen elections are not new. Elections have been stolen I don't know how long. If you look at 1898, go back in the late 19th century, and black people got the right to vote and were voting. Not only did they suppress the election by changing laws, in Wilmington, North Carolina, they basically killed people. They did. Black people and white progressives were elected. White boys went into a meeting with guns and said,

Y'all got to resign. Took all the black people who were prominent, put them on a train, one-way ticket, said, y'all up out of here. And killed a bunch of others. 1898. It was a racial pogrom. That's exactly right.

One report says they only killed 60 people. There's another story that says the Wilmington River ran blood. We have taken a city to book by my former president of Tennessee State, H. Leon Prather. That's right. Judith?

Yeah. So really want people to read this report, We Vote, We Count. You can find it on advancementproject.org website. Or wevotewecount.org. Yes, or wevotewecount.org. Because this is our fight. This is our fight of 2020 and beyond. And we really need folks to understand the mechanisms that they're using,

because it seems like a little thing, but those little things have serious consequences. Judith Brown-Dianas, thanks a bunch. Thank you. Wow. Before the Civil War, colonizers and black laws Thank you. Before the Civil War, colonizers and black laws threatened to deport former slaves born in the United States. African-American activists argued that citizenship was their birthright.

Former slaves studied law, secured allies, and conducted themselves like citizens, establishing their status through local everyday claims. As part of our continuing series, 1619 to 2019, Still Seeking Freedom, we're talking with Martha Jones, Society of Black Alumni Presidential Professor and Professor of History at Johns Hopkins University about birthright citizenship. Certainly glad to have you with us, Martha. This is relevant because we have seen in the last few years, especially with Trump in the White House, how Republicans have been targeting

birthright citizenship, how they want to change the laws because historically, how black folks were able to demand rights based upon that. And now what they really want to do is limit this really to white folks from other countries. So this is a long history of how immigration laws and this birthright citizenship clause has been used against people of color? The story really begins with the ways in which black Americans are looking to, in a sense, forestall precisely what we see happening in our own time,

which is to say, as you said, colonization, black laws, are all aimed at, in essence, deporting, or in 19th century parlance, removing black Americans from the country. And they come to this idea, this concept, this principle of birthright as a way to forestall their removal. Theirs is the first chapter, but only the first chapter in the ways in which the American state has used race and racism to attempt to curtail or to narrow who is a citizen who can belong. And so what should we know about this history? What you have laid out in its impact

on African Americans seeking freedom in this country? This is a story from which we learn that there's nothing new in the United States about communities of color facing threats, living under the specter of deportation. We don't have to imagine what the world is like without birthright citizenship, because for the first decades in this nation, all the way through to the Civil War, black Americans live without that protection, and hence subject to the arbitrary whims of the state, of white supremacy, and of a nation that really wants to ensure that its future is a white republic.

So when we see today lawmakers chipping away at birthright citizenship, threatening birthright citizenship, and we've heard that, whether it's from the White House or from Congress, when we hear that, we need to know that that's an old story. That's an old tactic. And we need to, in my view, double down on birthright as an important, not a thorough and not the only bulwark, but an important bulwark against the force of racism in our regime of national belonging.

And so when you see what is happening right now, this is what I say is absolutely, truly about white supremacy. This is Stephen Miller. This is Donald Trump. These are these individuals who see where we're going. We're 24 years away from America becoming a nation majority of people of color. We're seeing the few the birth birth rate in this country. Whites is extremely low. We see that in 17 states in this country, the annual white death rate is higher than the annual white birth rate. This is about maintaining America as a white country? Birthright citizenship is in 1868 an intervention, right, in that long history of white supremacy by transforming four and a half million black

Americans, millions of them having been enslaved, into citizens. Yes. But the thing I want to say to you about your story is that, in fact, this is a 21st century problem that even predates the Trump administration. The noise around challenging, chipping away at, doing away with birthright citizenship really predates the Trump administration. Every year since 2009, Congress has had before it what's termed the Birthright Citizenship Act, which would exempt the children of unauthorized immigrants from birthright citizenship. So we have been living with the threat of this regime for a long time. But of course, you're correct that since President Trump's election, now this is an idea that really has traction. And we're seeing it not yet in the form of an executive order, not yet in the form of an act of Congress. But we know that even today

in our midst, there are our friends, our neighbors, our co-workers who carry with them literally reams of paper knowing that they may be arbitrarily stopped, arbitrarily confronted by immigration officers and subject to detention as they try and prove the fact of their birth in the United States. So this era has arrived and we need to be vigilant about the ways in which it is beginning by targeting some of the most vulnerable Americans. Question, Julianne. But we don't know where it ends. Right.

Julianne, go ahead. What we've seen with immigration laws is a shrinking of the people of color coming in and an expansion of the white people. I forget the congressman who actually said any Irish person who had a high school diploma could come in. But meanwhile, for people from the African continent, from Latin America, had to have more credentials to come in. Do you see much of that in terms of the birthright citizenship? Absolutely, because part of the story of the early 19th century is about the kind of discretion that low-level officials enjoy and exercise every day. By the time we get to the second half of the 19th century, this is a story that will center on the children of Chinese immigrants. And there, what we know is that the citizenship of those people is not challenged by the Supreme Court

or by the president. It is port officials in San Francisco who determined for themselves that they think Chinese Americans born in the U.S. are not citizens and are going to detain them, harass them, and jail them. And they will have to go to the U.S. Supreme Court to have their citizenship affirmed. So there is an important resonance. And the lesson is that this kind of regime begins perhaps not at the top, but at the bottom. Greg, Professor Jones, first of all, thank you for your work. It's quite fortuitous that your long years of research and study came out in the form of the book, just as this became something that's in the national conversation. So, you know, ancestors

don't make any mistakes. That's very important. So thank you. And I'm glad you brought up that late 19th century, Chinese Exclusion Act, and then into the 20th century, trying who's white, who's not white. You know, I love this phrase that you've introduced, regime of national belonging. Thinking about Stephen Miller, who of course was on Jeff Sessions' staff before he transitioned to the next white supremacist, and Sessions, who's now trying to come back into the federal legislature from Alabama and their obsession with the Immigration and Nationalization Act of 1965. How do you think through our commitments as non-white people in a country where this regime of national belonging seems to sit at the center of our aspirations? In other words, I guess what I'm asking is, you've done so much work on this question

of birthright citizenship. How do you think through us coming up with definitions of national belonging that can displace whiteness and maybe ultimately even citizenship as the standard for determining our humanity in this project? I don't know if that makes any sense. It's just difficult for us to think, because we've got black people and brown people who will side with these white supremacists because citizenship for them means national belonging. Yes. So I think that there are two things. You know, the people I write about are really in

many ways improvisational on this, which is to say that they read the Constitution and the language in the Constitution, but they are also cognizant, for example, of the ways in which they believe their labor, much of it unrequited labor, entitles them to unqualified national belonging. They turn to military service, and many of them have served their fathers in the American Revolutionary Era themselves in the War of 1812. And they make the argument that military service should also be a basis for national belonging. And at the same time, I think you're right that in some sense, the people I write about are trying to solve an urgent problem. They are not political philosophers, if I could say that. They are practical. The show is called Unfiltered. You can say it.

They are practical men and women who are facing a brutal regime and the real threat of being forcibly removed from the United States. And they are prepared to make all of them in another day and in another time great lawyers. They're prepared to make the argument that will stick. And it turns out in the 19th century, the argument that sticks is one about the Constitution and birthright. And they go with that. In our own time, I don't think that birthright is the answer. And that's what part I take from Dr. Carr's comment,

that birthright isn't enough. And we live in an era when we have fully available to us a human rights vision that would say, for example, family relations should be part of a regime of rights of human dignity and so as we see families separated at the border as we see children detained separate from their parents we understand that even 19th century black Americans understood the pain and the indignity of a state that would interfere with the intimacy of family relations.

So there's a great deal more available to us when we pull back, I think, and begin to think about a framework like human rights, like human dignity, which may indeed include a regime that is grounded in labor, that is grounded in birth, that is grounded in military service. But it may expand to many other qualifiers as well. Eugene, you have a question? Yes. So, you know, there's a big movement now to just end birthright citizenship. How do you see that playing into the endgame here?

I don't think it's a movement to end birthright citizenship, frankly. right is not done away with, but when it is limited by excluding the children of unauthorized immigrants, we will say, well, maybe they weren't quite citizens in the way that I am born in New York City. That's right. And that is what's going on, right? We are being conditioned. No one is going to countenance or get away with, if you will, abrogating the 14th Amendment. But the narrowing of the interpretation of that amendment

is what this moment is about. And they're coming for the children of unauthorized immigrants, first and foremost. Martha Jones, Society of Black Alumni, Presidential Professor and Professor of History at Johns Hopkins University. We appreciate it. Thanks a lot. Thanks so much.

All right, folks, got to go to break. We come back. Lord, y'all, impeachment. Speaker Nancy Pelosi makes it perfectly claim, Don Trump, you effed up. And it's time for you to pay the price. You're watching Roller Martin Unfiltered back Like, share, and 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 Roland 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 fam it's the holiday season this is when you think about spending time with your family and friends this is also when you count your blessings and support those less fortunate. This year, become 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 can't pay their bail. Think about it.

If you are arrested for any minor offense and you go to jail, if you don't have the money, you've you gotta stay there until a court date is scheduled. That could be weeks, that could be days, weeks or even months. Some black folks have been there, were there for years. Simply put, America's bail system is broken for people of color. Freedom should be free, folks.

That's why the Ebony Foundation has partnered with The Bail Project and is sponsoring the Home by the Holiday campaign. The Bail Project has helped bail out thousands of people over the years and with your help, they plan to bail out a thousand people by New Year's Day. What they want you to do is make a donation anywhere from 25, 50 bucks or more to do so.

Now of course, People of Color represents anywhere from 50 to 90% of the jail population across the country. Now take this out, without bail, nearly 90% of those charged with misdemeanors plead guilty because they're trying to this out. Without bail, nearly 90% of those charged with misdemeanors plead guilty because they're trying to get out. However, when bail is paid, less than 2% receive a jail sentence. Sometimes justice just needs us. If you want to donate, folks, and help the Ebony Foundation, go to homebytheholiday.com.

That's homebytheholiday.com. All right, folks. by the holiday dot com. Our folks this morning, Nancy Pelosi, speaker of the House, took to the cameras and made it perfectly clear. Donald Trump, he has committed committed impeachable offenses. It's time for him to be held accountable. In America, no one is above the law. Over the past few weeks, through the Intelligence Committee, working with

the Foreign Affairs and Oversight Committees, the American people have heard the testimony of truly patriotic career public servants, distinguished diplomats and decorated war heroes, some of the president's own appointees. The facts are uncontested. The president abused his power for his own personal political benefit at the Judiciary Committee, the American people heard testimony from leading American constitutional scholars who illuminated without a doubt that the president's actions are a profound violation of the public trust. The president's actions have seriously violated the Constitution, especially when he says and acts upon the belief,

Article II says I can do whatever I want. No, his wrongdoing strikes at the very heart of our Constitution, a separation of powers, three co-equal branches, each a check and balance on the other, a republic if we can keep it, said Benjamin Bracken. Our democracy is what is at stake. The president leaves us no choice but to act because he is trying to corrupt once again the election for his own benefit. The president has engaged in abuse of power, undermining our national security and jeopardizing the integrity of our elections. His actions are in defiance of the vision of our founders and the oath of office that he takes to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Sadly,

but with confidence and humility, with allegiance to our founders, and a heart full of love for America. Today, I am asking our chairman to proceed with articles of impeachment. I commend our committee chairs and our members for their somber approach to actions which the president had not made necessary. In signing the Declaration of Independence, our founders invoked a firm reliance on divine providence. Democrats, too, are prayerful, and we will proceed in a manner worthy of our oath of office to support and defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, foreign

and domestic. So help us, God. Eugene Craig, I want to go to you on this one here. If you listen to Republicans, you listen to most of the folks on the Fox News, they are defending Donald Trump at every turn. They are protecting every lie. They are protecting the legal stuff this man has done. But you got folks like Judge Napolitano, who has said, bottom line is, they've got articles of impeachment. Ken Starr said on the Fox News, it's right there.

What is amazing to me is to listen to Republicans try to say, no, because this is just a hoax. It's not right. No, he was really worried about corruption. It's just a damn lie. It is. It is. The thing is this, right? Your current Republican

party lives with Donald Trump and dies with Donald Trump. Judge DePaul's out in a unique situation where he's a former Supreme Court justice for the state of New Jersey. You know, Ken Starr, you know, somebody that,

you know, he was the lead prosecutor for the Clinton impeachment. And so, you know, these are folks that are, that come with actual weight and substance behind them and also have the, you know,

they also have the independence, not privilege, but the privilege of independence from Donald Trump. Whereas all the rest of these folks, they're worried about a primary even though most of their filing deadlines have passed or are coming up. They're worried about angering Team Trump. They're worried about being cut off from things. And the thing is this. What's right is right. what's wrong is wrong. And I think this is going to define the GOP

for the next decade. This is the thing, Greg, that has to happen. There are people out there who are saying, you know what, Democrats, you're making a mistake. You're guaranteeing don't trump an election. I've heard a lot of people

say that. But the reality is this here. If you have to do something to deal with this man because he has no morals. None. He has no values. That's right. He has no principles. There is no such thing as boundaries. That's right. There's no such thing as a bottom. That's right. It has no principles. There is no such thing as boundaries. There's

no such thing as a bottom. It doesn't exist. And so, he will do more and it will continue. Remember, it was Nancy Pelosi who said Trump is going to impeach himself. And folks are like, what the hell is he talking about? Because remember, initially

it was the election, asking Russia, hey hey find those emails that's breaking the law asking a foreign entity to assist in the election then we of course had the muller report firing comey obstructing justice sending court lewandowski over there to fire him trying to get down again he obstructed justice then you have the obstruction of justice no we ain't complying with no subpoenas. Today, his lawyers have gone to the Supreme Court saying, I should not have to turn over my tax records to Congress, even though the law says.

The law, brother. The law says that Congress can request the tax records of any American. That's right. That's the law. He is saying, hell no. right that's the law he is saying hell no i'm above the law there you go and so in this case here you have democrats who essentially are saying if we don't do this this man will do whatever is required to stay there. That's right. And so they really have no choice in all this other bullshit of, well, no, the Senate will never convict. Okay. In the history of the United States, this is only the fourth time we've gone down this road. That's right. And in the other

two occasions, the person wasn't convicted, but it doesn't mean that you still don't do it. That's right. Well, Roland, you put your finger right on it. And I doubt there's another news outlet in this country who has been talking about potential impeachment as long as you have. Because I remember sitting next to Representative Al Green right on your show as you had him make the case very early on.

And of course, Al Green took to the floor of the federal legislature to say that he thought he why weren't there any non-white or people of color legal experts testifying could have had all of our sisters who come on the show consistently but but you've put your finger right on it this is really a test is whether or not this experiment we call the United States of America is real or imaginary. Of course, Nancy Pelosi has no choice. No congressperson has a choice.

This man has, let's take aside all the litanies you put out, everything you just laid out except one thing, the obstruction of justice. The minute you say that I'm not going to respond to a subpoena and present. Any subpoena. any subpoena, Congress has the sole power, the sole power. The minute you do that, now Pelosi has political choice. Do you send the Capitol Police to arrest this scuffed up guy out of

South Carolina, Mick Mulvaney? Do you send the Capitol Police to arrest these people? No. So that's the political choice, and that's where I think we've got the real challenge here. Clearly, this man has broken the law. There's no doubt. But he is above the law as long as we allow him to be above the law. That's the issue. Julianne, this was a tweet. There were two tweets that David Axelrod sent out today that I have to call out. Go to my iPad.

For those who want to skip ahead, the House will impeach POTUS by the end of the year because what he did warrants it. The Senate will hold a trial in January, but not convict, regardless of evidence, because he has absolute control of his party, and then we will move on. His second tweet was, impeachment will eclipse all for the next seven weeks and then it will recede and other events will supersede it as the election year moves on.

Here's the problem I have with that. One, is it correct? Yes. problem I have with that is that far too many TV anchors and commentators and columnists and political contributors, they have treated this like it's a game. Mm-hmm. That's right.

They have reduced this thing to this, look, what's the big deal? I mean, okay, look, sin is not gonna convict, why are you wasting your time? The problem here is, then you hear, of course, Republicans say, well, you've got to have

overwhelming bipartisan support, and it doesn't exist, so therefore you shouldn't do it. But first of all, impeachment design is a political process. It's not a criminal process. design is a political process. Yes, that's right. Not a criminal process.

It's a political process. The issue here, as I said, if you don't go down this path, what you're saying to Donald Trump and any future president, you can do whatever the hell you want. That's right. That's exactly it. You can lie. You can blow us off. You can do whatever the hell you want. That's right. That's exactly it. You can lie. You can blow us off.

You can cheat. You can do whatever. You have absolutely no need to listen to anybody. There's no such thing as three branches of government. That's right, brother. We don't even exist. So just go ahead on, King President. They have no choice

but to do it because it is the right thing, the honorable thing, and it is the proper thing and the constitutional thing to do. And the necessary thing to do. They must do it. He has broken so many laws. He has been so...

The whole thing about ignoring a subpoena. Nobody does that. But he has done, as I said, whatever he wants to. King Trump. So Nancy Pelosi... Two people... Well, Nancy Pelosi has been very considered about this. She didn't jump on the impeachment bandwagon right away.

Congressman Al Green, on the other hand, I think as soon as he got there... Day one. He said he wanted to impeach. Now, I think that was a little rushed. But I think that... The Muslim ban. Well, no, no, no, but remember,

he said from day one, impeachment... See, this is... It wasn't rushed. Here's why. No, break it down. Break it down. It was... Representative Al Green said it was based upon his election conduct. Remember, the moment Trump stood at that podium and said, Russia, if you're listening,

that's right, go get those 30,000 emails. He broke the law. So, Green was absolutely correct. The law says you cannot ask for a foreign help in an election. That's it. So when people

criticize him and Congresswoman Maxine Waters and the freshman members of Congress, Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Yama Pressley, Rashida Tlaib, that's why they were calling for it. So he actually did it before he became president and continued it

after becoming president. And now it's just like that, that, Comey, now Ukraine, that's what it's all about. And if it's a patriot, call them patriots. That's right. They are patriots. That's right. If there's such a thing. Basically, if the Constitution has any meaning at all, he needs to be impeached.

Come on down. It doesn't matter whether the Senate fails to convict him. It really doesn't. He, first of all, goes down in history as one of four presidents who's been impeached. I'm sure he doesn't care, but he goes down in history for that. Secondly, the next president who tries to mess like that knows

that Congress is not going to put up with that. Well, no, Dr. Balboa, actually, you made a very important point, and this is where Jim Jordan, who, of course, has no shame, you know, people scrying to him because they're being sexually abused at Ohio State, and he turns a blind eye. This is where Louie Gohmert, this is where that fool out of Georgia that got blistered by the law professor from Stanford yesterday,

this is where they all are clear. But what you're articulating presumes there's a United States. They know. No, no, seriously. Or that there's a standard of truth that binds to it. Their strategy now is to say, we don't care about truth. We don't care. This is why I say, this is the party of

we have the votes and we will run this to the wheels. No, really. Their defense of Trump is, yeah, he did it, but we're with him. And so as long as we kind of make this about the truth and the Constitution and standards, we are playing into the hands

of people who have now had a strategy of we don't care about nothing but winning. And Russia, we're with Russia too if we win. And Julian, the mistake that we also make, again, I don't care if you're a Democrat or Republican, the mistake that we make on the Clinton deal, somebody posted this on YouTube, Clinton was impeached for sex.

No. It's not true. He was impeached for perjury. That's right. He lied. Right. That's why he was impeached. Now, he lied about sex,

but he lied. But he lied. So the point there is, you as the president of the United States, you do not have the right to lie to Congress. You must cooperate with Congress. Unless you don't. Even Richard Nixon.

I mean, even Richard Nixon cooperated with Congress. Now, it took him a while, but he did cooperate. Why did he die? Why do you think he did? Do you think he cooperated with Congress because ultimately he believed in something beyond his personal power grade? Who? Like the United States? Nixon.

No, no, no. Remember, he cooperated with Congress to a certain extent. When he said, I will not turn over my tapes. That's right. Then Congress said, oh, no, we will compel you. Then he sued the Supreme Court unanimously and said, no, hell no, you got to turn the tapes over. And he knew the game was over and resigned.

Because he knew the moment he turned those tapes over... You know, it's interesting, Roland, because remember in that whole Saturday Night Massacre business, eventually he went through until he found an attorney general and people in the Department of Justice who would back him. In that conversation were William Rehnquist and Robert Bork. Now, Rehnquist's old law clerk is the Supreme Court Chief Justice, John Roberts.

John Roberts is going to have a decision to make. First of all, they should not be in court trying to argue that these subpoenas should stick. Why? These are three separate branches of government. The judiciary has nothing to do with this legislative thing. John Roberts is going to have to make a decision about this. As a matter of fact, and watch this here, watch this, folks.

Watch to see if the Supreme Court has the guts to stand up for the integrity of the court. If the Supreme Court actually was guts to stand up for the integrity of the court. That's right. If the Supreme Court actually was a body of integrity, it would be a unanimous 9-0 decision. That is exactly right. If Trump must

listen and must comply for Congress, because that's the law. That's exactly right. If, I need y'all to hear me. You'll see it before that. Eugene, that's the piece. You'll see it before that when there's a tax return issue. No, no, no, that's what I'm talking about. What I'm talking about is, I'm talking about on the tax return

deal, if the Supreme Court does not be, if they are not unanimous, that means that this Supreme Court, this conservative-leaning Supreme Court has decided we are a political body

and not a nonpartisan judicial body. That's it. You know, the most recent... Julianne, then Eugene, then I gotta go to two more real things before I go, because I'm over time. Go. These Republicans testified that they were strict constructionists, that they

believed the Constitution as it was written. So now we're seeing that they lied. So, you know, John Roberts has tended to be, I won't say a little left, he has tended to hew with the Constitution. But I don't believe that Brett Kavanaugh will. See, I get that. That's a 5-4 decision.

What I'm saying is, that's 5-4. So, right, John Roberts should do that because the Chief Justice, Eugene, is supposed to respect and protect the integrity of the court. What I'm saying is this should be 9-0. Alito. No question. Gorsuch. That's right. Kavanaugh. That's right. Clarence Thomas. It should be unanimous that a president must comply with a congressional subpoena. He could deny it. Eugene, your final comment.

Yeah, I think you're probably going to see seven, too. I think Roberts probably forced him to comply. And I think Gorsuch and Kavanaugh probably side with the protecting the court. Alito and Thomas are just too political. I mean, Jeannie Thomas, Clarence Thomas's wife, is one of the biggest Republican activists you ever come across. You got it. All right, folks. Also, real quick here. After Nancy Pelosi had a news conference,

a reporter from Sinclair Broadcasting, a conservative media outlet, used to be at Fox News, Jane Rosen, who had resigned over sexual harassment allegations. Let's just say he brought the Baltimore out in Nancy Pelosi. Do you hate the president, Madam Speaker? I don't hate anybody. Representative Collins, the reason I ask. You don't hate anybody, not anybody in the world. You don't accuse me.

I did not accuse you. You did. I asked a question. Representative Collins yesterday suggested that the Democrats are doing this simply because they don't like the guy. I have nothing to do with that. I think it's an important point. I think the president is a coward when it comes to helping our kids who are afraid of

gun violence. I think he is cruel when he doesn't deal with helping our dreamers, of which we're very proud. I think he's in denial about the climate crisis. However, that's about the election. This is about the election. Take it up in the election. This is about the Constitution of the United States

and the facts that lead to the president's violation of his oath of office. And as a Catholic, I resent your using the word hate in a sentence that addresses me. I don't hate anyone. I was raised in a way that is a heart full of love and always prayed for the president. And I still pray for the president. I pray for the president all the time. So don't mess with me when it comes to words like that. And then walk the hell off. That's called bike drop. Yes, sir. All right, y'all, real quick. Today, the U.S. Senate passed the FUTURE Act,

which will renew funding for HBCUs that laps on September 30th. The FUTURE Act will give $255 million in federal funding for HBCUs and minority-serving institutions. This includes five HBCUs in Virginia. The move is being applauded by the Thurgood Marshall College Fund,

the nation's largest organization exclusively representing the black college community. All right, before we go, y'all know what time it is. No charcoal grills are allowed. I'm white. I got you, girl. Illegally selling water without a permit. On my property.

Whoa! Hey! Hey, grandpa! Give me your eyes! You don't live here. I'm uncomfortable. property all right folks this ignorant ass white woman lost her mind in montgomery county maryland she was that close to getting her ass whooped rotate white people are crazy as fuck can you see her do'all see her? Do y'all really see her?

Like, so if I beat her ass, then what? If I knock her ass, you have three seconds to get out of my way. I'm going to beat the shit out of you. Move out of the way. One. Nana, please. Tell her to move. I'm going to whoop your grandmother's ass.

Two. Can you please move, please? Nana, please. Can you move, ma'am? No, I'm not. I'm not hitting you in this building. Who are you talking to on that phone? No, I'm not. I'm not hitting you in this building. Who are you talking to on that phone?

Is it a resident of this building? Is it a resident of this building? Here's an old ass woman, guys. Tell your nana to get her ass out of the way. Nana, please. Get the fuck out of the way, dumb bitch. Fuck you, bitch. Are you going to rob somebody? Do you hear her?

You need to get your hair done this bitch is crazy as fuck this bitch right here she just stood in the middle and hood like held me then she said i'm gonna go rob somebody you racist dirty nasty ass Okay. Here's what I'm still just... She was preventing her from leaving. That's false imprisonment. I'm telling y'all. I'm telling y'all. Luckily, that sister was holding the phone. I think, Roland, that this might be the closest you've come

in this beautiful segment you do all the time. Was that the closest you've come in the ones you've shown to get the ass beat? No, no, no. The one, no, that actually happened. What happened was a white homeless dude rolled up on a brother who worked at FedEx in Seattle and accosted the brother. The brother knocked his ass out

and the white boy died. No, no, he had some condition or whatever, but the brother knocked his ass out cold. He died. Eugene, I'm telling you, I keep telling it. They ain't press charges against him because he was like, yo, he said self-defense. But this white woman

is blocking the sister from leaving a building where she lives. You should have knocked her out. I'm at the point, knock her out. Look, it's... It wouldn't be beyond just words, right? That's actual physical contact. I'm no lawyer, but I could get to play one

on this show on occasion. So that, you know, looks like it would, you know, be assault in Maryland, probably in a second degree. And so I think, you know, you probably, you know, there's no self-defense law in Maryland, but I think there's a good argument that could be made so I think, you know, you probably, you know, there's no self-defense law in Maryland,

but I think there's a good argument that could be made that, hey, you know, that was my only way out. Julian, when you had the white boy who worked at YouTube

or Google, one of them, I remember his kid was like, daddy, daddy, let's go. Same thing. The grandchild was like, come on.

And that's why she's like, you better listen to your grandchild. I mean, the little children are seeing, hey, same thing. The grandchild was like, come on. And that's why she's like, you better listen to your grandchild. I mean, the little children are seeing, hey, your old ass racist, let him go.

The beauty of this is that she's a racist, you know what, but her grandchild gets it. So as he grows up, perhaps he'll keep that consciousness. If I was that, well, I'm too old. I was going to say, if I was that, since I'd be a butt too. Your ass, you would have done it. Don't even try to front at well I'm too old I was gonna say if I was that since I'd be about to but um no yo ass you would have done it don't even try to front about too old you know damn well you would have done that you know damn well Greg I just I keep brother I'm telling you I just I

keep telling people brother yo black people are not going to continue to be I'm gonna pray for you and be nice and be calm. I'm telling you, somebody, I'm warning y'all, somebody's white going to get killed. They're going to get their ass whooped, beat down viciously, and people are going to be saying, why'd you have to do that? Because we have done this now, I swear, 20, 30 times.

That's crazy. No, no. And for viewers around the country and around the world who will be watching this, Montgomery County, that's really D.C. I mean, that's Silver Spring Silver Spring Maryland all right trying to figure out whether that because you know that's right across the DC line we could throw a rock and hit it from here it's more than mine you know question it really is so no but the point you've been raising over and over again rolling in this space yeah somebody they're gonna try to write one in a minute and that girl was smiling the whole time the young sister she was In other words, you could tell that she had managed it,

but if she had turned around, and that grandbaby was trying to save her grandbaby. Nana, Nana, please. I'm telling y'all, I'm telling y'all, y'all can tell these white folks, stop detaining black people. Stop blocking people from leaving their own damn building. Stop asking them who they visiting.

Stop asking them, do you live here taking the trash out? The one we're going to show you tomorrow is the white woman who jailed a brother delivering packages. I'm telling y'all. He was UPS or something? Don't matter. In a uniform. No.

Delivering packages. Come on, man. And backed off when the white UPS guy said, no, he worked with me. I'm trying to tell y'all, I am not condoning it. She would never get another package again. I am not condoning it, but I'm trying to tell y'all, black people are not going to play this.

No. And I'm just warning y'all right now. So when it happens, y'all going to say, Roland, you called it. All right, folks, we appreciate it. Everybody that was on the show, Eugene, thanks a bunch. Greg, thanks a bunch. folks, we appreciate it. Everybody that was on the show, Eugene, thanks a bunch. Greg, thanks a bunch. Julian, we appreciate it. Folks,

please, this is why you gotta support this show. Because we're dealing with stuff these networks don't wanna talk about. I'll tell you, I worked at CNN. These networks are gonna deal with voter suppression in October of 2020. After the deadlines have already passed,

after people have already voted early. I'm trying to tell y'all, I told them when I was there, I'm like, yo, why are we discussing this in late 2012? I won the NABJ Journalist of the Year Award in 2013 because of my coverage for voter suppression. I'm telling y'all, we

cannot wait, and we're not going to do it, so we need you to support this show because we are talking about the stuff. I guarantee you the other networks not going to have Judith Brown, Diana's on for 40 minutes talking about voter suppression. They might have her on for five or six. Might. You might see her on Joanne Reed's show this weekend. But I'm telling you what's going on.

We have to have independent, black-owned media that's accountable to black people. Otherwise, we're going to be sitting here saying, man, we didn't know that. We didn't know that. The sister Marsha Jones, Professor, I've got to tell you right now, you ain't reading that in the New York Times. Nope, and not those questions and answers.

She's been on a lot of these shows, but not this. I'm just trying to tell y right now, you ain't reading that in the New York Times. Nope, and not those questions and answers. She's been on a lot of these shows, but not this. I'm just trying to tell y'all, go to RollerMartUnfiltered.com. There are 2,000 people right now on our YouTube channel. You can get right there on YouTube. Go to RollerMartUnfiltered.com. Join our Bring the Funk fan club. Look, if you got $5, $10, $20, we actually want you to give $50. That's just one time for the whole year.

The 20,000 people, total 20,000 people, we got about 3,000, 3,400 people in our Bring the Funk fan club. If 20,000 of our followers give 50 bucks each, we're completely funded for the next year. Don't even have to have another ad, anything like that. That's what we have to do because trust me, we gonna need our own voice in 2020.

And all the rest of these people out here hollering, talking about they knew black media. No, they not. Yeah, I said it, and I don't give a damn if y'all tweet them. They ain't knew black media, because guess what? They not on five days a week, they not having actual guests on.

All they doing is talking about what somebody else doing. They not traveling around the country, interviewing people, they doing none of that. See, trust me. Like Charlie Wilson said, remember Uncle Charlie said, I'm old school and new school? I'm old school and new school. So when

somebody say, I'm old media, yeah, I'm old black media, but I'm also new black media. Because we understand how all of this works. And I challenge anybody out there who call themselves new black media put your show up against this one and let's see who's actually informing the people go to rollermarkunfilter.com join our bring the funk fan club i'll see y'all tomorrow from nashville tennessee saturday i'll be giving the commencement speech at tennessee

state university the 19th uh commencement speech i'll be giving and the 15th at the HBCU. Y'all know I got a word for them, so I'll see y'all in Nashville tomorrow. Holla! 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. 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 We're on Drugs Podcast Season 2 on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. We asked parents who adopted teens to share their journey. We just kind of knew from the beginning that we were family.

They showcased a sense of love that I never had before. I mean, he's not only my parent, like he's like my best friend. At the end of the day, it's all been worth it. I wouldn't change a thing about our lives. Learn about adopting a teen from foster care. Visit AdoptUSKids.org to learn more. Brought to you by AdoptUSKids, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,

and the Ad Council. This is an iHeart Podcast.