#RolandMartinUnfiltered - SCOTUS discrimination ruling, DOE DEI complaint portal, Trump mass firing ruling, Zelenskyy vs Trump

Episode Date: March 1, 2025

2.28.2025 #RolandMartinUnfiltered: SCOTUS discrimination ruling, DOE DEI complaint portal, Trump mass firing ruling, Zelenskyy and Trump clash We'll discuss a significant U.S. Supreme Court case related to workplace discrimination--Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services. In this case, a woman claims she was demoted due to her sexual orientation. Justice Correspondent Elie Mystal will break it all down for us. We'll speak with a Louisiana activist about the National Park Service's decision to withdraw the Black community from consideration for a historic landmark. Did you see that train wreck of a meeting today between the convict-in-chief and Ukraine's president?  If not, we'll show you what happened and examine how that detrimental meeting could impact our international diplomacy.  The Trump administration launches a "public portal" for reporting alleged "illegal discriminatory practices" in schools. #BlackStarNetwork partner: Fanbasehttps://www.startengine.com/offering/fanbase This Reg A+ offering is made available through StartEngine Primary, LLC, member FINRA/SIPC.  This investment is speculative, illiquid, and involves a high degree of risk, including the possible loss of your entire investment. You should read the Offering Circular (https://bit.ly/3VDPKjD) and Risks (https://bit.ly/3ZQzHl0) related to this offering before investing. Download the #BlackStarNetwork app on iOS, AppleTV, Android, Android TV, Roku, FireTV, SamsungTV and XBox  http://www.blackstarnetwork.com The #BlackStarNetwork is a news reporting platform covered under Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an iHeart Podcast. Hello, I'm Isaac Hayes III, founder and CEO of Fanbase. And right now we're accepting investors in our $17 million round to revolutionize the future of social media. Today, for just $399, you can own 60 shares of stock in Fanbase at $6.65 a share. Go to startengine.com slash fanbase and invest today. While the big platforms have grown too massive and disconnected from their users, Fanbase is building a platform where creators and users truly come first. We've already raised $8.6 million from everyday investors

who believe in this vision, and now you can join them. This is your chance to invest in a social media tech company with over 1 million users that is disrupting media by allowing anyone to reach all of their following and monetize their content from day one. The market is changing, big platforms are failing to serve their users, and Fanbase is stepping up to fill the gap.

Don't wait until it's too late. Invest now. Invest for yourself and your future. Go to startengine.com slash fanbase and own the future of social media. Black Star Network is here. Hold no punches! I'm real revolutionary right now.

Black power! Support this man, Black Media. He makes sure that our stories are told. Thank you for being the voice of Black America, Roland. I love y'all. All momentum we have now, we have to keep this going. The video looks phenomenal. See, there's a difference between Black Star Network and Black-owned media and something like CNN.

You can't be Black-owned media and be scary. It's time to be smart. Bring your eyeballs home. You dig? It's Friday, February 28th, 2025. I'm Dr. Omekongo Dabenga sitting in for Roland Martin. Here's what's coming up on Roland Martin Unfiltered streaming live on the Black Star Network. We'll discuss a significant U.S. Supreme Court case related to workplace discrimination, AIMS versus Ohio Department of Youth Services. In this case, a woman claims she was demoted due to her sexual orientation.

Justice correspondent Ellie Mastal will break it all down for us. We'll speak with a Louisiana activist about the National Park Service's decision to withdraw the Black community from consideration for a historic landmark. Did you see that train wreck of a meeting today between the convict in chief and Ukraine's president? If not, we'll show you what happened and examine how the detrimental meeting could impact our international diplomacy. The Trump administration launches a quote-unquote public portal for reporting alleged quote-unquote illegal discriminatory practices in schools. It's time to bring the funk on Roland Martin Unfiltered, streaming live on the Blackstar Network. Let's go. news to politics with entertainment just for kicks he's rolling it's Uncle

Roro y'all it's rolling Martin rolling with rolling now he's funky, he's fresh he's real the best you know he's rolling Martin

now He's funky, he's fresh, he's real, the best you know, he's rolling, Martel. Martel. Tonight, we're diving into a case before the U.S. Supreme Court that could have major implications for workplace discrimination lawsuits. The case, Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, involves a straight woman, quote-unquote, who claims she was passed over for a promotion and later demoted because of her sexual orientation. The justices seem to be leaning in her favor, questioning whether the legal standard for approving discrimination should be different for majority and minority groups.

This case is unfolding as major corporations and government agencies face growing legal challenges to diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, many sparked by last year's Supreme Court ruling on affirmative action. So what does this mean for workplace protections? And could this ruling shift how discrimination is handled in the courts? To break it all down, we're joined by Ellie Mistal, justice correspondent for The Nation. Ellie, I'm a great fan of your work, and I really want to thank you for being here. So for those who may not fully be aware, can we start with the bigger picture? How significant is this case, and what impact

could it have on future discrimination lawsuits? Okay, so I'm going to kind of answer the question two ways. It's very significant, but I actually don't think it will have a huge impact on the future of anti-discrimination lawsuits, at least if the case kind of stays the way that it seems to be going from the Supreme Court. So that's a little bit complicated. So let me start with the actual lawsuit, all right? Marlene Ames is a straight white woman who claims that she was passed over for promotion when they hired a gay person for the job. And that's it. That's her entire evidence. No pattern or practice or history of racial or sexual discrimination, no larger background issues. It was just she wanted the

job and they gave it to a gay person. So clearly she was looked over because of her heterosexuality. If white fragility could be a Supreme Court case, this is what that case would look like, right? Now, everybody out here knows you can't bring no discrimination lawsuit if all you got is that they promoted a white man ahead of you, right? No black person can do that. If we could, we'd have a lawsuit every Tuesday, right? So we understand that you need to bring more evidence than just they hired some other person that doesn't look like you for the job, or else, again, anti-discrimination lawsuits would be all over the place, right? So, now, Ohio is a very special state in terms of how federal law applies there. It's one of the only states—there are, like, a couple of them—that have this very archaic rule,

judicial rule, for civil rights complaints. Now, obviously, anybody—white, black, brown, green, whatever—can sue for racial or sexual discrimination. But in Ohio and a couple of other states, if you are a member of the majority, which usually means white, in this case means straight, you have to show a background pattern or practice, right? You have a heightened standard of proof to bring a racial discrimination case, right? This makes sense if you think about it, right? If I'm black and I'm suing for racial discrimination case, right? This makes sense if you think about it, right? If I'm black and I'm suing for racial discrimination, I shouldn't have to prove that racism exists, right? We can skip the remedial white history part of the class and just go

straight to my individual complaint, right? But if you're white, since this country does not historically discriminate against you, since this country does not historically discriminate against you, since this country does not historically discriminate against straight people, then you kind of have to prove that there is something else in the history of your organization or institution that points towards discriminatory behavior before you can bring a civil rights case, right? Now, that again, Ohio is one of the very few states that has it, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, which controls federal law, and Ohio is one of the few circuits that still allows for this kind of heightened standard. And so at the Supreme Court, the main thrust of the argument was, well, let's just get rid of that rule.

We already don't have that rule in New York. We already don't have that rule in Florida. Let's get rid of that rule. And then everybody can sue for racial discrimination without having to meet a higher burden, which is, you know, the white people can sue under the same burden as black people. And as I already said, this woman most likely cannot prove a racial discrimination case or a sexual orientation discrimination case based on the evidence that she has, because all she's got is they hired a gay person. So what? That's not normally enough under any standard, much less this heightened standard, right? So in terms of significance, that's what I'm saying. Maybe not so much, because just letting

white people sue under the same rubric that white people can—in Ohio, that white people can sue in Florida doesn't change the landscape too much. What could change the landscape is that there was this other kind of argument just underneath the top-level Supreme Court back and forth. And that's this argument that was put forward by Stephen Miller and his America First legal team that says that anything, any way that any corporation or institution that has a DEI program is de facto discriminatory, facially discriminatory against white folks, right? So think about how that would change the standard, man.

It would change the standard so that now white folks, instead of having to have a heightened standard to prove discrimination, they have no standard at all. They don't have to prove discrimination one bit. They can just say, hey, they have a DEI program and they hired a gay person. So now guess what? I was discriminated against, right? Like that is the argument Stephen Miller wanted the court to adopt. Now, as I listened to the case, I didn't hear five votes for that. Neil Gorsuch was kind of interested. But for the most part, I don't think that they got five votes for that more radical argument. So my thought is that this case will actually come down 9-0 with even the liberal justices, even, you know, Katonji Brown Jackson and Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joining the conservatives to get rid of this one rule, but protecting, you know, but rejecting the larger argument that Stephen Miller was trying bad ruling that's 9-0, it's always important to think, well, what were the liberals actually trying to avoid? Because usually what they were trying to avoid is something much, much worse.

I know a lot of cops and 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. Across the country, cops called this taser the revolution. But not everyone was convinced it was that simple. Cops believed everything that taser told them. From Lava for Good and the team that brought you Bone Valley comes a story about what happened when a multibillion-dollar company dedicated itself to one visionary mission. This is Absolute Season 1, Taser Incorporated. I get right back there and it's bad. It's really, really, really bad. Listen to new episodes of Absolute Season 1, Taser Incorporated,

on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Binge episodes 1, 2, and 3 on May 21st and episodes 4, 5, and 6 on June 4th. Ad-free at Lava for Good Plus on Apple Podcasts. I'm Clayton English. I'm Greg Glod.

And this is season two of the War on Drugs podcast. Yes, sir. We are back. In a big way. In a very big way. Real people, real perspectives. This is kind of star-studded a little bit, man. We got Ricky Williams, NFL player, Heisman Trophy winner.

It's just a compassionate choice to allow players all reasonable means to care for themselves. Music stars Marcus King, John Osborne from Brothers Osborne. We have this misunderstanding of what this quote-unquote drug ban is. Benny the Butcher. Brent Smith from Shinedown. Got B-Real from Cypress Hill. NHL enforcer Riley Cote. Marine Corvette.

MMA fighter Liz Karamush. What we're doing now isn't working and we need to change things. 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. And to hear episodes one week early and ad-free with exclusive content, subscribe to Lava for Good Plus on Apple Podcasts. I think that's what's going to happen here. At least I still have hope that is what's going to happen here. So this is kind of triggering, you know, Michigan, you know, University of Michigan, affirmative action, you know, lawsuits back in the day. My concern is that with something like this, even with, you know, this 9-0 decision, you know, we live in this country right now where everybody's talking about Trump and Republican mandates that so many people across the country

will feel like emboldened to go against anything they see as discriminatory, even if, like with this case, there's no real basis. And they'll cite a 9-0 Supreme Court decision, even though what they actually might be deciding on is not exactly what they would be trying to sue on. Is that accurate? Oh, you're exactly right. The lawsuits are coming. And like I said, if white fragility was a Supreme Court case, this is exactly how it looks like. The lawsuits are coming, and anybody white who ever has to suffer the ignominy of seeing a Black person get a job that they think that they are entitled to, that white person is going to feel emboldened to sue. And it's going to come at any Black person who gets a job, any LGBTQ person who gets a job, like, those lawsuits are coming.

And there might be Supreme Court cases down the road that do adopt Stephen Miller's argument and do de facto, facially rule that any DEI program is a violation of the Civil Rights Act. So those lawsuits are absolutely coming. They wrote it down in Project 2025. Like, they literally said that they want to flood the zone with these kinds of lawsuits. It's going to be incredibly bad going forward in terms of trying to just defend the fact that you have a job while Black, because white folks in this country are going to argue that there is no job that a white person couldn't do better. That's the crux of their argument. So absolutely, these lawsuits are coming, and it's going to happen increasingly as long as we continue to allow Trump and Musk and Republicans to control the White House and Congress and the

Supreme Court. That's the sad reality that we're all living in. And as we're talking about this reality, what are you seeing from your broad experience right now as it relates to basically how they're trying to ending DEI in other spaces, but at the same time basically asking for DEI for themselves? How are you seeing this play out on the colleges, in corporate spaces, in nonprofit organizations? What is the bigger picture that people should be paying attention to as this is happening? Well, remember, no lawyer that I am talking to right now is truly fighting for DEI. DEI is a policy invented by white people to comply with the 14th Amendment and the Civil Rights Acts and their guarantees of equal protection under the law and equal employment opportunity for all, right? Black people are not asking for DEI. Black people are asking to be treated fairly when we apply for jobs.

And it's white folks who are just like, oh, I can't do that. If you leave it up to me, I'm always going to hire Chip, right? Like white people who could not figure out how to hire people on, wait for it, merit, instead of hiring the most meritorious person for jobs, would consistently hire the whitest person for jobs. White people invented DEI to force themselves to hire black people who deserve to have a job, who deserve to have an opportunity, right? So now as white organizations and white companies and white government is trying to take DEI away, I'm not fighting for DEI. What I'm fighting for is the Civil Rights Act. My mother did not march for DEI. She marched for the Civil Rights Act. And so my question is always, well, if you're going to take away DEI, how are you going to still comply with the Civil Rights Act?

How are you going to promise and prove that you are hiring people based on merit, as opposed to based on whiteness? Because every time you take away DEI, what looks like it happens, what looks like what happens is that you only hire people based on their whiteness. So how are you going to solve that? And that is the larger issue here. These organizations and companies that are trying to take away DEI, they're not saying we're going to hire the most meritorious person for these jobs. They're saying we're going to hire white people for these jobs. They're saying that we never really wanted to hire black people in the first place. And so now we can just fire them. Look at what's happening in the federal government. People who happen to be black,

who did not get their jobs through a DEI program or anything like that, who have literal years of experience and expertise in their government jobs are being fired simply because they were black while having the job. The person that I keep trying to remind people of right now is this woman named Gwen Wilcox, who was a commissioner for the National Labor Relations Board, is exceptionally credentialed, has a long professional work history, and she was fired for the crime of being black while in government. There was no anti-DEI argument to support firing Gwen Wilcox. If you want to fire people,

you have to look at their record. You have to show some kind of cause. Gwen Wilcox was just a great commissioner for the NLRB. She was fired because she was black. And that is happening throughout government. That is happening throughout corporate America right now. And that is what I'm fighting against. That's what most lawyers are fighting against, not the government's ability to end a white program that they invented and they called it diversity, inclusion, and investment initiatives. We're talking about following the 1964 Civil Rights Act. No, absolutely. And I want to bring in my panel to get some of their thoughts and questions as well. I want to bring in Raven Schwab-Curtis, content creator and keynote speaker out of

Chicago, Illinois. And I want to bring in Michael Imhotep, the host of the African History Network show out of Detroit. Raven, your question. Yeah. I mean, hi, everyone. My name is Raven Schwamm-Curtis. I'm a content creator and keynote speaker. I think DEI at its core is a modality that is supposed to right a wrong, right? The wrong being the long history of enslavement, the afterlife of slavery in this country and the violence of indigenous genocide and all the other violent moments of erasure and subjugation of communities on the margins. And so to see the right weaponize this term in such a virulent way, such that we're even afraid to name it or associate with it or even hold the value of this modality that,

in its essence, is designed, although imperfectly, to serve us to right these historical wrongs, I think is deeply troubling. And I will continue to fight for something like DEI to exist, because we need some modality, even if we don't call it DEI anymore, to rectify what has been wronged. And I always try to remind people, DEI was invented not just to help Black folks, not just to help, you know, descendants of slavery. You know, I can go back to, you know, my part, some deep ancestor that I had, you know, was liberated when Sherman marched through the South, right? Like, so I can go all the way back there, but DEI isn't there just to help me.

The biggest beneficiaries of DEI in this country are white women, straight up. White women benefited the most from inclusion, from inclusion opportunities. Remember, now we're calling it DEIA because we're also talking about people who are disabled who are getting opportunities to participate in the work in the workforce, like hearing impaired people and handicapped people. What's why are we firing them? Why is somebody getting fired who, again, does their job well simply because they were hired under a program that gives opportunity to people who are hearing impaired or people who are blind? Why are we firing them, Elon? And of course, they never have an answer for that.

They never have a reason for why the disabled American has to be fired or the white woman has to be fired. It's super focused on whenever they talk about who they're firing, they're always talking about us. And that is meant to encourage the, you know, mouth breathing white supremacist Trump voters to be like, yeah, well, you're getting rid of those Negroes. And I like that. Oh, wait, you got what? How did I lose my job? I thought my job was I thought the leopards wouldn't eat my face, is what they're saying now, right? But it's—but that's the whole problem with their approach to this. They're not doing these firings on an individualized, case-by-case basis. They're just taking a

wrecking ball through the whole federal government and focusing it on Black and brown people. Michael, your question. Hey, Ali. Good to see you again. So can you talk about how this case lines up with Project 2025? OK, because when you read Project 2025, we know it talks about attacking diversity, equity, and inclusion, but also we see this with going after discrimination cases against white people. We know there was a federal judge, a Trump-appointed judge, who ruled that the Minority Business

Development Agency had to service white people. We know that we see the revoking of the affirmative action executive order from President Johnson when Trump first came into office the second time. So can you talk about that? And how does that line up with this Title VII argument that this white woman is making from the 1964 Civil Rights Act, when the 1964 Civil Rights Act was largely for African Americans. The deepest desire of Stephen Miller, as was written down in Project 2025, is to put every corporation in America on notice that if they hire Black folks, they could be sued for violating

civil rights. Doesn't matter how qualified the Black person is. Doesn't matter how many letters of recommendation they have. Doesn't matter how well the Black person does their job. The point of Project 2025 is to create an environment where any time you hire a Black person, you have to potentially defend that hiring in court. All right. And now some might be able to defend themselves and some might not. But the point is, is that if you know anything about corporate America, they don't want to get sued every dang day just because they hired somebody. So with Project 25 and with Stephen Miller's America First legal team, the idea here is to

make it so that it is safer for every corporation from Target all the way down to your local mom-and-pop sandwich store. It's safer to hire a white person than to risk hiring a Black person or a Latino person, because if you hire one of those people of color, you might get sued. And do you really want a lawyer up? Is this employee, is this middle manager that you're hiring at your plant in Detroit, is it really worth catching a full-on lawsuit over? That's the calculation they want corporations to make. They don't want to have to sue every corporation. They want corporations to self-censor and to chill and to self-decide that they will not

hire Black folks because it's just too dangerous to do so. Like, that is the 30,000-foot point that they are making. And they're incredibly close to succeeding. And we've already seen them succeed at the college admissions level in the aftermath of SFF v. Harvard, the affirmative action decision, right? We've seen Black enrollment plummet at some of these elite institutions, so-called elite institutions, right? And it's because these institutions are now afraid of admitting Black and Brown students who are meritorious, who do deserve to be there, who can compete in that intellectual environment. Universities are afraid to admit them because they don't want to catch a lawsuit from Stephen Miller. So the plan is working and will continue to work as long as we let these people hold power.

Right. And also, just very quickly, don't forget the lawsuit that Ed Bloom filed against the Fearless Fund using the Civil Rights Act of 1866. And that was designed to scare off the corporations that were partnering with the African-American women that had the grant program for African-American—for women-owned businesses. All this is connected. All this is connected and is detrimental for African-Americans. It's a modern-day Klan movement, and I do not say that hyperbolically. If you think about how the Klan used to operate, if you were a Black-owned business,

the Klan would come and harass you. The Klan would come and make it dangerous for you. If you were a white business that hired an African-American, the Klan would make sure that you paid a price for it. What Stephen Miller is doing is exactly like what the Klan is doing, only he is using lawsuits instead of burning crosses. That is the difference is that he is using the power of the pen as opposed to the power of fire.

But it's the same idea. It's to threaten and intimidate any employer who dares to hire a Black person to put them on notice that their business and their livelihood could be taken away, again, not through insurance fraud and friar, but through a lawsuit that they cannot defend themselves from. Right. Thank you. Ellie, Mr. Dahl, thank you so much for everything that you continue to do. We will continue to be watching. And please continue to keep us all updated. We appreciate you joining us tonight on Roland Martin Unfiltered. ROLAND MARTIN UNFILTERED, The New York Times, Thank you so much for having me. I love being here. NICK SCHIFRIN ELI MISTAL, The New York Times, All right. Peace out. And we will be right

back with more Roland Martin Unfiltered right here on the Black Star Network. YAMICHE ALCINDOR, We begin tonight with the people who are really running the country and unfiltered right here on the Blackstar Network. We begin tonight with the people who are really running the country right now. Trump is often wrong and misleading about a lot of things, but especially about history. Donald Trump falling in line with President Elon Musk. In the wake of the unsettling news that MSNBC has canceled Joy Ann Reith's primetime show, The Readout, Roland Martin and the Black Star Network would like to extend an invitation to all of the fans of Joy Ann Reeve MSNBC show

to join us every night to watch Roland Martin Unfiltered streaming on the Black Star Network for news, discussion of the issues that matter to you and the latest updates on the twice impeached, criminally convicted felon in chief Donald Trump and his unprecedented assault on democracy as well as co-president Elon Musk takeover of the federal government. The Black Star Network stands with Joy Ann Reid and all folks who understand the power

of black voices in media. We must come together and never forget that information is power. Be sure to watch Roland Martin Unfiltered weeknights, 6 p.m. Eastern at youtube.com forward slash Roland S. Martin or download the Blackstar Network app. This week on the other side of change. Environmental disasters and systemic exploitation. From the wildfires in California to the unexpected snowstorms in the South. We are in the climate collapse. These extreme weather events are becoming more disastrous, and it is Black and brown communities that are often hit first and worst.

Watch us on the Black Star Network, so tune in to the other side of change. -♪ Alone... Bruce Smith, creator and executive producer of Proud Family, Louder and Prouder. You're watching Roland Martin Unkilled. The fight over diversity, equity and inclusion in schools has taken a significant turn. The Trump administration has introduced a

quote-unquote public portal where parents, teachers, and even students can report schools for what they consider quote-unquote illegal discriminatory practices related to race or sex. Wow. Today was the deadline for K-12 schools and universities to comply with warnings that failure. I know a lot of cops and 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. Across the country, cops called this taser the revolution.

But not everyone was convinced it was that simple. Cops believed everything that taser told them. From Lava for Good and the team that brought you Bone Valley comes a story about what happened when a multibillion-dollar company dedicated itself to one visionary mission. This is Absolute Season 1, Taser Incorporated. I get right back there and it's bad. It's really, really, really bad.

Listen to new episodes of Absolute Season 1, Taser Incorporated on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Binge episodes 1, 2, and 3 on May 21st, and episodes 4, 5, and 6 on June 4th. Ad-free at Lava for Good Plus on Apple Podcasts. I'm Clayton English. I'm Greg Lott. And this is season 2 of the War on Drugs podcast.

We are back. In a big way. In a very big way. Real people, real perspectives. This is kind of star-studded a little bit, man. We got Ricky Williams, NFL player, Heisman Trophy winner. It's just a compassionate choice

to allow players all reasonable means to care for themselves. Music stars Marcus King, John Osborne from Brothers Osborne. We have this misunderstanding of what this quote-unquote drug thing is. Benny the Butcher. Brent Smith from Brothers Osborne. We have this misunderstanding of what this quote-unquote drug thing is. Benny the Butcher. Brent Smith from Shinedown.

We got B-Real from Cypress Hill. NHL enforcer Riley Cote. Marine Corvette. MMA fighter Liz Karamush. What we're doing now isn't working and we need to change things. Stories matter and it brings a face to them. It makes it real. It really does. It makes it real. Listen to 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. And to hear episodes one week early and ad-free with exclusive content, subscribe to Lava for Good Plus on Apple Podcasts. divisive ideologies in the classroom. However, critics, including major teachers unions and civil rights organizations, claim that this move serves as a tool to suppress discussions about race, gender inequality in education. Legal challenges are already in progress. A federal judge in Maryland has blocked certain aspects of Trump's administration's DEI crackdown, and more lawsuits are anticipated.

Let's bring it back to the panel. Now, we're also joined by Matt Manning, civil rights attorney. And I want to start with you, Matt. I mean, this is perfect timing. You're out of Corpus Christi, Texas. So, I know in Texas, you've already been seeing things like this. But as this starts to get into this nationwide federal government policy, what are your thoughts on this right now? Well, my first thought is I'm going to brag because I learned today that my son got into the best elementary school in the state of Texas today because he scored the 99th centile. Shout out to my son. I'm very proud of him and his accomplishment. And if somebody wants to smoke, file a lawsuit and we'll beat it. But in any event, here's my thought on the policy.

You know, this is very reminiscent to me of communist Russia, right, the tell on your neighbors type thing. And what's the problem with this is that, one, you're going to have people who are emboldened to essentially tell on their neighbors and bring frivolous complaints, very similar to what you see in the reproductive space, right? That's what we've done in the state of Texas, is we've literally weaponized the law such that you can file a lawsuit against a doctor or against a person who has been engaged in abortion or promoting abortion outside of the state even. And this is very reminiscent of that and similar to that insofar

as people will be emboldened to file complaints. And the reality of it is, you know, with the DEI thing, that's become another dog whistle for black. We all know that, and we talk about it here on the show. But the issue with that is that there's going to be an inordinate number of complaints, most of which will have absolutely no basis in reality. And it's terrifying that the federal government is doing this, essentially promoting a crackdown on your neighbors and promoting this almost vigilante environment behind DEI. So it's concerning. But what I don't understand, really, is why you would promulgate this policy if your intent is to get rid of the entire Department of Education. It seems to me it's kind of inconsistent

with what they've signaled in terms of their intentions with the Department of Education. So I'm not sure if that's just purely the chaos and the cruelty or the point or if there's some longer strategic game that I'm unable to see. But those are my kind of initial thoughts. No, I hear you. And, Raven, in addition to your thoughts that I want to get from you shortly, I also want to know if you see a little bit of hypocrisy with this and the fact that Donald Trump just had a, quote-unquote, Black History Month celebration at the White House just a week or two ago.

Absolutely. Yeah, I'm glad you brought that up. I've actually posted something on my socials about that and how it's essentially, at least given to me, like, don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining. I don't know if I can curse on here, but that's the energy it was giving to me, very much virtue signaling and signifying or implying that he cares about the Black community while simultaneously cutting DEI, cutting programs, cutting funding that directly pours into and impacts our communities.

So I think it's deeply problematic. I think it's deeply emblematic of who he is as an individual and where his values or lack thereof lie. And I definitely want to reiterate that this moment feels like McCarthyism 2.0, right? This turn on your neighbors and turn them in positionality that ties back to this moment of anti-communism, extreme anti-communism in this country. And I think there's a case to be made that there are parallels between this anti-communist moment and this anti-DEI moment, which, as my co-panelist named, is really just code for anti-Black. And so I think this is a moment where we're seeing the pendulum swing, right? We go in one direction and we make progress. And then there's always, unfortunately, at least thus far, this extreme white backlash. And we're very much in a moment

of extreme white backlash. But it's so insidious, because the backlash is happening simultaneously while they're telling us to our face that they care about us, when they don't. They don't love us. They don't care about us. And they're reflecting that in their legislative decisions. And Michael, given the work that you do with the African History Network show, is this something that we should have seen coming? I mean, should we have been prepared for what some call the black lash? And every time there's some type of progress made historically, there's always some type of effort to fight this in some way, shape or form. Should we have been prepared for this?

Absolutely, we should have been prepared for this? Absolutely, we should have been prepared for this. And I've been warning people about Project 2025 since 2023, because it was released from the Heritage Foundation in April 2023. And I found out about the Schedule F employees from the article that Jonathan Swan wrote for Axios.com in July 2022 that dealt with reclassifying about 50,000 civil service employees, the Schedule F employees, and being able to fire them and replace them with people whose ideology aligns with Donald Trump's. This is what we're seeing going on right now, with Doge and the purge that's taking place of people all across the federal government, the 2.3 million employees. We see this is going to be somewhere around 200,000 that are going to be eliminated very quickly here. When you talk about the Black History Month celebration and the black MAGA that was there,

that was a total disgrace. And black MAGA didn't ask for an explanation of, to my knowledge, of why Donald Trump is canceling DEI programs, why he rescinded the executive order from 1965, Executive Order 11246, which is affirmative action from President Johnson. And we saw this coming also if you—I did a video October 18, 2024, when Donald Trump was on Fox & Friends. I'm not sure whose friends they are, maybe the Klan. But when he was on Fox & Friends and Brian Kilmeade asked him the question, what would

you do if you have one of these woke states, one of these liberal states that teach this new history that America was built on the backs of slaves on stolen land. Donald Trump's response was, we won't send them any money. He was talking about not sending funds to schools, school districts or states that teach actual history, declaring a war on history being taught accurately in schools. This is exactly what's taking place right now. Hashtag, we tried to tell you. Should have voted for the black woman. Yeah, the different shirts. We can support that as well. Before we go to break,

Matt, I want to come back to you as a civil rights attorney, because being here in the DMV, I remember Glenn Youngkin having a similar, basically a DEI snitch line. And as we've talked here multiple times, DEI, they talk woke, it's all about Black. But how should other groups besides Black people be receiving this? It seems like sometimes people just kind of let us go and basically look at us as some type of sacrificial lamb. But this is clearly something that's going to affect all different types of groups. But I don't know if there's a strong response coming from those communities. What are your thoughts on that? You know, that's an interesting question. And I think if I had a little more time, I'd probably answer it more thoughtfully. But I'll tell you, any person who's a part of any

marginalized group needs to think that they are soon coming for you as well. And, you know, you've already seen, I think, some echoes of that in the fact that a lot of these affirmative action lawsuits have at the elite universities have pitted, you know, non-white Asian people against white people, right? So the idea is if you're a part of any kind of marginalized group, you need to be concerned right now, because right now the attack on us is the attack on all. And that's what we're seeing. I mean, this erosion, as it relates to rights, is not only on DEI.

It's also in the LGBTQ community. And that's going to continue to expand, at least as it relates to the Latino community. It's primarily more in the context of immigration, but it's nonetheless the same type of erasure, erosion and attack. more in the context of immigration, but it's nonetheless the same type of erasure, erosion, and attack. And I think that's only going to be exacerbated the more that this administration is chaotic with its executive orders and is trying to expand this executive power. I think they're trying to find every realm of influence wherein they can say, you are other, and therefore you are less important, and therefore you are expendable. And I think that's what we're seeing in their early days of this administration.

No, absolutely. And this is something we're going to keep our eye on, because this is, like I said, it happened in Virginia. It's been happening in other parts of the country. Now they just made it legislation. And so we're going to see lots of stories. I think we also should pay attention to bots that might be coming in and people from other places putting our stories just to cause more attention, distraction and disruption. But we will definitely be paying attention to that right here on the Black Star Network. And we will be right back to more Roland Martin Unfiltered right here on the Black Star Network. Next on The Black Table with me, Greg Carr.

Dr. Gerald Horne, a man regarded by many as the most important historian of our time, he provides us a history lesson I'm betting you have never heard before. DR. GERALD HORNE, The Black Table": Texas enslavers who plan to continue the conflict, even after Appomattox, even after the formal surrender of Robert E. Lee. GARY RITTER, The Black Table": Dr. Horne talks about his new book, The Counter-Revolution of 1836, Texas, Slavery, and Jim Crow, and the Roots of U.S. Fascism.

You do not want to miss this conversation. Only on The Black Table, right here on the Black Star Network. I know a lot of cops, and 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.

Across the country, cops call this taser the revolution. But not everyone was convinced it was that simple. Cops believed everything that Taser told them. From Lava for Good and the team that brought you Bone Valley comes a story about what happened when a multibillion-dollar company dedicated itself to one visionary mission. This is Absolute Season 1. Taser Incorporated.

I get right back there and it's bad. It's really, really, really bad. Listen to new episodes of Absolute Season 1, Taser Incorporated, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Binge episodes 1, 2, and 3 on May 21st and episodes 4, 5, and 6 on June 4th. Add free at Lava for Good Plus on Apple Podcasts. I'm Clayton English. I'm Greg Lott.

And this is season two of the War on Drugs podcast. Yes, sir. We are back. In a big way. In a very big way. Real people, real perspectives. This is kind of star-studded a little bit, man. We got Ricky Williams, NFL player, Heisman Trophy winner. It's just a compassionate choice to allow players all reasonable means to care for themselves.

Music stars Marcus King, John Osborne from Brothers Osborne. We have this misunderstanding of what this quote-unquote drug thing is. Benny the Butcher. Brent Smith from Shinedown. We got B-Real from Cypress Hill. NHL enforcer Riley Cote. Marine Corvette. MMA fighter Liz Caramouch.

What we're doing now isn't working and we need to change things. 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.

And to hear episodes one week early and ad-free with exclusive content, subscribe to Lava for Good Plus on Apple Podcasts. This week on the other side of change. Environmental disasters and systemic exploitation. From the wildfires in California to the unexpected snowstorms in the South. We are in the climate collapse. These extreme weather events are becoming more disastrous. And it is Black and brown communities that are often hit first and worst. Watch us on the Black Star Network. So tune in to the other side of change.

I'm Russell L. Honore, Lieutenant General of the United States Army, retired, and you're watching Roland Martin on Filth. In Louisiana, the landscape of centuries-old sugarcane plantations, deeply rooted in Afro-Creole culture along the Mississippi River, was once considered for rare federal protection after a multi-year review by the National Park Service. However, this is no longer the case. At the request of state officials, the agency has withdrawn the 11-mile segment of land known as Great River Road from consideration for a National Historic Landmark designation. Joe Banner, the co-founder of the Descendants Project, joins us from Wallace, Louisiana, to explain why this historic site is no longer under consideration.

Thank you so much for joining us tonight and educating our larger public about what's going on. Can you give us a breakdown on how long this consideration was in process and how recently the decision was made to change this? Yes, thank you, first, for having me here tonight or today. This process to get recognition is something that we've been working on for a few years. So it's not something that's done overnight. It takes a lot of research.

It takes a lot of time. It takes a lot of consideration of all histories, but we focused, or we definitely wanted to include Black history and Indigenous history. So this was not something that was done overnight. We worked on obtaining the research and using the body of knowledge that we had, as well as connecting with community members, in addition to even industrial projects that we're attempting to locate in the area. We also contributed research, although sometimes it would take them several passes

to get everything that needed to be documented in their report it's still something that they've acknowledged in their information so um yes it's a process that took a long time uh finally in october of last year we found out that we were able to um we were we gained acknowledgement from the national park service that we were eligible for that designation. And it wasn't until recently that, like you stated before, that we learned that the National Park Service, by request from Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, was reconsidering their submitting of a letter to us stating that fact. Wow. And can you give us, for those who aren't familiar, can you give us a little bit more of the history of why this area is so significant? Yes. Our area is, first of all, my family has been in this community for over 300 years. I'm 10th generation Louisiana.

We are a mixture of several different cultures and heritage, but my family, I descend from the enslaved Africans that were in the region. So our area is also known for multiple plantation homes that are here. If you've heard of Whitney Plantation, a slavery museum, I'm a descendant of Whitney Plantation. I live maybe no more than two miles away from the house. But we have this plantation history that's been promoted and used by Louisiana, as well as our country, to get tourists. But what they failed to do is acknowledge the contributions of the Africans, those who are enslaved to the plantations. So our work has been to gain the acknowledgement for our ancestors and to have them recognized as part of this history and this culture that we love so much. Louisiana's culture,

New Orleans culture, and we are, I like to say, New Orleans' country first cousin, because everything that we have connects in many ways to New Orleans. And New Orleans is one of the most visited places in the world. That is because of the Black history that we have in our community and this region of Louisiana. And how do you see this in the larger context? I don't know if you just heard the last segment, we were talking about DEI. Even the first segment, there was a connection to Supreme Court cases. How do you see this as it relates to the larger attack on diversity, equity, and inclusion in this country? And why should people be paying attention to it? I think there are some people falsely believe that by erasing, taking a document or taking a policy away, that is going to erase the history

or erase what's there. And those policies and the documentation and the validation is important, don't get me wrong. But if someone changes it or someone says, you're no longer going to learn about Black history, guess what? That does not erase Black history. That does not take it away. So I think there really is a continuation of communities like us or people of color having to use other methods of recognition in order to validate who we are. So we can't wait, right, for the government to just tell us that we are important. We know that we are. And we push through. This is a good time for us, as sad as it is, to take away this. What it does is it helps us to strategize.

It helps us to figure out even more layers of the importance of our culture. So I can say personally, through the work that I've done, it's when I have been challenged that I've dug deeper and been able to find even more influential ways that we have been participating in the community. So we move forward, I think it's sad and it's tragic. It wastes a lot of time and money for us to move forward by having to take these necessary steps. But it's one to where I think that we will take it. We will take that challenge because it's

something that we've always had to do, and we're not going to stop now. Questions from the panel. Matt, you first. First, I want to say I love that Fawahode on your sweater there. I love the juxtaposition of the people who survived and the freedom that came from that and the independence. So, first, that's just beautiful. I love that. But in any event, I guess the question I have for you is, could you provide a little more history? I think I'm a little misunderstood. So, is it that there had actually been a provisional designation for this area that's being rescinded because of the corporate interest? Or was it a matter of there was an eligibility and it's

been applied for, and, you know, now it's being just kind of soundly denied? I'm a little confused on the sequencing. Yeah, multiple steps. That doesn't surprise me because it is an extensive process. But so in order to gain national historic landmark status, you gain eligibility. Throughout the process of your eligibility, there's still work that needs to be done and research that needs to be conducted in order to get that final National Historic Landmark status designation. But when the eligibility, when you do achieve that, what it does is essentially give you almost a temporary landmark status to kind of get to complete the process. So you have just about

the same amount of protection as if you had completed and got that final designation. So the stating that having that part is a really crucial part of the process because what it does is that it allows you to gain the necessary information and necessary research. A national historic landmark status is an important designation and it's understood that you need time and resources to do that. So this process, the eligibility, allows you that time and space and an opportunity to gather that resources without having to, you have to gain that protection in case you have a project or an attempt to destroy the history.

Would you let me ask one more question, Dr. Dabinga? Please. Oh, just very quickly. I mean, do you have any evidence that the state of Louisiana interfered with that eligibility process? And I ask because in what I was reading in preparation of this, I saw Jeff Landry, you know, public enemy number one, making stupid comments. And I didn't know if the state in any way had kind of encroached on that process.

Do y'all have any evidence of that? Absolutely. So the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality submitted a letter to the National Park Service asking them to reconsider this. So let me just state that again. The Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality interfered in this process, despite the fact that there was an open comment period also there with the parish presidents of Cancer Alley, that I like to call, who thanked the Trump administration and also complained about the Biden-Harris administration. The parish president of St. John the Baptist Parish, Jacqueline Holtor, who is a Democrat, by the way, was very appreciative of Trump and very negative towards the Biden-Harris administration. So this, yeah, it's definitely interference. It's been all the way. They've never been secret or shied away from what they are attempting to do. Raven, your question. Yeah, I mean, thank you so much for all these insights.

And this is obviously deeply troubling, this effort to sanitize a deeply important part of our history, which is the antebellum era and our resistance and thriving despite this violence and existing in the afterlife of slavery. My question for you is, what do you think Republicans in Louisiana, Republican leadership, has to gain from denying this landmark consideration? Like, really, what are they getting out of this at a very basic level? I think what they are, so there is uncertainty. Businesses realize Louisiana has, is risky to do business here. And one of the main reasons why is because data and information is attempted, they attempt to hide this information. If you are a business

and you have a multi-million, billion-dollar project, you need to have correct information. And what the elected officials and commissioners and these boards do, they will try to hide the information. We live very close to a national historic landmark, a plantation hall. Businesses or companies will try to locate right in this backyard, just denying the fact that it has designation. And public officials won't correct. They'll keep on this lie, right? So these companies come in, they don't know. They're honestly, they're courted throughout the world. They they come here and then they would have like communities like mine who say, no, I'm not going to let you violate a zoning law to be in my backyard, then they are, they're stuck. And the only reason, the only way many times that we can even resolve these issues is through the court system. So the companies have to then put up even more money on

top of the millions they've already invested trying to locate to Louisiana. I think the Republicans are, and I say, it's a mixture, and I can't even just say it's Republicans, because we have all, this is a bipartisan effort in many cases to put additional heavy industry on communities like mine, unfortunately. So there's not one party in many sense who's helping us out in this situation. I wish I could say that. But what I do know is that these businesses are, they're not getting the truth. And I think they have found out that Louisiana is a very risky place to do business because of the inaccurate information. And this is what our government is trying to hide. So essentially, this is a profit over people situation with the desire essentially to have a free hall pass for environmental racism.

That's what I'm hearing you say. Yes. I couldn't have said it better myself. It's environmental racism. It's people are profits over people. And being that we are in an area that's known for the multiple plantations that were in the area, the plantation country and Cancer Island match up because the petrochemical companies are in the footprint of plantations. The sacrifice of our community continues and businesses and companies, they continue to exploit the loopholes and the subsidies and the culture that allow for Black communities like ours to continue to be sacrificed. So they all come in with these dirty hands, right?

And then when we do stand up for ourselves, it becomes a public relations nightmare. And we are labeled as the troublemakers, or our lawsuits are labeled as frivolous. Not that we're trying to just have our civil rights and our human rights. We're always seen as the troublemakers for simply wanting to breathe and wanting to drink clean water and wanting to just live our lives

in health and happiness. Which is, which is, nothing wrong with good trouble. Sorry, go ahead. No worries. Hey, Joe Banner, I have so many questions for you, but I'm just trying to narrow this down to two. So, first off, can you give us more insight into Afro-Creole culture? And what does Creole mean? And we understand that African slaves were taken into the Louisiana territory even prior to the Louisiana Purchase of 1803. What were some of the main countries in Africa where those African people were stolen from?

So in our part of in our region of Louisiana, we have a strong West African culture here. And that was one of the first areas of regions that the Africans were kidnapped from to come to Louisiana. The Creole culture is, that's a great question, because often we, there's a misunderstanding about what Creole is. Creole is a mixture of different cultures that came together, but it has a strong connection to African and indigenous culture. So these groups of people, whether European or African, because of the Creole culture being a part of that, you will have people eating gumbo, which is an African dish, or jambalaya, or speaking Creole, and also using some African words in their Creole,

because that was part of the culture. So in our area of Louisiana, too, we're even a little bit more different because we have German ancestry, too. So we have certain parts, like we love cabbage here, and we love sausage, because that comes from our German roots, too. So having this created culture in Louisiana and being born from the colony is what's important as part of the culture.

OK, if I could just ask a quick follow up question. So when you talk about indigenous indigenous people, are there people of African descent or black people that are part of that indigenous culture? If so, what Native American nations do they belong to? You see, yeah, so what we all are connected, I think, to the indigenous communities that were around us. We are on the land of the Chittimacha as the tribe. It's also the Homa tribe. It's the Choctaw tribe. Because of enslavement, we cannot, we don't know how we connect. It's very hard for us to find the documentation that says we belong to a certain tribe. I know, for example, in my family,

I know that I have one of my great-great-grandmothers was noted as being mixed with Congo and Native America, India. So that's the way to describe it. Those are a lot of... Congo. Yes. And I mean, that doesn't really narrow it down. So it's hard to find those connections, but these are the type of records. And when you can find records of the enslaved, it just really gave little information about that. Right. Okay. Well, I appreciate that history lesson, especially being Congolese American myself. I'm always down to hear these stories. Joe Bannery, really appreciate not only the important history lesson that you gave us, but also updating us on this really important issue that more people should be paying attention to, because I guarantee this is happening all across the country.

We'll be staying in touch. Thank you so much for joining us tonight. ROLAND MARTIN, We'll be right back with more. Thank you. Thanks for having me. JOHN YANG, No doubt. And we will be right back with more Roland Martin Unfiltered right here on the Blackstar Network.

YAMICHE ALCINDOR, We begin tonight with the people who are really on the Black Star Network would like to extend an invitation to all of the fans of Joy Ann Reeves' MSNBC show to join us every night to watch Roland Martin Unfiltered, streaming on the Black Star Network for news, discussion of the issues that matter to you, and the latest updates on the twice-impeached, criminally convicted felon-in-chief Donald Trump and his unprecedented assault on democracy,

as well as co-president Elon Musk takeover of the federal government. The Black Star Network stands with Joy Ann Reid and all folks who understand the power of black voices in media. We must come together and never forget that information is power. Be sure to watch Roland Martin Unfiltered weeknights,

6 p.m. Eastern at youtube.com forward slash Roland S. Martin or download the Blackstar Network app. Next on A Balanced Life, we're talking everything from prayer to exercise to positive affirmations and everything that's needed to keep you strong and along your way. That's on a next, a balanced life with me, Dr. Jackie on Blackstar Network. Now that Roland Martin is willing to give me the blueprint. Hey,

I need to go to Tyler Perry and get another blueprint because I need some green money. The only way I can do what I'm doing, I need to make some money. So you'll see me working with Roland. Matter of fact, it's the Roland Martin and Sheryl Underwood show. Well, should it be the Sheryl Underwood show and the Roland Martin show? Well, whatever show it's going to be, it's going to be good. It was an international disaster. What happened in the Oval Office today. What was intended to be the start of negotiations over a deal concerning Ukraine's rare earth minerals turned into a remarkable confrontation. The twice impeached, criminally convicted felon in chief, Donald. I know a lot of cops and 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. Across the country, cops called this taser the revolution, but not everyone was convinced it was that simple. Cops believed everything that taser told them. From Lava for Good and the team that brought you Bone Valley comes a story about what happened when a multibillion-dollar company dedicated itself to one visionary mission. This is Absolute Season 1, Taser Incorporated.

I get right back there and it's bad. It's really, really, really bad. Listen to new episodes of Absolute Season 1, Taser Incorporated, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Binge episodes 1, 2, and 3 on May 21st, and episodes 4, 5, and 6 on June 4th. Add free at Lava for Good Plus on Apple Podcasts. I'm Clayton English. I'm Greg Lott.

And this is season two of the War on Drugs podcast. Yes, sir. We are back. In a big way. In a very big way. Real people, real perspectives. This is kind of star-studded a little bit, man. We got Ricky Williams, NFL player, Heism player hasman trophy winner it's just a compassionate choice to allow players all reasonable means to care for themselves music stars marcus king john osborne from brothers

osborne we have this misunderstanding of what this quote-unquote drug man benny the butcher brent smith from shine down got be real from cypress hill nhl enforcer riley cote This quote unquote drug man. Benny the Butcher. Brent Smith from Shinedown. Got B-Real from Cypress Hill. NHL enforcer Riley Cote. Marine Corvette. MMA fighter Liz Karamush. What we're doing now isn't working and we need to change things. 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. And to hear episodes one week early and ad-free with exclusive content, subscribe to Lava for Good Plus on Apple Podcasts. CONN TRUMP AND J.D. VANCE CHASTISED UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT VLADIMIR ZELENSKYY, TELLING HIM HE WASN'T GRATEFUL ENOUGH TO THE UNITED STATES. TAKE A LOOK.

I'M TALKING ABOUT THE KIND OF DIPLOMACY THAT'S GOING TO END THE DESTRUCTION OF YOUR COUNTRY. YES, BUT IF YOU UNKNOW STRONG... MR. PRESIDENT, WITH RESPECT, I THINK IT'S DISRESPECTFUL FOR YOU TO COME INTO THE OVAL OFFICE AND TRY TO LITIGATE THIS IN FRONT OF THE AMERICAN MEDIA. RIGHT NOW, YOU GUYS ARE GOING Mr. President, with respect, I think it's disrespectful for you to come into the Oval Office and try to litigate this in front of the American media. Right now, you guys are going around and forcing conscripts to the front lines because you have manpower problems. You should be thanking the President for trying to bring it into this conflict. Have you ever been to Ukraine that you say what problems we have?

I have been to... Come once. I have actually watched and seen the stories. And I know what happens is you bring people, you bring them on a propaganda tour, Mr. President. Do you disagree that you've had problems bringing people into your military? And do you think that it's respectful to come to the Oval Office of the United States of America and attack the administration that is trying to trying to prevent the destruction of your country? A lot of a lot of questions. Let's start from the beginning. First of all, during the war,

everybody has problems, even you. But you have a nice ocean, and don't feel now, but you will feel it in the future. God bless. God bless. God bless. You will not have the war. Don't tell us what we're going to feel. We're trying to solve a problem. Don't tell us what we're going to feel. I'm not telling you a problem. Don't tell us what we're going to feel. I'm not telling you. Because you're in no position to dictate that. Remember this. You're in no position to dictate what we're going to feel.

We're going to feel very good. You will feel influence. We're going to feel very good and very strong. You will feel influence. You're right now not in a very good position. You've allowed yourself to be in a very bad position, and he happens to be right about it. From the very beginning of the war, Mr. President. You're not in a good position.

You don't have the cards right now. With us, you start having cards. I'm not playing cards. Right now, you're playing cards. I'm very serious, Mr. President. You're playing cards. I'm very serious. You're gambling with the lives of millions of people.

You're gambling with World War III. You're gambling with World War III. You're gambling with World War III. And what you're doing is very disrespectful to the country, this country. It's back to you. I'm with all respect to your place. Far more than a lot of people said they should have. Have you said thank you once? A lot of times.

No, in this entire meeting that you said thank you, you went to Pennsylvania and campaigned for the opposition in October. Offer some words of appreciation for the United States of America and the president who's trying to save your country. Allison McManus, the managing director of national security and international policy at the Center for American Progress, joins me now to discuss how this could impact our position with other countries. Allison, thank you for joining us in the most academic way possible. My first question is, what the hell? I wish I could say it was a pleasure to be on the show. It's a pleasure to be speaking with you. But what a disgrace. I mean, how do you watch, listen, see the way that President Trump, Vice President Vance, and the other president of the United States, Elon Musk, online, have debased themselves in their attempt to humiliate a hero like President Vladimir Zelensky. It's a disgrace. There's just no other way to put it. It's embarrassing to watch. I feel

embarrassed as an American that this is the way that we would treat a noble partner and a noble president like Vladimir Zelensky. So, Allison, we know that when meetings like this happen, so many conversations and debates can happen behind closed doors. There could be shouting matches and the like. But some people are saying the way that this was staged, the way that J.D. Vance was there as well, that people are looking at this more of a sabotage and an ambush than something that was kind of happened spur of the moment because of the tone and some

disagreements. How do you see it? This was absolutely deliberate. President Trump and J.D. Vance invited Zelensky to the United States under the pretense that they wanted to enter into good faith negotiations around how Zelensky could save his country, save his countrymen, brave Ukrainians who have been fighting on the front lines, who have been dying for their country. He came to the United States in good faith on their behalf and, frankly, on behalf of Europeans and Americans, because we also have an interest in standing up to Putin's aggression. He came in good faith, and they completely threw him under the bus.

This was not something spur of the moment. This doesn't just happen ad hoc. This was absolutely something planned. And we know that it's something planned because it's in line with the type of approach that the Trump administration has been taking to the negotiations. And because we saw this really as something that was coordinated happening not only in their discussions in person with Zelensky, but also in the way that we saw, again, online, Elon Musk making fun of Zelensky for his clothes. He wears those

clothes to show solidarity with his troops on the front lines. He doesn't shave his beard because he wants to show solidarity with troops on the front lines. So 100 percent, this was a deliberate attempt to humiliate Zelensky, a partner in American and European standing, Americans and Europeans standing up to Putin. We actually have a soundbite of what you were just talking about. Take a look, everyone. Check in, Clem. I have a second question for President Zelensky. Why don't you wear a suit? Why don't you wear a suit? You're the highest level in this country's office and you refuse to wear a suit Just want to see if you do own a suit. Yeah, yeah problems

I don't have such I will wear a costume after this war will finish Yes, maybe Why maybe something maybe something like yours, yes? Maybe something better. I don't know. We will see. Maybe something cheaper. Yeah.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And when we look at that, that Alistair, you know, reported mocking him and making fun of him like that, it just really makes me wonder.

And then kind of going off of what you were saying, Trump also said right at the end of that, this is going to make for great TV and great ratings or something to that effect, which also makes it seem more and more like an ambush. Are you as, I should say, for lack of a better word, pessimistic, as many people feel today who have said that this is unquestionably the end of basically an 80-year period of alliance building in United States history and that this government is firmly on the side of countries like Russia and China and Iran? Or is that a stretch too far? It remains to be seen, but I think the writing is on the wall. And we've been hearing this from our European allies for a while now, including, you know, I think there was some apprehension Trump said months ago that he wouldn't mind if Russia invaded a European country.

So this is, again, this is just the latest and most egregious example now that Trump is occupying the Oval Office and is the one who is the commander-in-chief of our armed services, who's responsible for the United States' national security, and who's responsible for stewarding these alliances. Of course, these kind of demonstrations mean a lot more than whatever he may have said on the campaign trail. Now he's doing real damage that can't be undone. We heard after J.D. Vance's speech at the Munich Security Conference just a couple of weeks ago that some of our European allies are now considering the United States more as an adversary than they are as a friend. That includes stalwart allies like Germany. So I think that there is real damage here that's being done that can't be undone.

And the real harm of this, the real shame of all of this is that we have really an interest in seeing a just war—excuse me, we have an interest in seeing a just end to the war in Ukraine. Trump talks about peace. Everybody wants to see peace. You know, that's not the question. What he is doing is he is emboldening Putin to continue with his aggression. So not only is he not doing the serious work of trying to support Zelensky in achieving a just and lasting peace for Ukrainians, he is also emboldening Putin to potentially take further

steps down the line that will jeopardize European security at a time when the Europeans realize they can no longer count on the United States as an ally. So what we're seeing is really a fundamental reshaping of the kind of transatlantic security alliances that have kept Americans and Europeans safe since the end of World War II. MICHAEL ISIKOFF- Questions from the panel. Michael, your question. MICHAEL ISIKOFF- Yes, thanks for coming on and sharing this information with us. So, I guess, well, maybe two questions I have.

One would be, where does Vladimir Zelensky go from here? We know he left the White House today. Actually, he was escorted out. He wanted to continue meeting. He did not sign the planned agreement on providing the U.S. access to Ukraine's rare earth minerals. They were going to provide 50 percent to U.S. and Russia. So where does he go from here? like Donald Trump as well as Vladimir Putin to get more out of Ukraine, but with no security agreement, with no agreement on any real protection that the U.S. will provide to Ukraine.

That's exactly right. What the ultimate end goal was today for the Trump administration was to make Zelensky look weak, to try to discredit him so that he wouldn't be seen as a, quote-unquote, credible interlocutor, to make, frankly, the American people think that this guy isn't a guy that the United States should be backing and supporting in peace negotiations. So he's trying to weaken Zelensky's position, which de facto strengthens Putin's position. Now, where does that leave Zelensky today? Well, two things. First of all, there is still an active conflict that's happening. Zelensky is still the president of a country that is actively at war. There are Ukrainian troops on the front lines right now, and that's going

to be Zelensky's number one priority as he returns to Kyiv, is thinking tactically about how to hold the territory that Ukraine has held thus far and ensure that Russia is not able to make further advances. We saw at the end of last year that former President Biden was able to use presidential drawdown authority to get weapons to Ukraine, but those aren't going to last forever. So one thing that Zelensky is going to have to do is to think tactically about the battlefield to try to hold the line there. The second thing he's going to need to do is to regroup with European allies, who are now also regrouping and trying to understand what it is that they're going to be able to provide Ukraine in terms of security guarantees or further economic support, that they'll—it

seems pretty decisive that they'll need to do now without the United States. Again, I don't think that this necessarily means that there won't be any hope for any kind of return to negotiations. Actually, I do think that we'll see continued discussion of negotiations. But it's very hard at this point to see how the Americans, how the Trump administration comes back to the table in any good faith way in support of Zelensky or how Zelensky, frankly, would be able to trust the Trump administration after the spectacle that we saw today. So really, he's going to be looking to the Europeans. And that's an open question as to

what tangibly the Europeans will be able to put together in terms of a security guarantee that can actually protect Ukraine's sovereignty, push back on Putin's aggression, and deliver security for Europe and, frankly, for the world. And Raven, your question? I mean, thank you so much for these insights. I'm particularly struck by what you named in terms of this almost like faux respectability position of, well, he's not wearing a suit and that's not respectable. Meanwhile, he's literally trying to protect his peoplehood from war. So that seems really trivial and kind of adds the disgrace that you're naming. My question for you is really about how this moment is going to impact how we're viewed

as a country on the international stage moving forward. So how do you think this disgraceful movement is going to impact the way that we're viewed and also how we're treated on an international stage? Well, I think, you know, as we said earlier, I mean, this is really placing the United States in the same camp as a country like Russia. It makes the United States look like we are not credible allies, one, that we can't be trusted, two. And three, like, we are simply interested in transactional foreign policy that only, frankly, benefits the president and those around him.

It's, I think, very clear to our allies, partners, and our adversaries around the world that Trump is interested in getting what's best for Trump. And I think we need to be reminded that Russia is still an adversary. Russia still has ballistic missiles pointed at U.S. cities. There's nothing Putin would like more than to see the United States weakened. So when Trump appeals to Putin directly, Trump is really only looking out for Trump and his interests. And I think that that's going to be clear to partners, allies and adversaries all around the world.

That's, as an American, I have to say, that's a really scary thought. Matt, your question. Yeah, so, Alison, I have multiple questions, but I probably won't ask them as artfully as Michael, if I'm not as smart. Bear with me. But my three questions are this. The first question is, as it relates to the rare minerals agreement, is it customary for a country to exchange security for something like the rare minerals that are available in the country, that to me seems to be morally reprehensible. But I don't know international law, and I don't know if that's a customary thing in geopolitics. But first, if you could just shed some light on if

that's normal or if that's Trump trying to create a deal, number one. Number two, how do you think this affects Germany and its rising conservatism there? I'm very concerned about what's happening there. And I'd like your insight on how those two things may be working in tandem. And finally, what is your thought on the effect it may have on our relationship with China and any other kind of brazen adversaries and what we can expect to come from this? So on the first question regarding whether you know, whether or not this is customary to see this kind of trade-off, it's hard to tell because we never really got to see what the details of this deal would be. You know, if this were about creating certain investment

funds or, I mean, really what was supposed to happen today was that they were going to talk about what that deal actually meant. And I think the way that Trump wanted to portray this and actually that we've even seen some, you know, conservative funded media that's going, you know, is that like this was Trump coming, and he's going to take the critical minerals, and that's going to be that. But, you know, we never actually really got to see what that deal would look like. So it's really hard to say, you know, whether that would have been hypothetically a good or bad deal for the Ukrainians. Whether or not that was all a ruse, again, to just try to bring Zelensky to the White House to humiliate him, I can't say. But ultimately, we never really got to see the

details. With regard to Germany, really concerning trends in the way that the Trump administration, J.D. Vance, and others have been, and Elon Musk very publicly on social media, have been supporting the... I know a lot of cops, and 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. Across the country, cops called this taser the revolution. But not everyone was convinced it was that simple. Cops believed everything that taser told them.

From Lava for Good and the team that brought you Bone Valley comes a story about what happened when a multibillion- dollar company dedicated itself to one visionary mission. This is Absolute Season 1, Taser Incorporated. I get right back there and it's bad. It's really, really, really bad. Listen to new episodes of Absolute Season 1, Taser Incorporated, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Binge episodes 1, 2, and 3 on May 21st and episodes 4, 5, and 6 on June 4th. Ad-free at Lava for Good Plus on Apple Podcasts. I'm Clayton English. I'm Greg Glod. And this is Season 2 of the War on Drugs podcast. Yes, sir. We are back. In a big way. In a very big way. I'm Greg Glod. And this is season two of the War on Drugs podcast. We are back. In a big way. In a very big way. Real people, real perspectives.

This is kind of star-studded a little bit, man. We got Ricky Williams, NFL player, Heisman Trophy winner. It's just a compassionate choice to allow players all reasonable means to care for themselves. Music stars Marcus King, John Osborne from Brothers Osborne. We have this misunderstanding of what this quote-unquote drug man. Benny the Butcher. Brent Smith from Shinedown. We got B-Real from Cypress Hill. NHL enforcer Riley Cote.

Marine Corvette. MMA fighter Liz Karamush. What we're doing now isn't working and we need to change things. 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. And to hear episodes one week early and ad free with exclusive content, subscribe to Lava for Good Plus on Apple Podcasts. Far right off day party. But we shouldn't forget that Germany is still going to be driven by the interests of those that are in the center, in the CDU. And so I think that we'll still see a Germany that's very keen to support Ukraine. But let's keep an eye on what some of those far-right trends look like in the way that these parties are bolstering each other all around the world. With regard to the question on China, I do think that we you know, we should keep in mind that after

years of isolation on the world stage, after years of economic distress because of global sanctions, including many sanctions from the United States, Russia is in a really weak position. And the fact that the Trump administration is giving Putin this lifeline, I think that a country like China is going to watch very closely. Obviously, Russia and China are very different in terms of how they're carrying out global ambitions. You know, China has not necessarily had the same kind of imperialistic aggression that we've seen from Russia. But it is still challenging and competing with the United States militarily.

And certainly we'll be watching what happens in Ukraine and looking at the United States, again, as a country that is willing to negotiate, willing to play ball with authoritarians. Well, last question, since we do have you for this time. I'm seeing in the comments here, I'm seeing in comments in other spaces, and I'm sure you're seeing it as well. Why should Americans care? We need to not be engaged in these other wars. Know this, know the—some people actually think we have U.S. troops there. I mean, they just don't know. Why should the average American care about what happened today? I think we should remember—and this is, you know, not something that is present in our lifetimes for most Americans, this idea of being drawn into this kind of world war.

But the alliances that we developed after World War II, we developed because we did not want to see another land war in Europe. We did not want to see Americans going overseas to fight and die on European territory. And let's not forget, during World War II, the United States was attacked as well. During the Cold War, we saw that Russia was training its nuclear warheads on the United States. Russia still has nuclear missiles that are pointed at the United States. So even if it feels here in the U.S. like we're living in this time of relative security, we need to remember that that is because of the alliances that we built. That's because we now get valuable intelligence. We have these security guarantees with our European partners,

where we know that we can share the burden of providing for security and providing for defense. If that goes away, as it looks like it's going away right now, we are very, very much on our own. The amount of money that we have given to Ukraine, and this hasn't been, you know, American boots on the ground, pales in comparison to the kind of tax cuts that we just saw, you know, passed in Congress. So, you know, we need to just keep in mind that while it may be that we invest a little bit today in these alliances and in these partnerships, we are very much benefiting and we are saving costs down the line, costs and American lives down the line.

Of national security and international policy at the Center for American Progress. Thank you so much for joining us and updating us on what's happening right now with Zelensky being kicked out of the White House and its implications. Thank you. Thanks for having me. Take care. Definitely. And we'll be right back with Marolyn Martin Unfiltered right here on the Blackstar Network. Next on A Balanced Life, we're talking everything from prayer to exercise to positive affirmations and everything that's needed to keep you strong and along your way. That's on a next A Balanced Life with me, Dr. Jackie on Blackstar Network. This week on the other side of change. on Black Star Network,

so tune in to the other side of change. My name is Lena Charles and I'm from Opelousas, Louisiana. Yes, that is Zydeco capital of the world. My name is Margaret Chappelle. I'm from Dallas, Texas, representing the Urban Trivia Game. It's me, Sherri Shepherd, and you know what you're watching. Roland Martin on Unfiltered. Welcome back to Roland Martin Unfiltered. Before the break, we were talking about today's meeting between Trump and Zelensky. If you remember, Vice President Kamala Harris told us this would happen.

I believe the reason that Donald Trump says that this war would be over within 24 hours is because he would just give it up. And that's not who we are as Americans. Let's understand what happened here. I actually met with Zelensky a few days before Russia invaded, tried through force to change territorial boundaries, to defy one of the most important international rules and norms, which is the importance of sovereignty and territorial integrity. And I met with President Zelensky. I shared with him American intelligence about how

he could defend himself. Days later, I went to NATO's eastern flank, to Poland and Romania. And through the work that I and others did, we brought 50 countries together to support Ukraine in its righteous defense. And because of our support, because of the air defense, the ammunition, the artillery, the javelins, the Abrams tanks that we have provided, Ukraine stands as an independent and free country. If Donald Trump were president, Putin would be sitting in Kiev right now. And understand what that would mean, because Putin's agenda is not just about Ukraine. Understand why the European allies and our NATO allies are so thankful that you are no longer president and that we understand the importance of the greatest military alliance the world has ever known, which is NATO, and what we have done to preserve the ability of Zelensky and the Ukrainians to fight for their independence. Otherwise, Putin would be sitting in Kiev with his eyes on the rest of Europe, starting with

Poland. And why don't you tell the 800,000 Polish Americans right here in Pennsylvania how quickly you would give up for the sake of favor and what you think is a friendship with what is known to be a dictator who would eat you for lunch. Raven, Raven, Raven. It is so sad to see that clip and just the what could have been moments. And I've seen weekly, I've seen video after video of things that she has said that have come true on different areas of this presidency

within the first five weeks. What are your thoughts as we wrapped up this segment with Ms. McManus, and then seeing how we were already told what was going to happen with Vice President Harris right there. What's going through your mind? I mean, Black women are right almost all the time, so that doesn't surprise me. That doesn't surprise me at all. And, you know, I think what really strikes me about that exchange that

happened today is how deeply paternalistic it was. I almost felt like I was watching two parents chastise a kid. Like it was giving the same energy as a parent telling their kid to thank someone for giving them a lollipop. Like, you're not going to say thank you. You're not going to say thank you. This is a conversation between grown men equals. But the way in which they spoke down to Zelensky, I think, is part of the overarching shame that we're seeing. And listen, men can be and are fantastic leaders. And I think there is something to be said for the profound value that there would have been, would have, could have, should have, in having a Black woman in a position of power.

There's just a different kind of lived experience and compassion that I think arises from that positionality versus the positionality of someone who is a white man who, in many ways, has perhaps been given everything on a silver platter. That's certainly the case for Donald Trump, right? So I'm not surprised. She was right. She is right. And I think it's shameful that

this is what leadership looks like in this country today. Speaking of leadership or lack thereof, Michael, I couldn't help but notice people like Marco Rubio, who used to be a Russia hawk, you know, sitting on that couch. I'm seeing what Musk is doing online. The former Russian president called Zelensky a pig. What do you make of the fact that it seems that—not seems—that so many of these former Russia hawks have seemed to lose their—they've lost their spine as it relates to challenging Trump as it relates to Putin? And on top of that, they are actually now part of the global group of people in Russia and other places who are denigrating Zelensky right now.

Yeah, like punk-ass Senator Lindsey Graham from South Carolina, because they were cowards from the beginning. They were cowards from the beginning, OK? And we see what happens when they go up against a bully like Donald Trump, who's really a coward also. He's a coward when it comes to Vladimir Putin. You know, you're dealing with the collapse of the Republican Party and it capitulating to Vladimir Putin, capitulating to Russia. And for those that ask, why should America send weapons to Ukraine, why should they send funding to Ukraine to help them fight against Russia, Number one, a lot of that, probably about 60 to 70 percent of the money that's allocated

to Ukraine is not sent in the form of a check. It's actually weapons that are produced by military contractors here that actually create jobs here. We've talked about that here on this show, number one. Number two, if you study World War II—World War II began in 1939, when another dictator named Adolf Hitler of Germany invaded Poland, OK? Well, the countries that border Ukraine are Russia and Poland. And many—most military experts and those that know about this history firmly believe

that if Vladimir Putin is successful in defeating Ukraine, he's not going to stop there. He's going to go into Poland. Poland is part of NATO, based upon Article 5 of NATO. If any NATO country is attacked, then it's the duty of the other NATO countries to come to their aid to help them fight. And that will launch World War III. OK? So, if you have loved ones in the military and they come home in a body bag as a result of this, then you'll see why this is important.

OK? And the other thing is, you know, we told people what was going to happen on this show. And because of America's racism and sexism, they didn't want a highly qualified candidate. They talk about merit. She wasn't reading from a goddamn teleprompter. She's dropping history and talking about geopolitics

and Donald Trump is looking like he's constipated. But because of racism and sexism, you didn't want her. You want this son of a bitch right here. So this is what you get. And a lot of federal employees voted for him. They just lost their jobs this week.

And they're putting out videos saying, wait a second, I voted for him. I didn't think I was going to lose my job. Well, hashtag, we tried to tell you, you should have voted for the black woman. Folks got to get the shirts. Folks got to get the shirts, you know, and wear them proudly. Matt, you know, this was happening during our afternoon, right? So around the world, people are waking up to a headline literally saying Zelensky kicked out of the White House. I mean, what are your thoughts on where do we go from here as it relates to everything that happened today? And again, being mindful of the fact, Matt, that we are only five

weeks in to this administration. You know, part of the issue here, if we're going to be honest, is that he never would have done that to the leader of a Western European nation. Eastern Europeans are viewed as less than Western Europeans, if we're going to be completely honest. He never would have done that to a premier from Germany or the United Kingdom or anywhere else. He never would have. To your point, Patrick, he had Macron and he had Keir Starmer, you know, came to France there just two days ago and then like three days ago. So you're absolutely right. Correct. And he never, never would have done that, never would have come at them sideways and just dehumanized them in the way that he did or really just denigrated them in the way they did Zelensky.

I think there are a lot of different things I think about this, and to keep it as brief as possible. I mean, the first thing is, to me, it's morally reprehensible that this is tied, this alleged mineral agreement was tied to past aid or maybe potentially to future aid in addition to that. I mean, the idea that we're going to not stop a patent injustice as it relates to a war being waged by a known authoritarian unless we get some kind of quid pro quo is just disgusting to me. I asked Allison whether that was customary because I don't know enough about geopolitics to speak on that authoritatively. But that, to me, seems to be a problem just from a security standpoint if we are only intervening if we get some benefit. But on top of that, I mean, I think, as Allison kind of

mentioned, that this is a huge issue for us because as much as we might decry some of the past American military operations where we've gone around the world and trying to spread democracy and been paternalistic, to use Raven's word, the reality with that is the United States has long been seen as an authority in the space of security. And now we're going to be seen on the world stage as not only denigrating a duly elected leader of a sovereign nation, but, you know, rubbing him into the ground. I mean, literally talking about how he's dressed, talking down to him, acting as though he's, you know, not worthy of just the basic decorum and deference that we would pay any leader anywhere else. And what I think is going to continue to happen is that erosion of the United States as a place

that needs to just be looked at in some kind of respectful light is going to embolden other countries and potentially other axes of evil, if you will. I mean, what I keep being concerned about is what coalition of countries is going to come together to say this is the time to strike the United States. And maybe that doesn't happen in the military context or in a land invasion context. Maybe that happens in an even greater onslaught of a technological context. I don't know. I don't know enough about geopolitics. But it concerns me mightily that the United States seems to be taking the most contrarian tack in the most basic moral circumstances. The Ukrainian people were invaded. That's per se what happened.

And it's absurd that they would be gaslighting Zelensky as he sits on a couch in the White House as though he isn't deserving of basic respect. So I don't know what this is going to reverberate out to, but I'm extremely concerned. I know a lot of cops and 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. Across the country, cops called this taser the revolution. But not everyone was convinced it was that simple.

Cops believed everything that taser told them. From Lava for Good and the team that brought you Bone Valley comes a story about what happened when a multi-billion dollar company dedicated itself to one visionary mission. This is Absolute Season 1, Taser Incorporated. I get right back there and it's bad. It's really, really, really bad. Listen to new episodes of Absolute Season 1, Taser Incorporated

on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Binge episodes 1, 2, and 3 on May 21st and episodes 4, 5, and 6 on June 4th. Add free at Lava for Good Plus on Apple Podcasts. I'm Clayton English. I'm Greg Glod. And this is season 2 of the War on Drugs podcast. Yes, sir. We are back. In a big

way. In a very big way. Real people, real perspectives. This is kind of star-studded a little bit man we got uh ricky williams nfl player hasman trophy winner it's just a compassionate choice to allow players all reasonable means to care for themselves music stars marcus king john osborne for brothers osborne we have this misunderstanding of what this quote-unquote drug thing is. Benny the Butcher. Brent Smith from Shinedown. We got B-Real from Cypress Hill. NHL enforcer

Riley Cote. Marine Corvette. MMA fighter Liz Karamush. What we're doing now isn't working and we need to change things. 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. And to hear episodes one week early and ad-free with exclusive content, subscribe to Lava for Good Plus on Apple Podcasts. About how this is going to play out, especially in Europe, because as you see right now, I mean, you see the responses to Vance's speech at the Munich Security Conference. I mean, Europe is mightily troubled by this, as they should be. And I don't know what that means in terms of our security. And lastly, sorry, I know I gave you a mouthful, but, you know, we have Americans around the world. So it's not implausible that these countries who now want to attack Americans are not going to be attacking America, the country itself, but maybe attacking Americans abroad. And

we have hostage situations. I mean, I don't know that that's implausible. And it concerns me that the Trump administration is taking this tack with international policy? Well, I can say with certainty that geopolitically, this is not—this type of arrangement for their minerals is not a regular thing that happens. That's something that happens with exploitation rackets, and that's something that happens with colonization mentality. And so—but Trump sees everything as transactional, and that's why he's also having his developers have meetings about what to do in Gaza right now, which is a conversation for another day. But this is absolutely not the norm. This is a hustle. This is a racket. This is extortion. And we're going to keep talking about this on the Black Star Network. We will be right back with more Roland Martin Unfiltered. Stay right here. Next on The Black Table with me, Greg Carr.

Dr. Gerald Horne, a man regarded by many as the most important historian of our time. He provides us a history lesson I'm betting you've never heard before. Texas enslavers who plan to continue the conflict even after Appomattox, even after the formal surrender of Robert E. Lee. Dr. Horne talks about his new book, The Counter-Revolution of 1836, Texas, Slavery, and Jim Crow, and the Roots of U.S. Fascism.

You do not want to miss this conversation. Only on The Black Table, right here on The Black Star Network. What's up, y'all? Look, Fanbase is more than a platform. It's a movement to empower creators, offering a unique opportunity for everyday people to invest in Black-owned tech, infrastructure,

and help shape the future of social media. Investing in technology is essential for creating long-term wealth and influence in the digital age. The Black community must not only consume tech, we must own it. Discover how equity crowdfunding can serve as a powerful tool for funding Black businesses,

allowing entrepreneurs to raise capital directly through their community, through the jobs ad. I am Tommy Davidson. I play Oscar on Proud Family, Louder and Prouder. Right now, I'm rolling with Roland Martin. Unfiltered, uncut, unplugged, and undamned believable. You hear me? Mercedes Bruce has been missing from her San Tan Valley, Arizona home since February 1st, 2020-25. The 14-year-old has black hair and brown eyes and may require medical attention.

Anyone with information about Mercedes Bruce should call the Pinal County, Arizona Sheriff's Office at 520-866-5111. Economic blackout time, y'all. Today, thousands of Americans are taking a stand across the country by closing their wallets. The 24-hour economic blackout is a nationwide protest against corporate greed, political corruption, and the rollback of diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. Activists are urging people to spend nothing for one whole day as an act of economic resistance. The grassroots movement started by the People's Union USA is gaining traction online. Many are calling for continued boycotts of corporations like Walmart, Amazon and Target,

which have scaled back their DEI commitments. And for Black consumers who contribute over $1.6 trillion with fatigue to the U.S. economy, this kind of collective action can send a powerful message. Our dollars have influence. Michael, what did you think about this today? Question, because I did a video this morning after I dropped a post on my fan page, the African History Network, and I said something to the effect of telling Black people to boycott the last—to have a boycott and not spend any money on the last day of Black History Month is stupid. This is what I said.

Now, hear me out. I'm all for withdrawing economic support from Walmart, Target, corporations that have disbanded and stopped their DEI programs. But this is from the People's Union. I did research on this. So, John Schwartz, 57-year-old Jewish man or white man, is the one that created this, right? When you go and you look at this information, it says don't spend any money on this day. So, you're telling black people to boycott black-owned businesses.

That's what you're really saying, one. Two, it says if you have to spend money, you know, do it at small businesses, buy local. OK? What I told black people to do is redirect those dollars from white-owned corporations and spend them with black-owned businesses. You're talking about—this is the last day of the month. This is a Friday. You're talking about payroll day for black-owned businesses.

What's tomorrow? It's the first of the month. You're talking about rent is due, the lease is due on your office space if you're a Black-owned business, on your storefront, okay? You got invoices that may be due. So when things like this happen, too many of our people jump on this bandwagon and don't have a foundation that's based upon African history and culture and don't understand how to utilize this to benefit us, okay? So you can utilize some of that, but we have to modify that. We can't just jump on stuff like this and emulate things, because you're

going to hurt Black-owned businesses when you do that. How did you see it, Matt? I saw it largely like Michael. And, you know, it's interesting because I saw a post today on, I think, Facebook that was talking about some kind of some of the more granular points of a boycott that I never considered. But it was a person who spent their whole career in retail and they were giving very specific suggestions. For instance, if you have to buy, you buy either from a Black-owned business or you buy things that are like necessities that have a smaller margin, because apparently large retail companies will notice the lack of purchase of smaller consistent items, necessities, as opposed to big ticket items. Apparently, they've got some kind of algorithm that can figure out if you're not buying big ticket items, those are one-offs. But if people aren't buying flushable

wipes and bottled water or whatever, you know, that that becomes more concerning. So I think one of the things that we have to do to really kind of outsize the impact is consider things like that. I thought that was very brilliant strategically. And I hadn't seen enough of that in terms of the discussion of the boycott, but it was very fine-toothed. And I thought that was very important because that shows you, if you really want to hit them in their pocket, the metrics that they look at and how to leverage those metrics to make the biggest impact. What did you think, Raven? Yeah. I mean, you know, I think what I immediately think of here is that it's important that we refuse ceding ground, right? I think there could be the positionality or the argument that,

you know, what kind of big impact is this going to have? It's just one day. Even if we just make a dent, the point is that we're making a statement. And I think in particular, you know, a lot of my content is about Black and Jewish relationality. I'm a proud Black and Jewish woman. I sit in the both-and in a lot of things in my life. And I think, specifically, when we're talking about unions, both the Black and Jewish community, both separately and in solidarity with one another, have a very strong history of collaborating around these specific kinds of causes. So, you know, I think, to the point of consolidating our economic power, this is not a new thing,

right? Buy Black-owned, shop Black-owned. We've been about it. We're still about it, right? Absolutely. And I think there is perhaps not a middle ground, but there's a both-and here as well, that we can and I would argue should be boycotting a Target or a Walmart. But that doesn't mean we don't still shop Black for the companies that happen to be in those places. Maybe we just go directly to their website and support them through that modality. So I think there is a way both to honor our politics of pouring into community and strengthening ourselves economically and divesting, divesting from major corporations

that have made it clear that they do not care about us and they do not love us, right? That this was all about virtue signaling so they could get more sales with their Pride merch and their, you know, Black Power merch and their Juneteenth ice cream, if y'all remember Walmart doing that, and then reneging when that wasn't popular anymore. Yeah. No, absolutely. And speaking of supporting Black institutions, let's talk about the USDA. The USDA actually reopened its application process for a federal scholarship program supporting agricultural students at historically Black universities after pressure from Georgia Senator John Ossoff. The suspension

of this funding could have long-term effects on students, Fort Valley State University and Georgia's agricultural workforce. The USDA 1890 National Scholars Program has been instrumental in training young Black farmers and researchers. It doesn't seem like, Matt, that any Republicans are going to fight for this, but it seems like Senator Ossoff was able to make this happen. Well, I'm glad that he was. And I saw his statement, and I appreciated his efforts. And it's interesting we're talking about this, because one of the initial backlashes I saw was farmers and people saying that they had agreements with the government that were either not being honored or were attempting to be renegotiated or that they were worried about

being satisfied. And as a voting bloc and as just kind of a legislative bloc in terms of industry, I've been very interested in how that was going to happen. I don't have the metrics. I may be wrong, but I suspect a lot of farmers in the United States tend to trend conservative and Republican. So, you know, I'm interested in what effect any slashing with the USDA or any related,

you know, agencies as it relates to the agricultural industry in this country being affected in terms of numbers, what that's going to turn into on midterms and subsequent votes. And maybe somebody over there figured out, look, this is one block we can't piss off. So I know this is at an HBCU, but maybe the larger thought is from a policy standpoint, they don't want to ostracize that voting block. And I may be incorrect, but that's what I surmise. Raven? Yeah, I mean, I think it's really important here to note that John Ossoff, Senator John Ossoff,

is the first ever Jewish person to be elected to the Senate in Georgia, right? And so when I hear about this story, one, this is a win. I think this is emblematic of what happens when Democrats don't just lay down and take it and push back. So we love to see it. And also, I think this is a moment where we can and should hold the legacy of Black and Jewish relationality and solidarity in this country. I see this as a continuation of that solidarity in a way that's going to be really important. And I think we're going to need one another and need to lean on one another now perhaps more than ever before. I know things have been rocky over the last year and a half. And as we continue to negotiate and move through that rockiness, my fervent hope is that we'll

continue to see more instances like this of Democrats, Black, Jewish or Black and Jewish coming together in solidarity. MICHAEL GERSON- Michael? MICHAEL GERSON- Yeah, so this is a good move. Hopefully this does not get rescinded by Donald Trump. I'm interested to see what the black Republican from South Carolina, Senator Tim Scott, had to say about this as well. But, yeah, this is part of the continued attack.

And we know HBCU's got $17 billion over the four years of the Biden and Harris administration, the record amount of funding. They're not going to get anything close to that from Donald Trump and junior varsity vans. I know a lot of cops and 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. Across the country, cops called this taser the revolution. But not everyone was convinced it was that simple. Cops believed everything that taser told them. From Lava for Good and the team that brought you Bone Valley

comes a story about what happened when a multibillion-dollar company dedicated itself to one visionary mission. This is Absolute Season 1. Taser Incorporated. I get right back there and it's bad. It's really, really, really bad. Listen to new episodes of Absolute Season 1, Taser Incorporated, on the iHeartRadio app,

Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Binge episodes 1, 2, and 3 on May 21st and episodes 4, 5, and 6 on June 4th. Ad-free at Lava for Good Plus on Apple Podcasts. I'm Clayton English. I'm Greg Lott. And this is Season 2 of the War on Drugs podcast. Apple Podcasts. It's just a compassionate choice to allow players all reasonable means to care for themselves. Music stars Marcus King, John Osborne from Brothers Osborne. We have this misunderstanding of what this quote-unquote drug thing is. Benny the Butcher.

Brent Smith from Shinedown. Got B-Real from Cypress Hill. NHL enforcer Riley Cote. Marine Corvette. MMA fighter Liz Karamush. What we're doing now isn't working and we need to change things. 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. And to hear episodes one week early and ad-free with exclusive content, subscribe to Lava for Good Plus on Apple Podcasts. J.V. Vance, that's the name I've heard, little nickname. It doesn't get as much traction as I thought it would,

but it definitely says a lot because he's right behind Musk or Trump at number three. He's not number two. And finally, let's end with your boy, Michael. Let's just end with this. After years of evading, postponing, and disrespecting the courts, Rudy Giuliani has finally settled his financial obligations to two Black Georgia election workers. Giuliani falsely accused Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss of tampering with votes during the 2020 election. His reckless claims damaged their reputations and endangered their safety by promoting falsehoods about the election. Despite his attempts to delay the legal process, such as declaring bankruptcy, ignoring court orders and missing deadlines, a jury ultimately issued a about the election. Despite his attempts to delay the legal process, such as declaring

bankruptcy, ignoring court orders and missing deadlines, a jury ultimately issued a $148 million defamation judgment against him. He has been held in contempt of court twice for his actions. Records confirm that Giuliani has fully fulfilled his obligations to Freeman and Moss, but court documents do not specify the amount he paid or the details of the agreement he reached. Is this justice for these two Black women, Raven? How do you see it? Yeah, I mean, I think this is absolutely a win. And I think Black women are always the easiest target in this country, right? There's a reason that Malcolm X said that Black women are the most disrespected people in this country. That's not just

something he said for the sake of it. It's because it's a truism. And I think it's a beautiful thing when we see poetic justice, if you will, for Black women. But I don't know if that rectifies necessarily the harm, but certainly it's a move towards that. And I think in general, too, you know, as it pertains to this situation, anyone, anyone who has undergirded and supported the big lie deserves to be held accountable. That is my fervent belief. Opting into the big lie is fundamentally undemocratic, and one cannot claim to love this country, to want to repair this country, or to love its constituents if they stand behind it. Michael?

Yeah, this is good for Ruby Freeman and Shea Moss. No, they can't get their lives back. But, yeah, they need to get as much as they can from Rudy Giuliani, who spread lies about them. And this is one way to hit these MAGA nuts back, with these lawsuits, especially suing based upon the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, which is still on the books. And we know that there were lawsuits filed against Rudy Giuliani and others in Donald Trump's civil lawsuits. Benny Thompson, Representative Benny Thompson from Mississippi, was involved in one of those.

And that deals with when you have elected officials, people interfering with their official duty, inflicting violence upon them, threats, things like that. That's a Reconstruction-era law that's still on the books, the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871. Matt? I have nothing constructive to say, besides this is one robbery I wouldn't prosecute. I like that they ran up on them and ran them pockets, shake them down. You don't get to lie brazenly and flout the court and not have to pay. I am like Michael, or I think maybe Raven said, I'm not sure what the actual settlement was.

I think that's really less important than the fact that these two sisters got justice and that it's somebody is just, you know, ridiculous as Rudy Giuliani and all the games that he played. So I'm glad they ran his pockets. And I'm glad that there's a measure of public justice because to Raven's point, you know, we see black women disrespected all the time, brazenly, and the wins need to be amplified, right? It needs to be clear. You don't get to be a public figure where you absolutely just, you know, horribly affect someone's life like this, death threats and the things that happen, right? And then you're actually found guilty, or not guilty, rather, but you're found liable by a jury and required to pay. I mean, that needs to happen, especially in an era where we see an erosion in the belief of the courts

by the president himself. So I think this is a good thing to show that there's still some effect to happen, especially in an era where we see an erosion in the belief of the courts by the president himself. So, I think this is a good thing to show that there's still some effect to these Article III courts and that 12 people in the box can do the right thing. So, I'm glad that they had this outcome. NICK SCHIFRIN Yeah, there have been so many things that have enraged me, like all of us, you know, throughout this whole process. But this particular case of what they did to these two black women is pretty much close to tops of the list as it relates to the

most egregious and the most problematic for me. So it's really good to see that they are getting some form of justice in a way that benefits them. And so we're going to go out on a win tonight with that story. So I want to thank you, Matt and Raven and Michael, for joining us tonight, for sure. And please, everybody, please check us out. Absolutely. Check us out. Y'all support the Black Star Network, support Roland Martin and all that he's doing every single day, doing the best to bring stories that matter to our community that you're not going to see anywhere else, literally anywhere else on the news. So please follow us on all platforms. Support his book, White Fear. Follow everything that

we're doing with the Black Star Network. We've got so many new shows that you might just be seeing if you just stay tuned with us, right? Boland Martin will be back here on Monday. Hope you all have a great weekend, and I will see you next time. Holla! Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. One time Thank you. Thank you. This is an iHeart Podcast.