The David Pakman Show - 4/5/24: Trump fails to dismiss criminal trials, Electoral College is DEI for Republicans

Episode Date: April 5, 2024

-- On the Show: -- Producer Pat Ford fills in for David -- Donald Trump suffers three straight legal defeats, as judges strike down his attempts to get two of his criminal trials dismissed and one of them delayed -- Joe Biden is leading in an increasing number of national polls and leading in the prediction markets -- Donald Trump's Truth Social stock "DJT" has been on a precipitous decline since its NASDAQ debut, costing Trump billions in net worth -- Republicans claim to be against DEI and affirmative action, yet they benefit greatly from the Electoral College and the structure of the Senate, which are effectively diversity programs to help smaller states -- Right-wing trolls call Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott a "DEI hire" in racist online attacks -- Fox host Maria Bartiromo claims that Biden can't win without rigging the election, setting the groundwork for more election-denying conspiracy theories if Trump loses again -- The Florida state Supreme Court puts abortion rights on the ballot in a move that will likely help Joe Biden and Democrats -- Fox contributor Tammy Bruce argues that Trump selling bibles is a "regular guy" thing to do -- On the Bonus Show: Biden demands Netanyahu change course in Gaza, Pete Buttigieg shuts down Fox News on EV sales, No Labels not going to field a presidential candidate, and much more... ✉️ StartMail: Get 50% OFF a year subscription at https://startmail.com/pakman 🛡️ Incogni lets you control your personal data! Get 60% off their annual plan: http://incogni.com/pakman ⚠️ Try Ground News and get 40% OFF the Vantage plan at https://ground.news/pakman -- Become a Supporter: http://www.davidpakman.com/membership -- Subscribe on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/thedavidpakmanshow -- Subscribe to Pakman Live: https://www.youtube.com/pakmanlive -- Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/davidpakmanshow -- Like us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/davidpakmanshow -- Leave us a message at The David Pakman Show Voicemail Line (219)-2DAVIDP

Hey everybody, welcome to the David Pakman Show. I'm producer Pat Ford, filling in for David today as he is traveling, but fear not, he's going to be back with us on Monday. Donald Trump suffered three legal defeats in courts all across the country this week. Let's dive right into it because he is not having a great time when it comes to these criminal trials. Former President Donald Trump encountered significant legal setbacks this week, let's dive right into it because he is not having a great time when it comes to these criminal trials. Former President Donald Trump encountered significant legal setbacks this week having to do with three out of his four criminal cases. Two were over attempts to dismiss criminal charges outright, and one was over an attempt to delay the trial.

Turns out he lost all three motions. Let's start first with the New York hush money trial. Judge Juan Merchan dismissed Trump's motion to delay the New York hush money trial scheduled to start in just a couple weeks from now, April 15th. of presidential immunity that he is using in his federal 2020 election case that's actually succeeded in delaying that case at least for now until the Supreme Court hears this immunity argument. So the idea from Trump's lawyers when it came to this New York case was maybe we can get this one delayed as well. And of course, if you're Trump, you want to delay as much as possible, delay it until at least the 2024 election and beyond. And then with some of these federal cases, at least you have the chance of being able to pardon yourself if you're found guilty.

So Trump's lawyers were trying to test their luck, but Juan Merchan stepped in and rejected the motion as untimely, emphasizing that they missed their opportunities to file such a motion to take legal action like this. So once again, this comes down to poor legal work from Donald Trump's defense team. If they had put in this argument earlier, maybe Judge Merchan would have been more amenable to it. Merchan wrote, this court finds that defendant had myriad opportunities to raise the claim of presidential immunity well before March 7th, 2024. After all, defendant had myriad opportunities to raise the claim of presidential immunity well before March 7, 2024. After all, the defendant had already briefed the same issue in federal court, and he was in possession of and aware that the people intended to offer the relevant evidence at trial that entire time.

The circumstances viewed as a whole test this court's credulity. The trial centers, of course, on hush money payments made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels during the 2016 presidential campaign, effectively making it an in-kind campaign contribution that went well beyond the limits. Trump has pleaded not guilty to the charges. And once again, it's slated to start very soon on April 15th. Now let's go to the Georgia election interference case. Judge Scott McAfee this week denied Trump's attempt to dismiss the Georgia election interference case. Trump and his many co-defendants argued that the indictment infringed on their First Amendment rights, specifically

free speech rights. But McAfee clarified that political speech does not shield criminal activity from prosecution, emphasizing intent over truthfulness. Of course, this was always a ridiculous argument to make because if you use your speech to commit a crime, well, then it's no longer free speech. Just like if you say to your friend, hey, go kill this person for me, that speech is not protected. And yes, you can be prosecuted for doing that rightfully so. The judge in the case wrote, even court political speech addressing matters of public concern is not impenetrable from prosecution if allegedly used to further criminal activity. Now, the defendants claimed that Donald Trump was just using political speech, like when, for example, he called up Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and asked him to find the 11,280 votes.

That was just political speech, according to them. And so Donald Trump can't be prosecuted for making false political statements. Notice how they say that it's false in this case. But when Donald Trump is speaking to his supporters at a rally or to the media, then he's all of a sudden willing to say that, no, the claims were truthful, but his lawyers in court aren't willing to say that. That's just a bit of a side note. But the judge stepped in and retorted that this went well beyond mere political speech because he was actually trying to change the course of public policy and change official

government action, which isn't just politics at that point. That has to do with the actions of government. So the argument did not stand up. The case, of course, revolves around allegations of interference in Georgia in the 2020 election. And Trump is facing charges related to election claims. Of course, we had that whole dispute with Fannie Willis recently, who's able to continue prosecuting the case. A few of the charges in the Georgia case were dismissed, but most of them are able to stand. And we believe that the case is going to start at the end of summer or early fall. Prosecutors are targeting early August as the time to begin that case. And then finally, let's talk about the classified documents case, one of the two federal cases. U.S. District Judge

Eileen Cannon rejected Trump's plea to dismiss the classified documents case. Trump asserted that the documents were personal under the Presidential Records Act, a claim that he's been making all along. Trump keeps citing the Presidential Records Act, but we know that the charges that Trump is facing when it comes to this case have nothing to do with the Presidential Records Act. So it just doesn't work as a defense. And these were not just personal documents that Donald Trump took and refused to give back. They were actual government secrets, sometimes nuclear secrets. That's why he was charged under the Espionage Act.

And that's why this was a criminal matter. The Presidential Records Act doesn't even have to do with matters of criminal concern. And Eileen Cannon, who is a Trump-supporting, Trump-appointed right-wing judge, even she had to turn down this ridiculous request from the Trump team, ruling the charges against him make no reference to the Presidential Records Act, nor do they rely on that statute for purposes of stating an offense. So basically, she responded by saying, Sir, this is a Wendy's.

Cannon's ruling allows for the defense to revisit the argument, however, during the trial, which is slated to begin on May 20th. The case, of course, revolves around charges of willful retention of national defense information, false statements, and obstruction of justice. By the way, Jack Smith has taken issue with Judge Eileen Cannon at a number of turns, including recently over a matter having to do with jury instructions. And he criticized the judge publicly, leaving Trump with an opportunity to white knight for Judge Eileen Cannon to rush to her defense and suck up to her. He did exactly that with a post on Truth Social recently saying, quote, Deranged special counsel Jack Smith, who has a long record of failure as a prosecutor, including a unanimous decision against him in the U.S. Supreme Court,

should be sanctioned or censured for the way he is attacking a highly respected judge, Eileen Cannon, who is presiding over his fake documents hoax case in Florida. He is a lowlife who is nasty, rude, and condescending, and obviously trying to play the ref. He shouldn't even be allowed to participate in this sham case where I, unlike crooked Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, and all the rest, come under the Presidential Records Act. I did nothing wrong, but Biden did, and they let him off scot-free. How did that happen, Jack? A two-tiered system of justice election interference. So, of course, when Trump attacks judges and the family members of judges, he shouldn't be sanctioned or censured.

But when Jack Smith politely criticizes Eileen Kenyon's legal opinion, all of a sudden that is worthy of sanction and censure. You got to love the lack of consistency from Donald Trump. And of course, every other judge involved in one of these Trump cases, he doesn't like because he assesses that they're going to be unfair to him and that they're left wing judges. But when it comes to Eileen Cannon, he's actually okay with her. He's hoping that she will stay loyal to him. But in this instance, she wasn't able to make it happen because it was just too beyond the pale. This case has nothing to do with the Presidential Records Act, so she couldn't cite it as a reason to dismiss the case,

meaning as of now, this is going to go forward. So there you have it, back to back to back legal defeats handed to Donald Trump. It's hugely embarrassing, and it means that these cases are going to go forward soon with the first one beginning on April 15th. You better believe we are going to be following it. All right, let's go to a brief break. We'll be back with much more of the David Pakman show right after this. Think of your most personal emails. If you're using a free email provider, you should know that they're scanning every email you send and receive even after you delete it. They're usually using the data to build a picture of your life to show you ads, the David Pakman Show David Pakman dot com. by blocking tracking pixels in emails, which companies and hackers can use to track you. You can create unlimited email aliases to protect your identity and cut down on spam. You can encrypt every email you send, even if the recipient isn't using encryption. Startmail gives you 20 gigs of storage. That's more than you get on Gmail. And it only takes a few clicks to migrate all

of your emails and contacts over to start mail. Go to start mail dot com slash Pacman to get 50 percent off your first year. That's only about two bucks a month. That's S.T.A.R.T. mail dot com slash Pacman for 50 percent off. The link is in the podcast notes. Well, here comes Joe Biden. New polling data suggests that Joe Biden is actually making up 50% off. The link is in the gambling markets when it comes to the 2024 election. At this point, making this race look a lot more like a toss-up rather than leaning towards Trump's direction. Now, it may be too early, of course, to read too much into any of this with the election so far away.

That's what this week's guest, Rachel Bidikoffer, would tell us. But we're going to take a look at the polling anyway, because at the very least, it can maybe be a retort to these narratives that Joe Biden doesn't have a chance at all at winning the election or that we have to replace him going into the convention. Let's look at the current polling. So these are the national polls we have since Joe Biden's State of the Union, which seems to be a turning point for him because Republicans going into the state of the union claimed he wouldn't even be able to get through the hour long speech that he would just be mumbling and stumbling over his words the entire time. And that would be a huge embarrassment to the country.

Well, that didn't happen. Of course, Biden actually did outperform expectations and he made Republicans look bad at a number of different moments, like on the immigration issue, in my opinion. So ever since the State of the Union, we do seem to see a bit of a swing. And if you look at these average of recent polls coming to us from the Real Clear Politics website, we see that Donald Trump is up by an average of 1.1% in an average of recent polls. Now, this is a slim lead to begin with, but when you dig into it even further,

one of these polls that has Trump up massively is Rasmussen. They have him up 8%. Rasmussen is not a serious pollster, and don't take my word for it. Take the RNC's word for it. They didn't accept Rasmussen polling when it came to qualifications to get on the debate stage this year, and they did so because they were Trump-aligned or alleged to be Trump-aligned. So I think we can dismiss the Rasmussen poll. And then also we have a poll that has Trump up 7%. But if you take a look at the sample size, it is only 715 likely voters and it has a relatively large margin of error.

So I'm not sure we can glean too much from this poll as well. If you take one or two of these polls out, then Biden would be doing a lot better and it would look even more like a toss up. So that's the national polling at this point. As you can see, a few of the polls even have Joe Biden up a little bit. So things are looking pretty good when it comes to the national polling. But of course, you can say that we don't pick the president based on the popular vote. We pick the president based on the Electoral College. And that is unfortunately the case. So now let's take a look at some of the swing state polling. We do have fewer swing state polls to work with,

but Donald Trump maintains a small lead in most of them. Curiously, there's a new poll out of Pennsylvania that has Joe Biden up 10 points. It's probably an outlier. PA is probably a lot closer than that, but we can argue at this point that he's leading Pennsylvania, at least, as he is Wisconsin, and these other states are in reach, so there is work to be done, but the trend is in the right direction. And the more we see that happen with the national polls, I think the more it'll trickle down to the swing states. And then finally, let's take a look at the betting markets. This is predicted, which isn't a scientific measure of who is the most likely to win. It's

not like a projection model or anything like that. And it's not based on polling. It's simply who people are willing to put their money down on as the presidential candidate most likely to win. So based on the betting at this point, Joe Biden has a 50% chance of winning the presidency according to the prediction markets. And Trump only has a 45% chance of winning the presidency. So a clear edge to Joe Biden when it comes to this. Now, what I also think is being

left out of the conversation is the criminal trials that we discussed in the earlier segment. We of course have a number of Trump trials coming up. The first trial is starting on April 15th. Then we have the federal documents case starting next month. And also there's the Georgia election case at the end of the summer, early fall. We're not entirely sure about the federal 2020 election case when that's supposed to begin. But all of this is unprecedented. I mean, seeing a presidential contender go through a criminal trial during a presidential campaign, that's unimaginable enough to begin with. Seeing four of them,

I don't know if we were fully prepared for that. I don't know if we're fully weighing into the assessment how that's going to affect voters' minds and opinions when it comes to Donald Trump because I'd have to imagine a whole bunch of people are going to see Trump as at least a potential criminal and thus be unwilling to vote for him. Now, the retort to that is that Trump's indictments Trump as at least a potential criminal and thus be unwilling to vote for him. Now, the retort to that is that Trump's indictments actually helped him when it came to the Republican primary, but this is a much different electorate, the Republican primary electorate versus the

general election electorate. I can see why the indictments helped Trump when it came to the Republican party, because those are already a group of people who are poised to support him and were largely used to defending him. Some of them maybe considered, okay, we should maybe consider moving on from Donald Trump, maybe go with a Ron DeSantis, maybe go with a Nikki Haley, but so many of them have just gone right back to Donald Trump and the indictments helped them do so. But that is the Republican voter base. I don't know if that's going to extend to the national voter base. It could work on some independents, sure. But I think for so many people, they're just going to see, oh, Trump is facing four criminal trials. I wasn't even aware of this,

or I had minimal knowledge of this. But now I see the nonstop coverage of the trials on TV. I do think that's going to help Joe Biden. I think it's going to hurt Donald Trump. Time will tell. We'll see if these trials even take place on schedule. But that is another factor that we're not even considering at this point. Too many of us are just ignoring. And then there's also the point about how we're so far out from this thing. The economy's in a relatively strong position if the economy is also doing well six months from now ahead of the election that suggests that Joe Biden is going to get reelected. Of course, the message is the same. It doesn't matter if Joe Biden's up 20 points in the polls or if Donald Trump is up 20 points in the polls. What do you have to do? Register to vote. Get out and vote on or before election day. Convince your

friends and family members to register and to vote themselves. And if you want to do more than that, of course, you can donate, you can phone bank, you can canvas and do all you can to get involved because the election is a while away, but we absolutely can win this thing despite what Trump supporters and people who are fear-mongering about this election will tell you. Remember last week we told you about how Truth Social, Donald Trump's social media platform, hit the stock market? It got listed on the NASDAQ under the ticker DJT. Well, the hype and excitement from Trump supporters about it brought it up to this crazy valuation last week, something like $11 billion at the peak. It peaked at around $74, $75 a share. And now just a few trading days later,

it is already down to a measly $46 a share, meaning that Trump's net worth has come down significantly from the artificial highs it was last week. And many of the people who bought into the hype are also now down on their investment. Trump blew up over the stock decline, sending out the following message on where else but truth social. He trothed, as we like to put it, all of the competitors to truth social, especially those in the radical left Democrats party who are failing at every level, like to use their vaunted disinformation machine to try and convince people. And it is not easy to do this. That truth is not such a big deal and doesn't get the word out as well as various others, which they know to be false. Oh yes, all the truth social critics know that it really is the platform that people are using. It really is so ingrained in our

culture at this point, but we're just so unwilling to admit it. And apparently this critique from Donald Trump extends to Twitter slash X as well, which many of the Elon fans I'm sure are not happy about. Now, we know that the stock market valuation of DJT is wildly out of sync with what it is intrinsically worth. Last year, the company had just over $4 million in revenue and it had $58 million in costs. So there's nothing at all indicating that this is an $11 billion company. So the stock was way overvalued. And in my opinion, it still is way overvalued. And maybe a whole bunch of people recognize that. Maybe a bunch of shorts came in from people and institutions realizing that it was overvalued. Or, you know, maybe Trump supporters who bought into the hype

thinking that it would go to the moon saw it dipping and they panic sold. And that's the reason for the decline. It is somewhat of a meme stock after all. Whatever the reason for the decline, it has come down a significant amount. And in my opinion, that is a delightful thing to see. There was this idea surfacing within the right-wing ecosphere that maybe instead of donating to Donald Trump's campaign directly, where you're up against limits and these sorts of things, maybe you can just buy DJT stock and that will help him because

it will increase his net worth and it will allow him to spend more on the campaign. Mind you, Trump can't sell any of his stock for six months. I think a lot of people left that out from their analysis. And that's actually right before the election. He could potentially rug pull people right before the election because he owns 60% of the company. So he could just dump a whole bunch of shares at once. But theoretically, this plan could still work, you know, trying to raise Donald Trump's net worth by buying DJT stock and this idea that that could help him with the election and fundraising, because with Trump's net worth being higher, he can secure better loans. But I don't think that's going to work out for him so well if the stock is declining precipitously and if banks assess that the underlying asset of the stock aren't anything close to what it is valued at when it comes to the stock price. So things could change on this.

DJT could go to $100 a share next week. I'm not saying that it couldn't. It could also crash and go to zero. But as of yet, this is not the major win that Trump and right-wingers have made it out to be. Also, another truth social story to bring to your attention that broke this week, Donald Trump filed a lawsuit against Wesley Moss and Andrew Latinsky, former contestants on The Apprentice, who co-founded Trump Media and Technology Group, TMTG, for essentially not doing a good job, as Donald Trump sees it. Trump alleges

they failed to properly establish the venture, claiming they rode on his reputation, but failed to execute their responsibilities diligently. The lawsuit says that Moss and Lutsensky failed spectacularly at every turn in setting up the company and making a series of reckless and wasteful decisions that put the project on ice for more than a year and a half. Trump also claims they breached their agreement surrounding stock options valued at over $400 million. Trump wants to take away their 8% stake of the company, just seize it for himself. That's the remedy that he's seeking. But Trump, at the same time, will argue that he only hires the best people.

That is, except for, in this particular instance, when it comes to these two people. Except for them, Trump only hires the best people. Oh yeah, and except for his own Vice President Mike Pence. Oh yeah, and his Attorney General Bill Barr, and Christopher Wray, and Nikki Haley, and Jeff Sessions, and John Bolton, and Michael Cohen, and Mark Milley, and Anthony Scaramucci, and Rex Tillerson, and Steve Bannon, and Paul and Paul Manafort and Jim Mattis and basically everyone else who has ever worked for him ever. Aside from all those people, Donald Trump only hires the best people. So that's the story for you today. Truth social on the decline and Donald Trump losing billions as a result of it. All right, we're going to go to another break. We'll be back with more of the David Pakman show after these commercial messages. One of the most disturbing news stories of the last year is how the FBI, NSA and other law enforcement and intelligence agencies are buying the Internet browsing histories of millions

of Americans. If they buy the data in bulk from data brokers who get it from Internet service providers, they don't even need a search warrant. And the feds can know about everything you do data in bulk from data brokers who get it from Internet service providers. They don't even need a search warrant and the feds can know about everything you do online. That's why I use a service called Incogni. Our sponsor, Incogni, automatically goes to every major data broker and demands they remove your data from their records, which they are legally required to do if asked. They will even follow up with each data broker to make sure your data is really gone.. even X significant others or employers, ex employers. My audience gets 60 percent off.

Super easy. Go to Incogni dot com slash Pacman. Use the code Pacman. That's I N C O G N I dot com slash Pacman. Get 60 percent off with code Pacman. The info is in the podcast notes. For conservatives, DEI programs have become a hot button political issue. I mean, it's right up off with Code Pacman. The info is in the podcast notes. diversity and people's backgrounds and certain disadvantages that people may have when making hiring decisions or in the case of schools, admissions decisions. Conservatives believe that that is wrong and that we have to be purely meritocratic when it comes to these types of decisions in our institutions. They don't like DEI. They don't like affirmative action. They've made that clear. They don't like the concept of equity instead of equality. It's why people like Charlie Kirk get nervous whenever he sees a black pilot because he worries that it could be a Thank you. There were right-wingers who were blaming the collapse on diversity hires. They were calling the mayor of Baltimore a diversity hire, arguing that the most qualified people didn't get the jobs at the bridge and on the ship.

And that's exactly why this happened, even though there was no evidence whatsoever behind the claim they were comfortable making it. Well, it turns out that there is a glaring contradiction when it comes to Republican stances on these topics like DEI and affirmative action, which is that policies like these are the exact reason why Republicans have political power in the United States to begin with, or at least have the chance at having political power. What do I mean by this? Well, Republicans benefit greatly from the DEI programs that are enshrined in the United States Constitution. As many of you know, we don't pick our president based on the popular vote. I wish we did, but we don't. That would be the meritocratic way to do it.

No, instead, we do so based on the electoral college that gives extra weight to smaller states. And who just so happens to live in those smaller states disproportionately, it tends to be white rural folks who are more likely to vote Republican. Their votes count more towards who becomes president than do people who live in a blue city in a blue state, for example. If not for the Electoral College, we know that George Bush would not have gotten elected to the presidency in 2000, and Donald Trump would not have gotten elected to the presidency in 2016. Now, does that sound like equality to you,

or does it sound more like equity? How about the United States Senate? That's even more of a DEI program, in my opinion. Every state, regardless of population, has two senators. So California's 39 million people are represented by two senators, exactly the same as Wyoming, even though they only have 600,000 people. They also get two senators. This means that the Senate skews more right-wing than it otherwise would. We have a razor-thin Senate right now. I'm not so sure that would be the case if not for the DEI programs in the Constitution and the structure of the United States Senate. Now, what arguments will Republicans come back with?

They'll say that, well, we're not a democracy. We're a constitutional republic. Yes, so exactly. You agree that we are more of a DEI-like system here in this country than a meritocratic one. Maybe they'll also say that diversity and disproportionate representation is important because it's what the founders wanted to ensure a wide array of voices get heard in the government and that people in smaller rural states can be heard and that they're not largely ignored by the people who live in the larger states and the big cities. They can make this argument, but it's hypocritical when contrasted with their opposition when it comes to people making decisions in other types of

institutions, like when it comes to corporate boardrooms or university admissions. You can't have it both ways. Now, they could also say, hey, we're just dealing with the system that we have in place here. We're dealing with the cards we were dealt. This is what the framers of the Constitution set up as our system of government, and we have to work within the system. But this flies in the face, of course, of the respect and deference that Republicans so often pay to the founding fathers. It would have to, it makes them have to admit that the founders were wrong to make this argument. So I'm not sure that they even want to go there.

They don't want to say that the founders were wrong to set up this system of governments in this way in the first place. Conservatives are also troubled doing this because, again, this is exactly the system that has given them political power. And so they can't come out opposed to the exact reason why they're able to win elections and win so many seats in Congress and the presidency on occasion. It's just it's not a politically viable path for them to do to be opposed to how we set things up now. So I view this as a clear contradiction. If there's a better counter argument, I'd love to be made aware of it. There are, of course, countless examples of Republicans praising the Electoral College, but also being against diversity programs. electoral college, worrying they would shift power away from rural states to large blue states. Yet he worries affirmative action is providing benefits to one group at the expense of another

who have done nothing wrong. Graham's position, again, is not unique to him. It's rather emblematic of the Republican Party's stance these days. I'd love to hear why it's totally okay to have a DEI program or many DEI programs enshrined in the United States Constitution. This is the way we've been doing it for 200 plus years in American history. Why that's okay, but it's not okay when it comes to other arenas like universities and businesses. Why is it a five alarm fire when it comes to these other institutions in our country, but it's totally okay when it's the exact reason why you have political power in the first place. Explain to me that, right-wingers.

Speaking of DEI, Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott has unfortunately been the target of right-wing ire following the collapse of the bridge in Baltimore last week. Mayor Brandon Scott is only 39 years old, and he appeared recently at the site of the Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse in Baltimore for a press conference. He called for prayers. He called for gratitude toward the first responders who acted swiftly to rescue survivors. However, instead of focusing on the catastrophe and its implications, critics from the right and online circles attacked Mayor Scott over his race. They attributed the collapse of the bridge to, get this, diversity, equity, and inclusion policies,

DEI policies, and singled out Scott's mayoral tenure for blame. Notably, Phil Lyman, a Utah Republican who was running for governor of Utah, he broadened his criticism to include Maryland's Governor Wes Moore, who is also black. He accused them of prioritizing diversity over citizens' well-being, even though there is no such evidence to support this claim. One such bozo on Twitter repeated the exact same sentiment, writing, quote, This is Baltimore's DEI mayor commenting on the collapsed Francis Scott Key Bridge. It's going to get so, so much worse. Prepare accordingly. Now, in addition to this being, of course, a racist comment, it also doesn't even seem to be making the point that they're trying to make because Brandon Scott was not appointed to this

job. He was not hired to do this job in a traditional sense. He was elected, which is the most mariquatic way you can do something like that. I mean, he won the 2020 mayoral race with 70% of the vote. So how is this a DEI hire? On its face, it just doesn't even make sense. I mean, at least come up with some sort of criticism that can hold a little bit of water if you're going to go this route. They can't even do that. So he earned the victory in the ultimate meritocracy. The critique falls completely flat. I don't think they care, though. Really what they want to do is attack Brandon Scott for being black, and they're seeing this Baltimore Bridge collapse as a perfect opportunity.

What happens is when people like Charlie Kirk, as I talked about earlier, go out there and say that I'm scared to be on a plane with a black pilot because I'm worried it's a DEI hire. And I'm not being racist by saying this. It's just that I'm just so concerned about how we are doing our hiring here in the United States. And I'm worried that the most qualified people aren't getting the job. And lesser qualified folks who just happen to be Black or Hispanic, whatever the case may be, that they're getting the jobs instead. That's the argument that they'll try to make. You have many on the right calling Supreme Court Justice Katonji Brown-Jackson also a diversity hire. This is just what the right wing has been saying recently. And so it's no surprise that when even you have a case that doesn't have anything to do with diversity hires in these subjects at large,

there are going to be plenty of trolls online and even politicians in Phil Lyman's case who feel emboldened to make this exact point and just be racist, racist with a bit of a veil because they can claim it's not about race. It's about DEI. It's about affirmative action. It's about equity and these other things, but we know exactly what they're doing. Mayor Scott himself went on MSNBC and explained exactly what's going on to Joy Reid. He said, quote, what they mean by DEI, in my opinion, is duly elected incumbent. We know what they want to say, but they don't have the courage to say the N word. He also went on to say, and the fact that I don't believe in their untruthful and wrong ideology, and I am

proud of my heritage and who I am and where I come from scares them because me being in my position means that their way of thinking, their way of life, of being comfortable while everyone else suffers is going to be at risk. And they should be afraid because that is my purpose in life. By the way, isn't it the right wing that claim that we shouldn't politicize tragedies right after they happen? They always say that when it comes to mass shootings. Oh no, it's too early to talk about gun control. We can't do that now.

We have to let the families of the victims grieve. We have to have healing first. Then we can talk about the policy discussions having to do with gun control, even though there's always another mass shooting around the corner. So by their logic, there's never an appropriate time to talk about gun control, but that's what they talk about when it comes to mass shootings. However, they're not willing to make that argument when it comes to the bridge collapse. They go right into the diversity hires argument, jumping to conclusions, even when it doesn't make sense at all. And even when they don't have the evidence to make the claims that they're trying to make and back up the racist statements that they're trying to make. All right. We're going

to go to one more break. We'll be back with more of the show right after this. Today's sponsor, Ground News, is an app and website that quickly shows you how news is being covered across the political spectrum, adding context and making it easy to understand the polarizing events like the election season that we're in. If you're watching this on YouTube, Donald Trump and Joe Biden secured their party's nominations for a historic presidential rematch. So I'll be looking at Ground News's election page for minute to minute updates on the issues that matter most and the blind spots in the left and right's election coverage. So, for example, check out the breakdown on why the GOP's Biden impeachment appears to be falling apart. Ground News found more than 20 articles published on this, but I can

see it's a near total blind spot for people only following right leaning news. I wonder why. And looking over here, many of these articles come from reliable sources, with each giving me some new detail and reading their summary of this from each political viewpoint really just gets me up to speed in seconds on any issue. So make separating fact from noise easier this election by going to ground dot news slash Pacman. My viewers get 40 percent off their unlimited access vantage plan, making it just five dollars a month. That's ground dot news slash pacman for 40% off. The link is in the podcast notes.

Fox News propagandist Maria Bartiromo is laying the groundwork for yet another claim that the election was stolen in the case that Joe Biden once again defeats Donald Trump in November. While we don't yet know, of course, what the result of the 2024 election will be, what we do know is that if Donald Trump loses, he's not going to go down quietly. He's going to complain and whine and cry and say that he really was the rightful winner of the election. Over the past few months or so, there hasn't been too much talk about this subject from Republicans. They haven't really waded into the conversation about election rigging and voter fraud because Trump had maintained a decent lead in the polls and they just didn't think that they had to go there. They were feeling confident. But as I told you earlier in the show, the tides have

actually been turning in Democrats' direction, in Joe Biden's direction. And so that means that plenty of these Republicans are starting to lose confidence. And that is coming through to us in the form of arguing that Democrats have no shot at winning this thing. And the only way they can conceivably win this thing is by rigging the election in that they indeed are gearing up to rig the election. And who is on the front lines in this effort making this case, it's none other than Fox's Maria Bartiromo, who amazingly still works at Fox News and Fox Business, despite being front and center at the Dominion defamation lawsuit resulting in Fox News having to pay a settlement of almost $800 million. Amazingly, she's still working at the network. Here is Maria Bartiromo interviewing Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Whatley and saying that people are really concerned that the election is going to be tampered with. It doesn't appear that Joe Biden can win on his policies. A Wall Street Journal poll this morning shows Trump leading Biden in six out of seven swing states. That's Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Nevada, and Pennsylvania.

In Wisconsin, the two are tied in a head-to-head matchup. So how does Biden win? So I have to stop it right there for a second. Maria Bartiromo is saying that this race is over in April, well before the November election, when people like Rachel Biddecoffer tell us that we're still months away from people even starting to pay attention to this thing. Plus, we also have the X factor of Trump's criminal trials. Secondly, she ignores how the national polling has trended in Biden's direction ever since the State of the Union. Going only with swing state polling gives you a different idea of how this race is shaping out. And of course, we have fewer state polls overall. So she's trying to paint a particular picture by showing this graphic

here. And we can actually put the graphic up. The margin of error in these polls is plus or minus four points, meaning most of these are statistical ties. Actually, Wisconsin has it as dead even, as she says, only a one point difference in Georgia. The biggest gap is North Carolina, but I don't even know if we really consider North Carolina to be a swing state anymore. I think it's pretty solidly Republican. So this is all built on a misleading and wrong premise made by Maria Bartiromo. You can argue at this point that Trump is winning the race, but in no way can you argue that Joe Biden is doomed to fail and that this thing is over. Now let's get into the meat of the clip. Republicans are talking about the potential of an election that is tampered with.

Republicans are warning that there is a Biden order, executive order, which allows illegal immigrants and felons to vote. What are your thoughts on this issue? We are going to win this election because the American people understand that they are worse off under Joe Biden than they were under Donald Trump. We cannot stand another four years. And so we're so what Maria Bartiromo is laying out here is all based on conjecture. It's a people are saying this argument. She's saying Republicans are saying this, presenting it as an actual argument with facts and data behind it when that doesn't exist. And then she does come back with a source saying that there's this Biden executive order that will allow undocumented immigrants and felons to vote.

And that's part of the election rigging that she sees going on. This is just dead wrong. Let's take a look at a quote from the Daily Beast about this. Quote, the executive order she mentioned is a 2021 order designed to expand voter registration efforts through the work of various federal agencies. It is our duty to ensure that registering to vote in the act of voting be made simple and easy for all those eligible to do so, reads the executive order, which features a clause instructing officials to inform formerly incarcerated people on any potential restrictions to their right to vote upon release from custody. The order makes no mention of undocumented immigrants, nor does it expand the right to vote to any groups previously unable to do so.

The president does not have any authority to extend the right to vote to undocumented immigrants, and the 1996 federal law expressly prohibits non-citizens from voting in federal elections. So brilliant reporting from Maria Bartiromo, isn't it? Feelings-based arguments, people are saying-based arguments, and then just making things up to push your agenda, things that are factually and provably not true. And all of this is to placate the ego of the pathetic man that is Donald Trump, who just can't own up to losing. We don't even know if he's going to lose this time yet, but he's already setting up the groundwork because he just can't take it. He couldn't take it in 2020, and he's not going to be able to take it in 2024. And he's perfectly okay with taking down the country along with them. And there are unfortunately people like

Maria Bartiromo who are willing to be on the front lines in that very effort. Just when many Democrats were giving up on the state of Florida, it turns out that the sunshine stain is in play because the state Supreme Court has ruled that abortion rights can appear on the ballot, potentially putting the contest in play for Joe Biden and other Democrats down ticket. The authoritarian six-week abortion ban in Florida is going to take effect in less than a month. That's the bad news. It's going to replace the current 15-week abortion ban in Florida. Now, if you ask me, a 15-week ban, that's bad enough. A six-week ban, that is absolutely insane, completely draconian because most women aren't

going to even know that they're pregnant six weeks into a pregnancy. And if you do find out during that time period, well, then all of a sudden you have a very limited window to make a decision about what you want to do, to make the appointments and to carry out the procedure. And we know that so many abortion doctors are going to be reluctant to do this type of procedure, worrying that they're breaking the law. If you're up against that six-week limit, then maybe they just say, oh, no, it's too close, so we're not going to do it at all. That's exactly what Republicans were able to accomplish when it came to this six-week abortion ban. They're effectively going to outlaw the practice in the state, and now voters have a chance to fight back on it. The state Supreme Court gave the green light to rule that an amendment protecting abortion rights couldn't appear on the ballot in November. If passed, it would overturn Ron DeSantis' abortion bans.

So it's back on the ballot. Republicans should be concerned about this because they're losing on this issue, right? It's been a major reason why they haven't had much success in politics over the past few years. It's why there was no red wave in 2022. It's the reason why we're hearing about Democrats winning in places like Kentucky and Alabama. They probably otherwise wouldn't have won those races over the past year or so, if not for the overturning of Roe versus Wade. And that's because abortion at this point is essentially a 60-40 issue. An NBC News poll from last year found that 61% of voters disapprove of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision overturning Roe versus Wade. So people may turn out specifically to vote on the abortion issue. That includes Democratic-leaning voters who may have felt disaffected by the state's

right-wing trend in recent years. They may go out and vote and say, you know, Trump's probably going to win here. Rick Scott, the senator, is probably going to win re-election here. But at least we can do something right about this abortion issue. So they'll go out to vote for that very reason. And, of course, they're also going to vote for the other races on the ticket. So this could conceivably be really, really good for Democrats. And also a bit of good news is that cannabis legalization is going to appear on the ticket. So this could conceivably be really, really good for Democrats. And also a bit

of good news is that cannabis legalization is going to appear on the Florida ballot. So that is also a driver of potential Democratic votes. And we have to keep in mind that Biden didn't actually lose Florida by all that much in 2020. Looking back at it, we think it was maybe somewhat of a landslide, but he only lost Florida by 3.5 percentage points. So Democrats can still win in Florida. It is, you know, certainly not a foregone conclusion that Republicans are just going to keep winning there. And we know how politics is. There could be a reversal in the trend.

Now, this could also help Democrats in numerous House races. Even if Biden doesn't defeat Trump in Florida, if we pick up some house seats because of this, that would be excellent. There's also the Senate race where Rick Scott is only slightly up over his likely challenger, Debbie McCarcel Powell. And so that means that, you know, maybe a few percentage points can be made up with if enough Democratic voters are incentivized to go out and vote based on this abortion issue. So, you know, it wasn't close when it came to the governor's race in Florida in 2022. That is true. Ron DeSantis won by 19 points. That is massive. Yes. And they do have super majorities in the House and the Senate in Florida. So I understand how the situation may look bleak, but this could signal a reversing of the course and potentially can bring about

a new era where Florida is back in play. Now, one more thing about this, a bit of irony. The whole reason why the abortion issue is going to be on the ballot this year is because of Ron DeSantis and the right-wing legislature backing him up. He wanted to position himself as the most conservative candidate in the Republican field, more conservative than Donald Trump. And he was able to achieve this by signing the six-week abortion ban into law. Obviously, he didn't win the primary. This didn't work for him. Republicans aren't even all that concerned about policy compared to personality at this point. So that's why Trump was able to win. But how ironic would

be if Ron DeSantis' action instituting the six-week abortion ban is what leads to Donald Trump losing the state of Florida with the Supreme Court now putting the issue on the ballot directly to the voters and encouraging a whole bunch of left-leaning voters to go out and vote for abortion rights along with Joe Biden. That would just be absolutely hilarious. And also there's the question about how Donald Trump should play this because during the primary, he said that he was very much against the six-week abortion ban. He said that it went too far and that it was cruel and had some other choice words for it. He's going to have a difficult position at this point saying that voters should overturn the ban while at the same time vote for him in the state of Florida. So my sense is he's just going to try to stay out of the issue and not comment on it, but that's increasingly difficult to do, especially when he votes in the state of Florida and he'll have to make a decision of his own

when it comes to this. So Florida is back in play and we actually, ironically, have the state Supreme Court to thank for it because now abortion rights, as well as cannabis rights, are going to appear on the ballot and that's greatly going to turn out the Democratic vote.

We've been covering over the past couple of weeks how Donald Trump is selling Bibles to fund his presidential campaign. He's selling these $60 Bibles that for some reason also contain the Constitution of the United States and the Declaration of Independence and the Pledge of Allegiance. It's all there under one Trump Bible that you can get today for $60. Now, it turns out that there are a lot of right-wing religious Trump supporters who are actually taking issue with Trump doing this, even going as far as to call it blasphemous.

Now, is it an issue that I care about personally? No, I don't care if Trump sells his Bibles, but religion is supposedly super important to many people in Trump's voter base, certainly the evangelical population. So it's interesting to hear from certain voices who are expressing dissatisfaction with it, saying that Donald Trump shouldn't do it. I'll show you this clip again. We showed it to you earlier this week. Republican Congressman Mike Turner was asked about the Trump Bibles, and he claims that he hadn't heard about it before, tried to pivot to talking about Joe Biden and the Easter celebration at the White House, but then later had to go back on track,

got asked about it again, whether he would buy one of these Trump Bibles, and Mike Turner said that he wouldn't write a check for it. Let's take a look at that clip as a reminder. I think it's appropriate for the former president, for the likely Republican nominee, to be selling such a product? You know, I haven't really seen that. I've heard some people talk about it. I think I'm more

concerned about the White House restricting the ability of children to put religious symbols on Easter eggs for the Easter egg roll at the White House. You know, I'm glad that CBS gives people the right to express their religious freedom. I can't imagine that we're certainly in a situation where the Biden White House is restricting, especially that of children, their ability to express their religious freedoms. Okay, but you wouldn't buy a copy of this Trump Bible, would you? I'm not writing a check for that. Okay. So Mike Turner, seemingly a religious figure, he's taking issue with the fact that Trump is selling these Bibles, even if he's not willing to outright condemn the action. And this has been the sentiment felt by plenty of right-wingers online as well,

the more religious ones. And that has prompted Fox News to do some damage control. Insert Fox contributor Tammy Bruce to White Night for Donald Trump. She went on TV and said that Trump selling Bibles is actually a good thing because it's a regular guy thing to be doing. Yeah, when I think about what a regular guy does,

it's selling Bibles. Let's take a look at what Tammy Bruce had to say on Fox. You know, President Trump selling a Bible is kind of a regular guy thing to be doing. It's not, oh, it's not presidential, right? You've got the sons or the brothers to do the selling of things. This is what Trump does. It takes him into people's kitchens, into their living rooms, while the left is sitting up on the highest mountain in the world, looking down on all of the hoi polloi. And there is Donald Trump once again, reaching in

and being himself and being able to relate to, I think, to the average. Now, I don't know about you, but when I think about the average regular guy in America, I don't get the picture of someone who is selling Bibles for the purposes of fundraising for his presidential campaign. I more get the image of like a dad taking their kid to Little League practice or maybe some guy running the local 5K or some dude changing the oil in his car in the driveway out front. I just, I don't get the image of someone selling Bibles. I don't picture that as an everyman,

average guy thing to do. Also, she talks about how this brings Donald Trump into people's homes, into specifically people's kitchens and living rooms. Is that where people keep their Bibles? I mean, living room, maybe that makes sense, but I think it's more of a bedroom thing, right? Don't you put it in the bedroom nightstand? Like you see at hotels. I don't think people tend to keep their Bibles in the kitchen. That would be pretty bizarre. I can't imagine people are like making

a nice lasagna and have to wait for the ovens to preheat to 375 degrees. And in the meantime, are reading a couple of Bible verses. I don't think that happens, but maybe it happens in some Christian households across America. But what essentially Tammy Bruce is doing here is trying to provide cover for Donald Trump. She probably understands that there are some religious right-wing folks out there in the country who are concerned about Trump doing this, and she's trying to explain to them that, no, no, it's okay. This is an average person kind of thing to do, and it's the exact same reservations that Trump had to deal with when it came to previous elections.

Evangelicals were hung up about his treatment towards women, they were hung up about the Access Hollywood tapes and, you know, other scandals Trump has had in his past, but ultimately they were convinced that Trump was the right guy for them. The abortion issue went a long way to convince many of those evangelical voters to support him. And at this point, they've basically accepted the fact that Trump isn't too much of a religious figure. They don't mind. And apparently they're not going to mind ultimately that he's selling these Bibles. So once again, we have an example of a Fox News contributor twisting themselves in knots trying to explain away Donald Trump's controversial actions. And to many right-wingers,

this is going to work just fine for them. All right, that's going to do it for today's show. But make sure to tune into today's bonus show. You can get the bonus show by signing up for membership at joinpacman.com. On the bonus show today, we're going to talk about a number of topics. We're going to talk about how Joe Biden has told Benjamin Netanyahu that the situation in Gaza is unacceptable and that the U.S. may have to take action if civilian lives aren't better protected in the region. I'm going to show you a clip of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg smacking down Fox News on the issue of EVs. And finally, No Labels is bailing on its plan to field a unity candidate in the 2024 presidential race. I'm sure you're all disappointed that we're not going to get a No Labels party candidate in the election.

All of that and more on today's bonus show. Don't miss out. Sign up on JoinPackman.com. If you're a member, I'll see you there. If not, Dave will be back on Monday. Take care, everybody.