The David Pakman Show - 5/11/23: Trump CNN town hall goes horribly wrong, George Santos' unhinged press conference

Episode Date: May 11, 2023

-- On the Show: -- Matt Desmond, Professor of Sociology at Princeton University and author of the book "Poverty, By America," joins David to discuss poverty in the United States, including its causes, changes over time, and ways to eradicate it. Get the book: https://amzn.to/3VWTQlG -- Failed former President Donald Trump lies uncontrollably during a CNN Town Hall hosted by Kaitlan Collins in front of a sycophant crowd -- CNN's Donald Trump town hall was a total disgrace, pushing journalism closer to a humiliating collapse -- Was CNN's Donald Trump town hall the most corrosive event in news television history? -- Lying Republican Congressman George Santos holds an outrageous press conference after being arrested for 13 different criminal charges -- The arrest warrant and indictment for lying Republican Congressman George Santos is released -- Republican Senator Mitt Romney has the correct reaction to the arrest of Republican Congressman George Santos -- Voicemail callers are generally disgusted with CNN's Trump town hall -- On the Bonus Show: SCOTUS Justice Elena Kagan was worried about accepting free bagels, Fox News hit with another lawsuit, Senator Dianne Feinstein returns to Senate for first votes since February, much more... 🦛 Happy Hippo: Use code PAKMAN for 20% off at https://happyhippo.com/pakman ♨️ Bon Charge Sauna Blanket: Use code PAKMAN for 15% OFF at https://boncharge.com/pakman 🧠 Mindbloom: Use code PAKMAN for $100 off at https://mindbloom.com/pakman 🚲 Lectric eBikes! Shop for your new electric bike at https://lectricebikes.com 🌳 Use code PAKMAN for 20% off HoldOn plant-based bags at https://holdonbags.com/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

. We start today with Donald Trump's CNN town hall. We are going to talk about how CNN handled it. We will talk about reaction to the town hall from handled it. We will talk about reaction to the town hall from Trump supporters. We will talk about reaction to the town hall from Republicans and Democrats in elected office and from other networks. But we have to start with the town hall itself, which was two hours of Trump lying uncontrollably, calling the host Caitlin Collins nasty and telling the same corrosive greatest hits detrimental to American democracy that we have seen him tell for years now with some pushback from Caitlin Collins, but a structure that was

completely unprepared for the absurdity and insanity of the event at the very top level. MSNBC put together this sort of highlight list, which included Trump continuing to say he really won 2020, saying that E. Jean Carroll made up a fake story and is a whack job. Remember, a jury found that Trump sexually assaulted her, called the moderator, Caitlin Collins, a nasty person, complimented Vladimir Putin, refused to side with Ukraine in that invasion of Ukraine by Russia, defended keeping classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, pushed Republicans to default on the U.S. debt and said he was inclined to pardon a bunch of the January 6th rioters. We're talking about criminals. Let's get right into it, because

there is just so I can't cover even everything that was lied about because there were so many lies. But let's start. Trump found liable of sexual assault the day before and then the next day gets a prime time. It might have been a one hour. Now, I don't remember if it was one or two hours. I watched it in an accelerated format after the fact. Standing ovations from a sycophant audience and Trump arguably admitting to criminality during this event. Trump asked those classified documents. Did you show them to anyone? And Trump says not really, which I think means, yes, he did. When it comes to your documents, did you ever show those classified documents to anyone? Not really. I would have the right to. By the way, they were

declassified after night. Not that I can think of. Let me just tell you, I have the absolute right to do whatever I want with them. Now, understand not really isn't no. And immediately saying not really, but I could definitely do it if I wanted to. Sounds like he is saying yes. Another one of the most notable moments was when he called Caitlin Collins a nasty person. Now, when I do my analysis of how this was handled, you can simultaneously realize Caitlin Collins tried to do a good job. And when she pressed Trump, he insulted her. But also the way that this was generally handled by CNN was a disaster.

This is sort of the epitome of that. When she actually tries to press Trump, he just insults her. Why you held on to those documents when you knew the federal government was seeking them and then had given you a subpoena to return. Are you ready? Are you ready? Can I talk? Yeah. What's your answer? Can you mind? I would like for you to answer. OK, it's very simple. That's why I asked it. It's very simple that you're a nasty person. I'll tell you. And of course, the sycophant crowd cheers attack. Think about this.

This event embodies the downfall of journalism, but in more than one way, it's the downfall of journalism in that CNN was in way over its head and completely unprepared structurally to handle the uncontrollable lies flowing out of Trump's mouth like projectile vomiting. They were unprepared to do that. That's a problem, right? In journalism. But also it's the continued attacks on journalism where when you attack the moderator who's doing their job or trying to your supporters cheer.

We Trump's insulting the person asking questions really sad on many, many levels. The topics came up related to the 2020 election. And Caitlin Collins, again, she's trying tries to confront Trump with the reality that the things he's saying, even Republicans say say aren't true about the 2020 election. And he just steamrolls right past never had to pay before. We nobody can afford to continue to pay what's happening with energy. But we were energy independent. We were getting out of Afghanistan with strength and with dignity.

And instead we got out. We look like fools. Probably the most embarrassing moment in the history of our country. We have a lot of questions about the economy and foreign policy tonight. But what you just said there, Republican officials debunked those claims about fraudulent ballots. We want to give you a chance tonight. Who? Republican officials in Georgia and every single state.

There is no, your own election officials, Mr. President. So we wanted to give you a chance. People were afraid to take on the issue, But we have a big problem in this country. We have we wanted elections. We have elections that were horrible. If you look at what happened in Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, if you look at what happened in Detroit, Michigan, this is all debunked lies. Understand that if you look at what happened in Atlanta, millions of votes and all you have to do is take a look at government cameras. You'll see them. People go into 28 different voting booths to vote, to put in seven ballots apiece. And they're all on camera.

I have to stop you there. None of that happened. Because there is no evidence of that. Your own election officials testified to that and have said that. Republicans in these states did this. In Georgia, there were multiple recounts, including a hand recount. We have questions about the claims that you're making tonight from voters on this topic. I want to bring in Scott Dustin from Concord.

He works in. All right. And then this guy, we're not going to play it. But this guy then asked if Trump is going to stop all of this stuff about 2020. And Trump basically responded, well, if there's no more fraud, then I'll stop talking about them. The topic of documents did come back up. Donald Trump claimed Obama took documents

as well. And Caitlin Collins says Obama did not take documents. Jack is not criminal. I took the documents I'm allowed to. You know who else took them? Obama took them. Nixon took them. Reagan took them. Oh, he did. He did. I'd like to know Reagan says that President even Jimmy Carter, even Mike Pence had some documents and he's a very honorable guy. You reference, but you know, took him more than anybody is Joe Biden. He has eighteen hundred boxes and nobody even knows. And you know, eighteen hundred and nobody talks about him. Now, these are all lies. And again, Caitlin Collins is trying. Trump is totally steamrolling her in absolutely every way here.

They then bring up the insurrection, the riots, January 6th, 2021. Trump says Nancy Pelosi is to blame. Caitlin Collins tries to interject about Trump's continued lies about 10000 National Guard troops, soldiers, etc. And Trump just keeps going and going and going. Oh, boy, looks like we have a bit of a glitch here with this clip, but let's see if we can fix it for everybody. Here we go. We can go sentence after sentence after sentence of things I said and things I put out. One of the big problems was that Nancy Pelosi, crazy Nancy, as I affectionately call her crazy Nancy Pelosi and the mayor of Washington were

in charge, as you know, of security and they did not do their job. Guard, you're in charge. They are. Well, I offered them national guard. I said, we'll give you soldiers, we'll give you a national guard. Trump did not offer. Trump asked for soldiers to protect him. That's the incredible thing. It's an it's an unbelievable, complete rewriting of history, blaming people whose responsibility is not what Trump claims is their responsibility. And then we find out Trump was worried about his own safety. He wanted soldiers there to protect him.

You whatever you want. And they turned me down. You're alive. She turned me down. She takes me. She turned me down in writing. They turned me down. But you're acting defense secretary Chris Miller at the time.

He says you never gave a formal order to deploy the National Guard. But when it comes to that day, just the opposite. He Miller wrote a book and he's a fantastic guy and he was ready to go. They turned him down. These are all lies. And then maybe one of the most horrifying aspects to this. And again, with a sycophant crowd like this, if the crowd's cheering, that's a moment you want to zoom in on because Trump's probably saying something horrible. And indeed, Donald Trump says he will pardon a large number of the alleged insurrectionists

and convicted insurrectionists. And what they've done and I love that question because what they've done to so many people is nothing, nothing. And then what they've done to these people, they've persecuted these people. And yeah, my my answer is I am most likely if I get in, I will most likely I would say it will be a large portion of them. You know, they did a very if the crowd's cheering, it's probably a really bad moment. And that alone, Trump saying, I am going to mass pardon criminals who were rioting on my behalf. Put everything else aside. Put the rest

of the town hall. Put everything aside. That alone is a great reason not to vote for Donald Trump. When Caitlin Collins brings up Mike Pence, Mike Pence, Trump's former vice president, says Trump endangered my life that day with what he did and what he incited. Will you apologize? And Trump says, I don't really think I didn't. He did some. Pence did something wrong by not holding up the certification of Joe Biden. But one person who was at the Capitol that day, as you know, was your vice president, Mike Pence, who says that you endangered his life on that day.

I don't think he was in any danger. Mr. President, do you feel that you owe him an apology? No, because he did something wrong. He should have put the votes back to the state legislatures. And I think we would have had a different outcome. I really do. Crowds cheering when the crowd cheered. It was a signal that this is one of the crazier things that Donald Trump is saying. Of course, Mike Pence did not have the authority or ability or right or permission, whatever you want. He did not have the ability to reject the election of Joe Biden and to somehow try to stuff Trump into the Oval Office for four more years. Then the topic of E. Jean Carroll came up. Now, I want you to

remember that the day before this town hall, a jury found Trump liable civilly for the sexual assault and defamation of E. Jean Carroll for Trump's assault on her in the 1990s in a Bergdorf Goodman department store in Manhattan. Trump brings up that E. Jean Carroll had a pet named Vagina and that the judge wouldn't let that be part of the trial. I'm not kidding, folks. It's 2023. Former president running again. This is what he's talking about.

Her dog or her cat was named Vagina. The judge wouldn't allow it to put that in all of these things. But with her, they can put in anything access. This is a jury of nine people who found you liable of sexual abuse. Do you think that that that will deter women from voting for you? No, I don't think so, because I think the whole thing just so you understand, really, I never met this woman. I never saw this woman. He never saw her. I don't believe a word he's saying. And then Trump actually goes into a detailed story about the circumstances. I think I just lost the light in my suit. That was weird. Goes into a detailed

so we'll get that fixed up. He tells a story about what's being said happened. And it's one of the most bizarre moments of the entire thing. I never met this woman. I never saw this woman. This woman said I met her at the front door of Bergdorf Goodman, which I rarely go into other than for a couple of charities. I met her in the front door. She was about 60 years old. This is like twenty two, twenty three years ago. She was about 60 years old. And this is like 22, 23 years ago. She was 52. I met her in the front door of Bergdorf Goodman. I was immediately attracted to her and she was immediately attracted to me. And we had this great chemistry. We're walking into a crowded department. So we had this great chemistry. And a few minutes later, we end up in a a room, a dressing room of Bergdorf Goodman

right near the. The crowd laughs and laughs and laughs. They just love it. Remember, Trump's been found civilly liable for sexual assault and they're just making fun of the victim. The crowd's loving it. Everybody's having a party. And then she found out there are locks on the door.

She said, I found one that was open. She found one. She learned this at trial. She found one that was open. She found one. She learned this at trial. She found one that was open. What kind of a woman meets somebody and brings them up? And within minutes, you're playing hanky panky in a dressing room. OK, I don't know if she was married then or not. John Johnson, I feel sorry for you, John.

Just a president. Can I. So think of it, an entire crowd on national TV led by Trump disgustingly laughing about the sexual assault that remember, it's not a mere allegation. Now, a jury found Trump liable for that and the crowd just having a grand old time. Caitlin Collins did ask Trump about the infamous Access Hollywood tape where Trump says you can just grab women by the you know what Trump Trump defends. It says there's nothing wrong because he says they let you do it.

They let you do it. There was a tape deposition of you from October in it. You defended the comments that you made on that excess Hollywood tape about being able to grab women how you want. Do you stand by those comments? I said, if you're famous and rich or whatever I said, but I said, if you're a star, you are. And I said, women let you. I didn't you are. And I said, women let you.

I didn't say you, Grip. I said, women let. You know, you didn't use that word. But if you look, women let you. Now, they said, will you take that back? I said, look, for a million years, this is the way it's been. I want to be honest. This is the way it's been.

I can take it back if you'd like to. But if you're a famous person, if you're a star and I'm not referring to myself, I'm saying people that are famous, people that are stars in the deposition, people that are rich, to be a star, people that are powerful, they tend to do pretty well in a lot of different ways. OK, and you would like me to take that back. I can't take it back because it happens to be true. I said it's been true for one million years, a million years, even before Homo sapiens. It was absolutely the truth.

Trump then moving on to what we might call foreign policy, the idea of Trump foreign policy. I know it's kind of laughable, but given a number of opportunities to say, you know, given that Russia invaded Ukraine and Russia is in the wrong, do you want Ukraine to come out victorious from that? Or do you want Russia to successfully take over Ukraine? Trump refused to answer that question. Nancy Pelosi here is would you give Ukraine weapons and funding if you were? I would sit down.

Let me just put it this way. If I'm president, I will have that war settled in one day, 24 hours. How would you settle that war in one day? And again, the crowd's cheering. So it must be Trump said something stupid. And indeed, how on earth are you going to settle that in 24 hours? I'll meet with Zelensky. They both have weaknesses and they both have strengths. And within 24 hours, that war will be settled. It'll be over. It'll be absolutely. Do you want Ukraine to win this war? I don't think in terms of winning and losing, I think in terms of getting it settled. So we stop killing all these people and breaking them.

Oh, sounds like a sort of both sides perspective on something Russia did here. And the crowd loves it. Speaker 4 Can I just follow up on that? You said you don't think you have to do is you have to get you have to follow up on that because that's a really important thing. Let me just say there. Can you say if you want Ukraine or Russia to win this war? I want everybody to stop dying.

They're dying. Russians and Ukrainiansians dying like dogs. So he refused to answer that, refused to answer that. And then lastly, and not surprisingly, the cherry on top, Trump refuses to commit to accepting the results of the twenty twenty four election. You are running in the twenty twenty four race. If you are the Republican nominee and you were in that 2024 race, will you commit tonight to accepting the results of the 2024 election?

Yeah, if I think it's an honest election, absolutely. That means no. To accepting the results of the election, regardless of the outcome. Do you want me to answer it again? If I think it's an honest election, I would be honored to. And right now we are so far ahead of both Democrat and Republican. And you know what? If I don't win, this country is going to be in big trouble. It's so sad to see what's happening. But no commitment there on the accepting the results, regardless of the outcome, if it's an honest election. Correct. OK, so not committing to accepting the 2020 or election

results or. And Trump just kind of waves off Caitlin Collins and the crowd laughs and everybody has a grand old time. This is dangerous. Everybody's laughing off the fact that he did it in 2020 and he's saying he's going to do it again in 2024. If he loses, he will say that it was rigged. Disastrous event for democracy. Let's now talk about CNN's role in this. I said I was keeping an open mind. Let's see how CNN handles the Trump town hall. Maybe they will hold Trump accountable. Maybe it will be produced in a way that Trump can't steamroll Caitlin Collins and tell lies with a sycophant crowd and everybody's going to cheer. And you know, it won't just be Caitlin Collins meekly every once in a while trying to fact

check. But unfortunately, that's basically what it was. And we can simultaneously say Caitlin Collins offered some token resistance. She did try to do some fact checking, sometimes more successfully, sometimes less successfully in the context of Trump lying uncontrollably, spreading really dangerous, corrosive lies about American democracy in front of a crowd where when they cheered, it was the absolute worst stuff, the worst of making fun of sexual assault victim E. Jean Carroll attacking Caitlin Collins is nasty. When the crowd cheered or laughed, you knew Trump was doing the absolute worst stuff.

And so Caitlin Collins tried, but she couldn't even remotely control Trump in her defense. Very few people could. And that's where we have to question what was the reason for doing this town hall? It's May of the year before the election. There isn't even really a serious challenger to Trump yet. I know DeSantis is in the 20s. DeSantis isn't running right now. Nikki Haley has no shot. Vivek Ramaswamy has no shot. So why do a town hall like this in May of 2023 for the ratings? It's that simple. Chris Licht taking over CNN and saying this is what we're going to do. Trump ignored the token fact checks. He spoke over Caitlin Collins. The crowd cheered. There was no way to control it. When you zoom out, I don't see how America was served by this event. I don't

see how voters were served. And the way I'd characterize it in some total is Caitlin Collins did the best job she could by herself on stage in front of a crowd of Trump sycophants. But the situation made it an impossibility. It was doomed to fail. And after the break, we'll look at the reaction from some in the media and some in elected office. One of our sponsors today is Happy Hippo, Today is happy hippo offering super quality lab tested kratom kratom, also known as Mitra Gina Speciosa, is an herbal leaf from Southeast Asia known for its soothing and uplifting properties. We've talked about it on the show before. Some people compare it to coffee, others to CBD, but with a much more pronounced effect. You can take it with water,

use it to make tea. The quality of Kratom that you buy online or at stores can really vary. And if you use Kratom, Happy Hippo is where you want to go. With over 10 years of experience in the business, Happy Hippo only offers top shelf alkaloid rich Kratom products, no grainy cheap stuff. All the batches are consistent and lab tested for purity. If you ever run into a batch you don't like, they'll replace it. No questions asked. Happy Hippo offers same day shipping. They often ship within just 20 minutes of you ordering. And Happy Hippo has the happiest customer service you'll find anywhere. Always glad to answer your questions. And they're giving my audience 20 percent off when you go to happy hippo dot com slash Pacman and use the coupon code Pacman. That's happy hippo dot com slash Pacman coupon code Pacman

saves you 20 percent. The info is in the podcast notes. One of our sponsors today is Bonn Charge. I have always enjoyed dry saunas. You get in there, your heart rate is up, dilates the blood vessels, can soothe achy joints and muscles. It's relaxing. It's just a great way to remove a little stress. Bonn Charge is the creator of the infrared sauna blanket, which you can enjoy from home. Super easy to set up. Heats up fast. You don't have to have your head inside like at a traditional sauna at the gym. Nice for meditating or reading, getting work done, relaxing. I have found it to be a great way to unwind at the end of a long day. Easy to clean, sleek, lightweight design, easy to store and comes with a 12 month warranty. And of course, if you don't love it, returns are super easy,

but I think you will love it. And you'll get 15 percent off when you go to bond charge dot com slash Pacman and use the code Pacman. That's B.O.N.C.H.A.R.G.E. Dotcom slash Pacman. Use code Pacman for 15 percent off. The link is in the podcast notes. All right. Was the Trump CNN town hall the most corrosive television event in political history? Depends who you ask. For example, Republican Congressman Byron Donalds was actually reinvigorated into continuing to not answer

the simple question, did Trump win in 2020 or did he lose? Trump setting the tone during the town hall that he's insisting he won. Byron Donalds asked about it. He will not acknowledge nearly three years later that Trump simply lost that day. This is one of the reasons why these events are so corrosive. Listen to this oversight committee. Can I just are the facts? You do acknowledge Donald Trump lost the 2020 election, correct? Again, we're going to continue to talk about 2020. I mean, it's a right. Hold on. Let me tell

you. Let me tell you why most voters are frankly kind of tired of y'all bringing this up. Inflation, border. You don't have the courage to express your opinion about what happened. I'm a Republican voter. I'm a Republican voter. Voters want to talk about inflation, the border, fentanyl, the debt ceiling, foreign policy. If you want to talk about the 2020 election, let's talk about this.

We do know that Mark Elias was in many jurisdictions suing to actually change election procedures, which, by the way, is at the hands of the state legislature and every state, according to the Constitution, not in the hands of courts, not in the hands of the Supreme Court, the state legislature. We do know that to be a fact. We do know that true. You won't state your opinion about actually factually what happened in the 2020.

You guys want me to make a statement. Frank, let me tell you right now, this this is not a trick question. They act like it's a trick question. It's just OK, fine. You want Trump to have won. You want him to win in 2024. You think Biden's bad. But can we just start with Biden did win.

Can we start there? They refuse. Joe Scarborough from MSNBC this morning had actually a pretty good take about the impact of this town hall. No surprises. And yet it was just it was a disgraceful performance. Yes. I'm constantly telling people not to catastrophize over Trump, that he's actually going to lose.

This is a former Republican member of Congress, by the way, because he keeps drilling down deeper and deeper into his base. But it is it is I can't believe I'm going to use catastrophizing language here. But it was it was just it was disgraceful on every level. Yeah. It showed, I wouldn't say it's dangerous for democracy because we passed that a long time ago, but it showed the corrosive effects of Trumpism over eight years. And I've got to say, the most shocking part was an audience And I've got to say.

The most shocking part was an audience who cheered on a president who tried to overturn American democracy. Yeah. Joe Scarborough is completely right now. A practical question becomes, did Trump convince anybody one way or the other? We'll get to Van Jones's take on what it did to Democrats. But they actually had a focus group on CNN with a group of Trump supporters. And you may or may not be interested to hear that it didn't affect any of them one way

or the other. Trump spending that time just lying and lying and lying. It just had no impact one way or the other. But that's what they have in common, that most of them are Trump supporters. What I want to ask you, first of all, is do you think show of hands? Anybody think Donald Trump looks better after this town hall? No hand. And if you think it looks worse, no hand.

You think the same thing about him as you did when you walked in? So on Trump supporters, it had no impact whatsoever. What about on Democrats? Well, Van Jones says, if you watch this and you're a Democrat, you're probably feeling a lot better about Joe Biden all of a sudden. I think if you're a Democrat watching that, you think we've been criticizing and complaining about Biden. This is a horror show that we don't want a rerun of. And I think a lot of Democrats

were appalled by his behavior, him throwing Ukraine under the bus. You know, I hope he gets sued again this morning for libel and slander and everything else. He's being so horrible, you know, toward the people who have been on their side of his legal cases. But, you know, I think that we've got to be careful here now because Trump has a particular trick that he uses with nostalgia. The whole make America great again is about there was this era that was wonderful as 19, which we've talked about before. So listen, I think the best case scenario, as atrocious and disgusting as the event was on the merits, the hope is Trump supporters still support him. Other Republicans were maybe appalled. And of course, Democrats may be appalled enough that now they are more

interested in coming out to vote in 2024 against Trump if he is indeed the nominee. It's still a while to go, but let's hope that's the outcome. Let's now go to George Anthony Devolder Santos. George Santos, the lying of lying congressman who was arrested yesterday on 13 criminal counts, held a manic unhinged press conference after being arrested. It's wacky. We're going to look at it. It's just really, really wacky stuff. And he is trying to do the Trump thing where he says it's a witch hunt and it's all unfair and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

He gives this event in Islip, New York. Vish Bura is the guy if you're watching in the blue checkered suit over Santos's right shoulder, he's increasingly a corrosive actor in Republican politics there in Long Island. Let's listen to what Santos had to say. And this is this is crazy. I'm warning you, this is bonkers stuff. Speaker 1 guys. Look, this is the beginning of the ability for me to address and defend myself. We have an indictment. We have the information that the government wants to come after me on, and I'm going to comply. I've been complying throughout this entire process.

I have no desire not to comply at this point. They've been gracious in there. Now I'm going to have to go and fight to defend myself. The reality is, is it's a witch hunt because it makes no sense that in four months, four months, five months, I'm indicted. You have Joe Biden's entire family receiving deposits from nine. The crowd not reacting positively to that. Nine family members receiving money from foreign from foreign destinations into their bank accounts. It's been years of exposing. A lot of you here have reported on them, and yet no

investigation is launched into them. I'm going to fight you. I will. And I'm just getting back to that. I'm going to fight my battle. I'm going to deliver. All right. So it's a witch hunt, he says, asked whether he will resign. He says that he will not. And again, you will not. I will not resign. I will not resign. Now, he may be kicked out. One interesting thing that happened in the last 24 hours is that Kevin McCarthy, the Republican speaker of the House, said, I do not support the reelection of George Santos. And you might say, who cares if Kevin McCarthy doesn't support it? In general, Republican leadership supports the reelection of Republicans who are running for reelection.

So this could be the beginning of Republicans actually saying we've got to we've got to do something about this. Hilariously, he was he George Santos was asked, why did you apply for unemployment benefits when you were making one hundred and twenty grand a year working? And of course, this is one of the different frauds that he's alleged to have committed. And he says, well, that this is all going to be part of my defense in an orderly fashion. Why would you apply for unemployment benefits when you had a job making one hundred and twenty thousand dollars a year?

By the way, I have for people who are watching, there is about 80 who are not watching. There's about 80 microphones in front of him. It almost looks satirical. And there's a guy in the back holding a sign that says Devolder defrauds the voters, which is just a beautiful touch. It's this SNL can't do anything with this because it wouldn't look any different to parody this event. This is part of my defense. This is inaccurate information. And I will get to clear my name on this during the pandemic. It wasn't very clear. I don't understand where

the government's getting their information, but I will present my prosecutor's say that you got over twenty thousand dollars in unemployment benefits. Sir, how is that acceptable? Ma'am, like I said, my employment was changed during the time. I don't understand where the government's coming from. I'll present my defense. He's all totally confused. At another moment, he completely delusionally says that in a couple of years he'll be chairman of a committee in the House.

Now listen, he may or may not make it out of the next month. I don't know. It depends on what Republicans are going to do. The idea that he's going to get reelected and subsequently become the chair of a committee really is a level of delusion that raises a lot of red flags. So many. Well, look, the way I look at it, I'll be a chairman of a committee in a couple of years. If you just look at the standards of Congress, look at the Senate.

There you go. Soon. This is no worse than anything everybody else is doing in the House and Senate. So he'll be chairman of a committee trying to put sort of a positive spin on this entire thing. He says he's feeling fine despite 13 criminal charges. I'm feeling it's hard. I'm addressing I'm addressing one of your colleagues here. Look, look, look at the. Speaker 5 Thank you.

Speaker 4 I'm addressing I'm addressing one of your colleagues here. I don't want to give the back of. So as usual, Jody, I do my best to be a positive person. Life is already as bad as it gets. So I I'm fine. And somebody yelling his lips are moving. Therefore he must be lying is the implication. OK, he this is maybe the funniest moment.

He starts talking about getting back to Washington, D.C., to vote on it like a border bill. He's pretending to be a normal congressman. And there's something so funny, like, yes, members of Congress vote on bills. But the idea that this guy is going to now be able to just pretend to be a normal congressman with 13 criminal counts against him is a joke. Washington. Yes, I am. I have to go back and vote tomorrow.

We have one of those consequential votes in this Congress, which is a border bill. And I'm very looking forward to being there to vote on. All right. He's going to pretend to be a normal congressman. And then lastly, Fox News caught up with the Santos with Santos's lawyer on the way out. The lawyer was mostly interested in finding his car. But he did say, I don't really have anything to do with Santos choosing to hold that wacky press conference. You didn't have too much that you wanted to share at this time. He just talked himself. What do you have to say about how your client is feeling right now?

Oh, I was like, oh, it's looking for his car. But hold on with us, Martha. I mean, he had a lot to say in that press conference. But what's that's up to? OK, I know you said you don't want to try it in the media, but how is he feeling? You looked a little nervous when he was in court today. A lot of serious allegations. How many times have you been arrested? All right. So making the point that people just get nervous when they get arrested, but that it's really up to Santos whether he holds these press conferences. So a completely manic, wacky event. It's taking on a sort of circus sideshow feel. And it seems as though Santos can't get away from circus sideshows. We're going to see it. We'll see if this guy

survives the next month. I hope he doesn't. But I don't have a prediction right now. can't get away from circus sideshows. We're going to see it. We'll see if this guy survives the next month. I hope he doesn't. But I don't have a prediction right now. If you deal with anxiety or depression, you may have tried meditation, exercise, diet changes, therapy, all of which are important things to try. There is also a new treatment that we've been talking about on the program for years, which for many people has been a game changer, and that is ketamine therapy. The research around ketamine therapy for anxiety and depression looks very promising, which is why I'm thrilled about our new sponsor Mind Bloom. Mind Bloom is the leader about doesn't have the unpleasant side effects of traditional antidepressants. In a study of over twelve hundred Mindbloom clients, eighty nine percent reported improvements in their anxiety

and depression after just two sessions. Read about the evidence for ketamine therapy. We've talked about it on the show. It's pretty remarkable stuff. Mindbloom is offering my audience one hundred dollars off your first six session program. Go to Mindbloom dot com slash Pacman. Use the code Pacman. That's M.I.N.D. B.L.O.O.M. dot com slash Pacman. Use code Pacman for one hundred dollars off. The info is in the..... . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . ..... Lectric is where you want to go. I've tried e-bikes that cost seven thousand dollars

and Lectric delivers the same performance and specs, but at a much more reasonable price point. I take my electric e-bike everywhere these days. I've almost completely ditched my regular bike for now. E-bikes are, of course, better for the environment than taking a car. The e-bike gives you more flexibility and range than a regular bicycle. You can go further. You can see more. My e-bike is just my favorite form of cardio at this point. It comes fully assembled to your door. It includes a bright LCD display, seven speed gearing, five levels of pedal assist and a powerful battery that's removable so you can bring it indoors for charging. It's also fully foldable so I can put it in the back of my car and they The David Pakman Show David Pakman dot com. That's L.E.C.T.R.I.C.E. Bikes Dotcom. The link is in the podcast notes today.

We're going to be speaking with Matt Desmond, who is a professor of sociology at Princeton University and also author of the book Poverty by America. Really appreciate your time today. Looking forward to this conversation. Me, too. Thanks for having me. So when we talk about poverty in the United States, we know that on average and we can define average a few different ways, the United States is a very, very rich country.

We've all heard, you know, you put Bill Gates in a room with poor people. The mean net worth gets very high, but it doesn't really represent the situation for everybody other than Bill Gates in that room. Is it a mathematical reality that even though there are very rich people in the United States and that sort of skews these averages, poverty is still very high? Do we need to go beyond that to really understand the source of it? The United States stands alone as the richest country in the world with the worst poverty. So our child poverty rate is double that of other peer nations like Canada, South Korea, Germany.

Angus Deaton, the economist, estimated that over 5 million Americans live in abject poverty by global standards, getting by on $4 a day or less. And look, one in three of us live in homes making fifty five thousand dollars or less. A lot of those homes aren't considered officially poor. But what else do you call trying to raise two kids on fifty five K in Boston? So there's a giant amount of insecurity and poverty in this rich land. When we think about poverty, part of what we have to talk about is how we're measuring it. And as you're talking about, there are people who, by the definition in the United States, aren't poor, but that the practical day to day realities certainly mirror poverty as we understand it. Can you talk a little bit about how the definition of poverty in the United States has changed over

time? So there's a lot of different ways to measure poverty. Researchers do not agree on what the best measure is. You know, for me, one way to measure hardship is just to measure hardship. And so you can look at something like evictions. They're up 20 percent since 2000. Look at the share of families visiting food pantries, up 19% since 2000. The number of our homeless school kids is up 74% since the Great Recession. There's a lot of incredibly troubling signs that poverty is not only persistent in America, but growing. You know, the poverty line is a pretty flawed measure, but it also tracks pretty well with those hardship measures. The government introduced another measure called the Supplemental Poverty Rate and Supplemental Poverty Measure in 2011.

And it counted for a lot of kind of government programs the official poverty measure ignores, but it also counted for like housing costs and regional variation in cost of living, which the official poverty measure also ignores. And when they released that line, that new poverty line, the country officially gained three million more poor people, actually, because any reductions in poverty offset by counting aid were more than kind of canceled out by counting rising housing and medical costs. Speaker 1 I want to really delve into one of the aspects you write about in the book that goes above and beyond defining some

of these terms, establishing what the situation currently is and what it has been. And you talk about how affluent Americans knowingly or unknowingly contribute to poor people remaining poor. And this may be a difficult thing for some people to hear and to understand. Can you talk a little bit about that and how you lay out the case for the knowing or the unknowing aspect of that? I ran across this line by the novelist Tommy Orange, and it goes like this. These kids are jumping out of the windows of burning buildings, falling to their deaths. And we think that the problem is that they're jumping. And

when I read that sentence, I was like, man, that sounds like the American poverty debate. You know, for hundreds of years, really, our focus has been on the poor, on the poor themselves, the jumpers, you know, we should have been focusing on the fire, who lit it, who's warming their hands by it. And many of us, when we have that kind of conversation and we want to talk about the guy that's just a little richer than us or a lot richer than us, but the book is really trying to get a lot of us. And by us, I mean those of us that have found some security and privilege in this country to really looking hard in our lives and realize how we're connected to the problem and the solution.

A lot of us consume the cheap goods the working poor produce. A lot of us are invested in the stock market. Don't we benefit when our savings go up, even if that savings comes at a human sacrifice? Many of us benefit from tax breaks. And we don't think of those as welfare programs, but they are. They cost the government money and they put money in our pocket. And, you know, a lot of us hold on to those tax breaks, which starve anti-poverty spending. And then we have the audacity to ask, how can we afford to do more as a country? So I think that when you start looking at the poverty problem by looking at the fire, you kind of realize there's so much poverty in America, not in spite of our wealth, but because of it. And I think that opens up new possibilities for change.

I'm interested in your thoughts about to what degree there is moral moral responsibility at the individual decision level. Maybe this is analogous to, you know, I've talked with my audience before about how if you think taxes should be higher, sending the IRS more money isn't really policy. It's not a solution to the problem. It's not how we got here. And so you can simultaneously pay, I think, pay what you legally owe while advocating that large swaths of people, maybe including yourself, should be paying more.

If we apply that to the conversation that we're having about poverty, how should the individual look at their level of responsibility here? I think we should commit ourselves becoming poverty abolitionists. You know, we should view poverty not as an unfortunate aspect of American life, but as an abomination. And I think like other abolitionist movements, the movement to abolish slavery, the prison, you know, we should recognize that profiting from someone else's pain corrupts all of us. And so that's a political project that's going to take renewed political movements and policies, but it also is a personal project. And that requires us to shop differently, invest differently, thinking about taxes. For those of us that benefit from this lopsided welfare state, the fact that the country does so much more to guard fortunes than to fight poverty, maybe we start a letter writing campaign. We write our congressperson saying, like, let's wind down these things. I don't need this. This is also a neighbor to neighbor conversation over the fence line conversation, not because, you know, these little kind of personal moves will

abolish poverty, but those personal moves multiplied over and over again builds a political will that empowers our lawmakers act. One of the areas that's a topic of much, much discussion with lawmakers and in communities and with neighbors is about zoning practices, approval boards for condos, restricted income condos, all these different things. Can we talk a little bit about that in the sense of, you know, we we know about the long history of exclusionary zoning practices, practices in lending. Many of us have talked about those realities. We now sometimes see I mean, recently in Brooklyn, I was talking with some friends about a project

that was putting in I think it was a dozen or so units. And the idea is we're going to sell the dozen units to six buyers and these are going to be income limited. So everybody buys two units. You live in one. We create lower income landlords. It all sounds interesting. But is it really going to are we really going to deal with this problem piecemeal in that way? Or does the solution really have to come from higher and be broader and bigger? Yeah, I think both and everything, all of the above, you know, and I think that segregation continues to be a driving force of poverty in America. There's probably no more soulless phrase in the English language than municipal zoning ordinance, you know,

but like that's a really good way to look at the soul of a community. You know, on 75 percent of our land, you can only build a single detached family home. You know, we build these walls around our community and we hoard affluence behind those walls. And that not only concentrates wealth, but it concentrates poverty outside of our walls. So we have to tear down the walls. We have to start reaching for broader, inclusive communities, which really means, you know, going down to your zoning board meeting at Tuesday night and standing up and saying, look, I refuse to deny kids opportunities my kids get living in this place. We got to build this thing. I refuse to be a segregationist. So again, here's a conversation that sounds very like policy

and abstract, but it's also very personal. You know, it's about how we vote, how we move, the conversations we're having with our workers at the water cooler. You know, and studies show that, you know, Democrats are more likely to embrace affordable housing in the abstract, but are no more likely than conservatives to vote yes in their own backyards. You know, studies show that conservative renters were actually more likely to vote yes on an affordable housing project than liberal homeowners. So I think our values cannot stop where our property line begins.

We really have to live out these values in our own lives. How did those values apply or connect to just to pick something that's often discussed to get your take on it? Something like mobile phones and in particular in the context of activism. Most of us have heard that and are aware that mobile phones are connected to so-called conflict minerals, typically from other countries. We're now talking outside the US, even though companies like Apple and others will say, no, everything's fine.

We're ensuring this, that the other thing isn't going on. Videos have surfaced where we see that there are very young, young looking people. Hard to say they aren't kids digging by hand, et cetera. Then they're manufactured. They're sold in places like, you know, a T-Mobile store, Apple store in the United States. And we can look at the wages that are paid there and they're not astronomically high, but they're sort of like, OK, and a lot of these are creating local jobs, et cetera, in the United States. How do we take that panorama total and combine it with the fact that many people who want to be activists for exactly the issues you're talking about use the devices to to that end?

Right. So it also plays a role in their activism. How do we unwind something so seemingly seemingly complicated when we apply the sort of standard and critique you're applying? Yeah, I would love us to apply that kind of critique to poverty abolitionism. You know, many of us know not to eat chocolate from certain brands because of these things, or we are aware of the climate consequences of certain purchases or flights or certain meals. But, you know, we know that our cucumbers, it's local organic.

We don't know how much the farmhand picked it. We know where to get our coffee if we want to signal certain political values. But we don't ask how much the workers are getting paid in there. I was in London a few weeks ago and I saw these stickers on stores and they said, you know, we pay a living wage. And I went into on stores and they said, you know, we play, we pay a living wage. And I went into a store and I said, what, tell me about the sticker. And they're like, well, you know, the standard is here, but you know, our companies decided to bring it up to here. I would love to see that kind of thing happening in America, that consumer push and process. And so

there's groups like Union Plus that say, hey, you know, you want a candy bar, you want a beer? These are these are union made. These aren't. As you as the cell phone example relates, right, a lot of us kind of feel, you know, embroiled in these kind of morally compromising networks. And we want out of it. You know, and this is where kind of argument for poverty abolition isn't just an argument for the end of this depravity and scarcity. It's about a freer country, a safer country, a happier country and a country where we don't worry so much about our kids. You know, I was I was in London a couple of weeks ago as well and saw the exact same stickers and found them interesting.

Should we be economic nationalists in this conversation in the sense of prioritizing, for example, like with coffee? There's very little coffee grown in the US, I think maybe some in Hawaii. And that's basically it. So it's coming from other parts of the world in having this conversation. Should we be economic nationalists in the sense of focusing on the metrics that relate to the workers in the US? Or should we be considering the farm in Costa Rica or wherever? And then with coffee, there's a middle person that's often involved where sometimes a lot of that money actually gets sucked in. To what degree should we focus

on within the U.S. versus outside of it? I think there is an there is something to be said by starting here. And the reason is building a political will to abolish poverty in America. And I mean that for real. I think we can and should end poverty in this land of abundance. Getting to that goal, I think, motivates further investments in countries that have far more poverty in the United States and could get us there. But if we can't do it here, right in our own backyard, I don't think we have a chance of doing it abroad. So I don't think we have to choose. And I think that often we have these kind of scarcity arguments, right? We're kind of setting up this false scarcity narrative. I don't think we have to do it. But I think just

pragmatically, there is something to be said about, OK, let's tackle poverty right here, right now. Then let's broaden, broaden the aperture. Last thing I wanted to ask you about, particularly in the context of the COVID COVID stimulus bills, the earned income tax credit has been a topic of discussion. I think generally speaking, it's a good program. I like the higher numbers. I think it makes sense in a lot of ways. But it also has limitations, which which you've talked about.

Certainly, it doesn't seem to address the root causes of poverty and the reasons people might qualify for an earned earned income tax credit, child tax credit to to begin with. Can you talk a little bit about that treating symptom versus disease, maybe? Right. So the earning tax credit is kind of a wage subsidy that our poorest paid workers, many of them parents, get every year. It's a big part of the safety net. It's about $61 billion a year. And for a lot of families, man, it's a lifesaver. It is a lifesaver. It lifts millions of families out of poverty. But it doesn't address that

problem, that low-wage problem. Do I think the EITC is a good idea? Do we need it? Absolutely. Do I think that we need other things that really cut at the root of poverty? Yes. So those would be things like worker power, expanding representation on corporate boards, for example, for workers. Yes. Finding out ways of making organizing easy instead of this incredibly hard, slow process that it is now. Things to really kind of build up wages and fight worker exploitation. And, you know, as we're doing that, let's definitely make sure those families have enough to get by with things like the EITC. So short term solutions and long term solutions. Do you see that Democrats or Republicans are

definitively better on this issue? Or is that a lot of political framing and posturing when there may not be as much daylight as some would believe? Speaker 2 No, I think Democrats are definitely better on this issue. Fair. I think on the ground level, there's a lot of Americans that want this right. Most Americans want a higher minimum wage. Most Americans think the rich aren't paying their fair share taxes. Yes. Most Democrats and most Republican voters think poverty now is a real unfair circumstances, not a moral failing. So I think there's a lot of us on the ground level, neighbor to neighbor, neighbor to neighbor that actually agree on these basic issues

of economic justice. But our electives are polarized from us. And that's a problem that we need to fix. The book is Poverty by America. We've been speaking with the book's author, Professor Matt Desmond, Sociology Department at Princeton University. Really appreciate your time and insights. Thank you, David. Appreciate you. Plastic, it's everywhere we look and not enough is being done about it. One hundred billion plastic bags are used and thrown away every year. Here's something super simple you can do to reduce plastic and help the planet a little bit. Our sponsor, Hold On Bags, is the company making plastic free trash bags and zip seal kitchen bags. They're just as strong and high quality

as the plastic bags you're used to. Hold On Bags are 100 percent plant based and home compostable, meaning they break down in just weeks, not decades. Their zip seal kitchen bags come in sandwich or gallon size to fit all of your needs, whether it's carrots or crayons. At home, I put all of my food waste in a hold on trash bag, throw it in the compost pile. And when I throw a hold on trash bag in my dumpster, I love knowing it's not filling our landfills and oceans with plastic. Single use plastics harm the planet at every stage, production, disposal, decomposition. Join the growing movement away from single use plastic. These products are really great. It's so easy We're not going to spend a ton of time on this because we've we've just not have we Code Pacman saves you 20 percent. The info is in the podcast notes. We're not going to spend a ton of time on this because we've just not have we don't

have that much time left on today's show. It's been so packed. But I do encourage folks to check out the arrest warrant and the indictment of George Anthony DeVolder Santos, including the full list of charges. There's funny stuff in it and there's interesting stuff in it. I'm going to put up just the first page of the arrest warrant. I don't know why I find this so damn funny. I don't know if it's a version of satire of some kind or if it's just totally standard.

The arrest warrant lists him as George Anthony Devolder Santos, a.k.a. in quotes, George Santos. I couldn't stop laughing when I saw this because it may well be that this has nothing to do with the fact that he has changed his public name over time without I'm not saying he legally changed his name, just the way he has publicly stated who he is. Videos where he says, I'm Anthony DeVolder and I run a pro Trump group. I'm George Santos. I'm George Anthony and all these different things. This may just be a completely standard thing that has no bearing on on that. George Anthony

DeVolder Santos, a.k.a. George Santos, as if he's been living under a false name for some period of time. Absolutely love it. But more importantly, the indictment and the arrest warrant describe the offenses, which include wire fraud, money laundering, theft of public monies and false statements. And it lists the specific laws that that he is accused of having broken. And there are a number of articles you can look at which go into more detail. It's actually seven counts of wire fraud, three counts of money laundering, one count of a theft of public funds, and then two counts of lying to the House of Representatives on financial forms. That's the that's the false

statements element of this. As the article says from MSN, wire fraud is the most serious charge and carries a penalty up to 20 years in prison. And as is often the case in these situations, if we get to a guilty verdict someday or a plea, a judge would decide, do you serve concurrently or consecutively different charges? And as you might know, if you get seven years on four different charges consecutively, that's twenty eight years. If they're concurrent, it's seven years total. So just all of the different details that we're going to be Mitt Romney was asked now that George Anthony DeVolder Santos has been charged criminally with multiple charges, what should happen?

And I love that Mitt Romney doesn't just say he should resign. He says he should already have resigned. And this is exactly the right answer. I actually wish that there were more Republicans. Some of them are going to come around now and say, well, he should now resign. I wish more people said what Mitt Romney says in this short six second clip to CNN's Manu Raju. He should have resigned a long time ago. He said embarrassment to our party. He's embarrassment. That is Congress. OK, so, yes, he should resign now. And actually, Republicans in the House should hold the vote and they should kick him out. But

the right take, as Mitt Romney has been one of the few Republican voices willing to say this, is that he should have been gone a long time ago. He never should have gotten to this point in time, even in even prior to the actual indictments. These Republicans seem very scared to just come out and say it or they don't believe it. But good for Mitt Romney for making that clear. We have a voicemail number. That number is two one nine two. David P. So many of you calling in about the Trump town hall on CNN. Most of you were appalled. Let's listen to a couple of these voicemails. Yeah, David, I just have to say about this Trump thing tonight on CNN, I'm about 38 minutes into it and I'm having to pause and walk outside and

de-stress every 10 minutes or so. But the thing that CNN did here is the crowd. The crowd is full of sickenance. It's like a laugh track. i mean you have caitlin collins who i honestly you know i looked at this tonight and i heard your you know i listened to your live stream and i heard your show earlier today and i'm thinking to myself the biggest person's you know that's got everything on the line is not trump it Trump. It's Caitlin Collins. And she's trying to interview this man. Where the crowd is literally a laugh track from the 1960s, I don't understand why CNN put their own employee in this position. Yeah.

So this is this is part of the argument I made about Caitlin Collins. There is praise and criticism of Caitlin Collins, but putting her in that position with a sycophant crowd is part of the friendly nature in in total with which Trump was given this opportunity. Let's listen to another caller about the Trump town hall. I think this is the Eggman. I watched Trump and Caitlin Collins on CNN last night like it was a homework assignment. Yeah, I watched it like I had to do it because it was something I needed to report on. My wife was watching with me. She walked out of the room.

It upset her so much. You can't stand Trump that much. You couldn't even listen anymore. But I forced myself to watch. I can't wait to hear what. You couldn't even listen anymore. But I forced myself to watch. I can't wait to hear what you have to say. Yeah. Shalom. Shalom. The Eggman quite appalled by it. And here's one more caller wing and.

Hi. Yeah, Dave. So my longtime listener, maybe less than a year. I watched the Trump or listen to the Trump town hall, and it was pretty within five minutes of listening. I was just like, this is a waste of time. I mean, I get why CNN did it. I mean, but we didn't learn anything about Trump that we didn't already know. That's true. But we learned a lot about the state of Trump sycophants, because when you look at when the crowd laughed and when the crowd cheered, it was at the absolute bottom of the barrel

moments when Trump attacked his own sexual assault victim during the event. The crowd laughed and cheered when Trump attacked the moderator, Caitlin Collins. The crowd laughed and cheered when Trump said he actually won in 2020. The crowd cheered. The crowd was actually what was new. Trump did his greatest hits and it was truly, truly horrible. We've got a great bonus show for you today. We'll talk about the latest out of the Supreme Court. We're going to talk about Fox News hit with yet another defamation lawsuit. And we will also talk about Senator representing California Dianne Feinstein's return to the Senate for the first time since February amid

calls for her to resign. We'll discuss the entire circumstances around her return all on the bonus show. Thank your lucky stars every day. You're not Dave Pakman. You don't have to be me to listen to the bonus show or to watch it. I'll host it. You watch it. Sign up at join Pakman dot com. Otherwise, we'll be back tomorrow with a brand.