The David Pakman Show - Ice Murder Terrifies Country As Trump Defends Natl Guard Prepared

Episode Date: January 11, 2026

-- On the Show -- Caleb Ragland, Chairman of the American Soybean Association, joins us to discuss how Trump's tariffs are reshaping the soybean industry and the economic future of rural America -- An ICE agent shoots and kills U.S. citizen during a federal immigration operation in Minneapolis as Trump falsely claims self defense and blames the radical left -- Governor Tim Walz prepares the Minnesota National Guard after uncoordinated ICE raids kill a resident and escalate tensions between state authorities and federal agents -- A confrontation between Minnesota state power and federal ICE operations raises concerns about institutional breakdown as courts and political norms face direct strain -- Trump proposes raising the U.S. military budget to 1.5 trillion dollars while falsely claiming tariffs will pay for it and contradicting years of anti Pentagon rhetoric -- White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt makes incoherent and contradictory claims about U.S. control over Venezuela and openly entertains buying Greenland -- Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. says Donald Trump has ordered obesity to end as new federal dietary guidelines reshape school meals military food and assistance programs -- On the Bonus Show: New reporting shows many patients regain weight after stopping GLP-1 drugs, raising questions about whether medical weight loss now requires lifelong treatment. Plus, Donald Trump says the United States could effectively run Venezuela for years, signaling an extraordinary expansion of U.S. control over another country's government and oil industry 🤖 Sponsored by Venice: Use code PAKMAN for 20% off a Pro Account at https://venice.ai/pakman 🛡️ Incogni lets you control your personal data! Get 60% off their annual plan: http://incogni.com/pakman ⚠️ Ground News: Get 40% OFF their unlimited access Vantage plan at https://ground.news/pakman -- Subscribe to our (FREE) Substack newsletter: https://davidpakman.substack.com -- Get David's Books: https://davidpakman.com/echo -- TDPS Subreddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/thedavidpakmanshow -- David on Bluesky: https://davidpakman.com/bluesky -- David on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/davidpakmanshow (00:00) Start (01:41) ICE raid kills U.S. citizen (11:38) Walz readies guard after deadly raids (20:18) Minnesota-ICE clash strains institutions (26:45) Trump floats $1.5T military budget (34:39) Soybean chair on tariffs' rural toll (55:24) Leavitt riffs on Venezuela, Greenland (01:01:44) RFK Jr claims order to end obesity  

We start today with a video out of Minneapolis showing an ice agent shooting a woman through her car window during a massive federal immigration raid. The woman, a U.S. citizen, was trying to leave after receiving conflicting commands, shot and died. Some are saying this is murder. Others were saying it is self-defense. I am not unsure which of the two it was and we will talk about it. Donald Trump blamed the radical left. This genuinely has the potential. to generate a civil war-like environment in the United States.

I don't say that lightly and we will talk about it. The fallout has been enormous. Governor Tim Walls of Minnesota says he is readying the national guard to be up against Trump's ice, which is both incredible and potentially, potentially escalatory, but necessary, I believe. We will also talk about the sudden proposal from the White House for a. 60% increase to the military budget. I thought Trump wasn't going to be that guy. And now his budget proposes increasing the size of the military by 60%. And later, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. says the

president has announced there is an order to end obesity. I mean, listen, ban obesity, ban COVID. Why not just ban things, right? Except we know that doesn't make any sense. All of these stories and more. Plus, a soybean farmer, Caleb Ragland, will join me. We've got a great. show today. Donald Trump's ICE agents appear to have murdered a woman, a 37-year-old American citizen. This is a story unlike any I have ever covered on the show. And it is one of the most disturbing stories, certainly of Trump's second term, never mind of the entire time that I have been doing this. And we deserve to describe it accurately. Renee Nicole Good, a 37-year-old U.S. citizen, A mother, a writer was shot and killed by an ICE agent during a massive federal immigration

operation in Minneapolis. The shooting was caught on video. Multiple angles. Clear footage. She was just driving away after being given conflicting information about what she should be doing. Ice agents surrounded her car. They gave conflicting orders. One agent said drive away.

Another said get out of the car. As she tried to maneuver away from the agents and ice. officer fires three shots through the window. She drives a short distance, crashes and dies in the hospital. I'm going to play it for you. Okay. There's nothing particularly graphic in the video. It was not a foot chase. It was not a shootout. It was not someone charging at an officer with a vehicle nor a weapon. I'm not going to do as a Pruder style film analysis of the video. But if you look closely, you will certainly notice that the officer was not at risk of getting run over. This was even if you say, oh, well, she was disobeying a legal command.

Does that justify getting assassinated? So listen, here's the video. This is the United States of America right now. Why every single media outlet is not calling this what it is. I don't know. But that's a whole other problem. Let's take a look. She stopped.

Officers get out. So you hear someone say, get out of the fucking car. Okay. And there's the moment. Now, the key thing is the officer who shoots, who in this angle is, briefly obscured by the vehicle. As you see the car accelerate, you see that the officer is to the left of the car. The wheels are turned.

She's not about to run this guy over. And then shooting through the window. We're not going to look more deeply at the video. The video, if what you want to do primarily is analysis of the video, the video is out there and you can certainly do it. But what is important here is that she was trying to leave. And that really matters. Because even in the most charitable interpretation to the ICE agents, she was disobeying an order

that justifies making an ICE agent who is not in any danger, judge jury and executioner, this is not law and order. This is not the way the United States is supposed to work. Now, Donald Trump very quickly weighed in and he says the agent was acting in self-defense from what. He said it's hard to believe the officer is alive. Really? The officer wasn't hit and then later ran towards the vehicle. Trump posting, quote, I have just viewed the clip of the event which took place in Minneapolis, Minnesota. It is a horrible thing to watch. The woman screaming was obviously a professional agitator. And the woman driving the car was very disorderly, obstructing and resisting, who then violently, willfully and viciously ran over the ice officer who seems to have shot her in

self-defense. None of that happened. None of that is true. Trump continued. Based on the attached clip, it's hard to believe he's alive, but is now recovering in the hospital. What? The situation is being studied in its entirety. But the reason these incidents are happening is because the radical left is threatening, assaulting and targeting our law enforcement officers and ICE agents on a daily basis. Can you imagine a more irresponsible and deluded comment? They are just trying to do the job of making America safe, says Trump.

We need to stand by and protect our law enforcement officers from this. Radical left movement of violence and hate. The problem, of course, is none of this comports with reality. Will the legacy in corporate media have the audacity? Is that what it is? The courage? The responsibility to the facts to simply say none of this is true. The officer was never run over.

He was on his feet the entire time. The video, if you keep watching, it shows him running down the street after the shooting. An independent reporting from outlets like The Guardian and the New York. Times found no evidence that the officer was injured at all despite the claims of the Department of Homeland Security. How is it hard to believe that he is still alive? Not hit and running around. The obvious question no one in the administration wants to answer is why was the gun pulled

at all? Why was the gun even out? If an ICE agent feels justified shooting into a car because a driver is trying to drive away amidst conflicting commands, that is not law enforcement. It is time for citizens and residents of the United States and every single media outlet to say that is enough. Now, Tim Walls and also the mayor of Minneapolis, Jacob Frey, they are saying this is enough. Here is Governor Tim Walls saying this was both predictable and avoidable. And of course, he's completely and totally correct.

The outrage that we have. Look, this was this was totally predictable as I said it yesterday. and it was totally avoidable. And I just want to remind you, too, the local law enforcement, we get no coordination. They don't tell us they're coming. They don't say why they're sending the largest deployment in the American history to Minneapolis.

They're not making us any safer. We don't have any of that coordination. They should be talking to us when we do these things. Let us know. We are going to be down here. This is going to happen. We don't have that. So when you see local law enforcement or state patrol

or if it would take the National Guard, We're there responding to the chaos they've created too. But our role is to make sure that we're protecting Minnesotans so that something like this doesn't happen. If federal agents are operating without coordinating with local officials and essentially in secrecy, of course this is going to happen. Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, he had a different way of approaching this issue. There's little, I can say again, that'll make this situation better.

I do have a message for our community, for a city, and I have a message for ICE. To ICE, get the fuck out of Minneapolis. We do not want you here. Your stated reason for being in this city is to create some kind of safety and you are doing exactly the opposite. So a very clear message. Now, one of the things I found most disgusting is how many in the right wing media, including Jesse Waters on Fox News rushed to attack the character of the woman that was murdered.

Now, I want you to listen very carefully. Okay. Listen carefully as Jesse Waters lists characteristics of Renee Good, the 37 year old who was killed. Do any of the characteristics he mentions justify an assassination? Take a listen. The woman who lost her life was a self-proclaimed poet from Colorado. with pronouns in her bio. A 37-year-old white woman named Renee Good. The Daily Mail says she leaves behind a lesbian partner and a child from a previous marriage. She was a disruptor, though she considered herself a legal observer, but there's no evidence

she had a law degree. Wow. Wow. Well, I'm not hearing anything there, Jesse, that justifies what took place on video. We have the video. And yet Jesse Waters is virtue signaling to his audience. Lesbian pronouns. Child from a previous relationship. Legal observer with no law degree.

Yeah, we have the video, Jesse. We have the video. Now, legally the case is far from settled. Of course, state prosecutors may be able to pursue charges depending on whether the officer's behavior is deemed necessary and proper or not under Supreme Court precedent. We don't know legally where this is all going to fall, but the fallout is massive protests erupting across the country, schools closed, tear gas deployed, and Tim Walls putting the Minnesota National Guard on standby.

And that is where the bigger picture comes in, which we will talk about in a moment. This is no longer an isolated incident. This happened during what the Department of Homeland Security under Christy Noem is calling the largest immigration enforcement operation ever. carried out. 2,000 federal agents in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area. Heavily armed forces descending onto cities without coordination, accountability, or restraint will make violence more likely. And it did. And when the violence is immediately justified by the president of the United States, it sends the message to the officers that you can get away with a lot. And that if you

are a protester or even just an individual in the wrong place, wrong time. If you don't comply perfectly, it may not be a ticket. It may not be a civil infraction. It may not be you escorted away. It may be you getting killed and not surviving to go home to your family. There is nothing here about public safety as the priority. A woman is dead. The video does not match right wing media or the administration or Donald Trump's story. And instead of accountability, we're getting lies and scapegoating and all of the normal stuff. Every media outlet should be calling this for what it is. Let's talk about what Tim Walls is doing next.

The governor of Minnesota is preparing the National Guard to face off against Donald Trump's federal ICE goons. This is potentially moving towards a disaster of such scope and significance that it has been decades since the US has seen this sort of thing. Now, I know a lot of you wrote to me about, is this the start of the Civil War, David? Let's table that for a moment for the next segment. Here is what we have learned about what Minnesota and Minneapolis are planning. Again, here is Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey with a message for ICE in the aftermath of the

killing of 37-year-old Renegger. There's little, I can say again, that'll make this situation. better, but I do have a message for our community, for a city, and I have a message for ICE. To ICE, get the fuck out of Minneapolis. Now, we heard that earlier. Let's now go to the state level response from the governor Tim Wals, who says this, can you believe this is the United States of America right now, days into 2026? Governor Tim Walls is preparing his state's National Guard to face off against Trump's ice goons.

Listen to this. We do not need any further help from the federal government. To Donald Trump and Christy Noem, you've done enough. There's nothing more important than Minnesota safety. I've issued a warning order to prepare the Minnesota National Guard. We have soldiers in training and prepared to be deployed if necessary. I remind you, a warning order is a heads up for folks. And these National Guard troops are our National Guard troops.

They're teachers in your community, their business owners, their construction professionals. They are Minnesotans. Minnesota will not allow our community to be used as a prop in a national political fight. We will not take the bait. We do not need any further help from the federal government. All right. This is a major escalation. But it's a necessary one.

There are those who are immediately saying, why is Tim Walls raising the temperature? Folks, Trump's goons came in, shot a woman three times through her window and windshield, killing her. And Trump went online. It said it seems like self-defense. That's the escalation. Governor Walls is doing one of the few things he can do to try to defend his state. Now understand that National Guard units are normally activated.

for disaster response or for civil unrest or a support role as requested by local officials. This is different because the guard is being prepared to respond to and defend against federal law enforcement activity itself. This is a line not often crossed in the United States. That is why a lot of you are writing to me about civil war and I will get to that. Conflicts between states and the federal government have always, almost always played out in the courts. A state sues, the Justice Department responds, a judge issue.

are ruling. It's a slow process. It's often a frustrating process. But the reason that that process exists is to prevent a physical confrontation between a state national guard and federal law enforcement or between local police and federal police. The whole point of the slow frustrating system we have is to prevent these sorts of violent escalations. When a governor like Tim Walls, who is careful, This is not an erratic guy. When a governor like Tim Walls says we've got to prepare the state military forces to potentially battle federal agents because they are operating in ways that are dangerous or illegitimate, we are not in normal territory.

This is a unique situation. Now, the context, of course, matters. If Tim Walls were just saying, we don't want ice and we're putting the National Guard out there to fight them, there are many of us who would say that is justified, but But it might be moving a little too quickly when using the courts may be appropriate. That is not the context right now. The context now is that an ICE agent shot and killed a U.S. citizen during what they are calling an enforcement operation where the video evidence contradicts the administration self-defense

narrative. Federal officials are doubling down and Trump is blaming the so-called radical left. There is no accountability and not even the idea. Let's pause and think for a second. So from the state's perspective, if you are the governor, the administrator of the state of Minnesota, which is what he is. Federal agents show up unannounced. They create chaos. They kill a resident, lie about what happened on camera and say, we're going to keep going. He is in a position where he has to say, do I do nothing or do I act to protect public safety as I see it?

That is how you end up with Tim Walls preparing his national, state's national guard to do battle against the federal goons of Donald Trump. Now, does this mean? Civil War. That is the critical question that I will talk about after the break. All right. So we all know Alexa listens to us, recommends products based on our conversations. Meta retargets us based on our browsing and engagement history. Have you wondered what chat GPT and Claude are up to with your conversations?

We feed so much of our information to these AI chatbots, thoughts, dreams, sensitive questions, business ideas, they take the information, tie it to your identity, and they can sell that to third parties and governments. ChatGPT has the former director of the NSA on their board right now. That doesn't feel awesome. It took us a long time to truly understand what social media companies were doing with our data. We don't have to make the same mistake with AI. And that's why I've started using Venice AI. Our sponsor, Venice is a job. generative AI platform that is completely private and permissionless. They don't spy on you. Venice AI won't censor the AI. They have a safe mode, which you can turn off for both text and

image generation. Messages are encrypted. Your conversation history is only stored on your browser. I love the pro plan because I get upgraded features like uploading files, unlimited text prompts, check it out. If you want to use AI without censorship or fear of handing over your most intimate thoughts to a corporation or the government, go to venice.a.a. slash Pacman and use code Pacman to get 20% off their pro plan. The link is in the description. The David Packman show continues to be an audience supported program. And I am so flattered and thrilled by some of our newest supporters who have gotten memberships at join packman.com. Huge thank you to Jason Binger and Robert Berkel, our newest members at join packman.com.

I invite you to join them, get the daily bonus show, as well as the commercial, free audio and video feed of the show. And quite frankly, you really are doing a lot to support the existence of this program, which I believe in 2026, independent media will be as important as ever, especially with what is happening in legacy and corporate media. We thought it was bad in 2020. We thought it was bad in 2025. Well, what's going on with corporate media is getting even worse and very quickly in 2026.

So I invite you to sign up at join packman.com. I will also mention on January 20th, the one year anniversary of Donald Trump being sworn in for his second and final term. We are doing a single day membership drive where we will discount memberships like crazy. My lawyer is beating down the door saying, sir, don't do it. My accountant is sending me telegrams and faxes day in and day out saying, don't do the discount. And I'm saying to all of them, we're going to do it until they pull the discount from my cold debt or something like that. Anyway, get on my newsletter at substack. David Pakman.com or just email me and I'll put

you on the newsletter info at David Pakman.com. And then on the 20th, you'll get an email. with a coupon code telling you how to avail yourself of this absolutely massive membership discount. For years now, there has been a cottage industry of commentators predicting civil war. Every election, every protest, every heated news cycle gets framed as this is it. This is the civil war. And for a long time, that was not just exaggerated rhetoric. It was extraordinarily cynical rhetoric. There was no organized plausible pathway to civil war in the United States. And a lot of the people who were pretending that we were on the precipice of a civil war were really serving to drive clicks and fear and engagement.

And I didn't participate in that because I think it's wrong. I have to now come to the table and talk to you about what is happening now. What is happening right now as a result of what took place in Minneapolis is different. And I want to explain it without going full doomsday. the civil war is here. This week yesterday, Tim Walls, the governor of Minnesota, said he is preparing the Minnesota National Guard to physically stop through confrontation Donald Trump's ice goons from carrying out operations in Minnesota. This is happening in the aftermath of the killing of 37-year-old American citizen Renee Good by an agent of Donald Trump's ice. So we are potentially

going to see the Minnesota National Guard, physical. physically face off against Trump's ice. This is not a rhetorical flourish. This is a state executive signaling we are ready to use military force to block federal law enforcement. A civil war doesn't start with neighbors shooting each other in the streets. It starts when institutions stop recognizing each other's authority. And it starts when the chain of command breaks.

And it can start when state and federal power collide in a way that can't be resolved. by a court or by an election. And if we look at history around the world, that is a danger zone. So I'm not here saying the civil war is here. But what I am here to tell you is that we are starting to see the scaffolding for what can lead to civil war type conflict. Now, up until now, even during extreme political conflict in the United States, disputes between states and the federal government have been mediated through lawsuits and junctions

in federal courts. It's a slow process, as we talked about earlier, a state sues, the Justice Department responds, a judge rules, and the slowness of that process can be very frustrating. But part of the process is to prevent political conflict from turning into armed conflict. If you get beyond that, if you have a state-controlled armed force like the National Guard, physically confronting federal agents, we're not in normal political territory. We are not in a moment where the court is going to decide. This doesn't mean we are in a civil war.

It doesn't mean that a civil war is inevitable. It doesn't mean violence by default follows. Most civil wars do not look like two clean sides that form overnight and fight each other. They are escalating standoffs, miscalculations, moments where someone decides, I'm going to push a little bit more than we've ever pushed before. And then someone else says, we are now going to push a little bit more. That is the risk. And it is especially dangerous in the context of Donald Trump's presidency where federal law

enforcement is increasingly seen as a political weapon against which states need to defend themselves. When federal agencies are perceived rightly or wrongly as acting on behalf of a single leader, rather than a neutral law enforcement apparatus, states begin to treat them as illegitimate. They begin to treat them as hostile. And that is how they end up deploying the state national guard against them. That is how trust collapses. Now, it's also worth saying that the people who spent years, screaming civil war over mask mandates and school board meetings, they did real damage. They have

desensitized the public to the idea. Because when you've got all these people who have been saying civil war for 10 or 12 years over everything, now when the more serious actors who I try to be thoughtful, I try not to be hyperbolic, when I now come in and say, listen, I'm not saying, oh, civil war is inevitable, but I've got to recognize that a mask mandate did not reflect a push towards civil war, what we are seeing now in terms of the National Guard of Minnesota versus Trump's ICE goons could push in that direction. We now don't get the attention that this really does deserve because there are some people who have been, it's like the boy who cried wolf type of situation. And it makes it harder to recognize when we are seeing the type of

institutional breakdown that really can lead to that type of conflict. This is different. Okay. This is not Twitter drama. It is a kind of escalation that political scientists actually do worry about. Now, the hopeful part, if there is one, is that this can still be deescalated. Congress exists. Courts exist. How quaint, right? But governors and federal officials can try to step back from the brink.

But pretending that this is just another overhyped news cycle, I believe would be a mistake. Civil wars don't start when someone declares them. They start when the rules simply stop working. And right now, there are really important rules that are under strain. One key point is that the next move matters more than the statements themselves that are being made. If Minnesota files for injunctions and Trump defies court orders, the risk of an escalation goes up dramatically.

If courts act quickly and both sides at least pretend to comply, it'll probably cool down the situation. Civil conflict risk goes up, not just when people do. disagree, but when courts, when court rulings are not treated as binding. If people say, I don't care what the court said. The risk, of course, is that there are a number of instances so far in the last year where the Trump administration has said, effectively, we don't care what the courts say. A real armed confrontation between ICE and a state national guard would create chaos that I don't believe Trump is able to manage. And it'll create a paradox. Trump may push

right up to the edge because he thinks it gives them leverage. But then, it may actually be pulling back that serves him better than crossing that edge, it makes it a very volatile moment. I'm cautiously optimistic that it won't get to that point. Donald Trump floated one of the most extreme policy ideas of his presidency yesterday, and that is saying something, and it is not getting a lot of attention. In a truth social post yesterday, Donald Trump said that the United States military budget for next year for 2027 should be not a trillion dollars, but 1.5 trillion dollars. Not a typo. That would be a roughly 60% increase. You would say, well, hold on, David, a trillion to 1.5 is 50%. Yes, but the actual budget is like 900 something. So it's closer to

60% increase than a 50% increase. And he announced it on truth social where he said, quote, after long and difficult negotiations with senators, congressmen, secretaries, and other political representatives, I have determined that for the good of our country, especially in these very troubled and dangerous times, our military budget for the year 2027 should not be a trillion dollars, but rather 1.5 trillion. This allows us to build the dream military that we have long been entitled to and more importantly that will keep us safe and secure regardless of foe. If it weren't for the tremendous numbers, if it weren't for the tremendous numbers being produced by tariffs from other countries, many of which in the past have ripped off the United States at levels never seen before, I would stay at the $1 trillion number. But because of tariffs and the tremendous income that they bring amounts being generated that would have been unthinkable in the past, especially a year ago during the Sleepy Joe Biden administration, the worst president in the history of our country, we are able to easily hit.

the $1.5 trillion number while at the same time producing an unparalleled military force and having the ability to at the same time pay down debt and likewise pay a substantial dividend to moderate income patriots within our country. Now, I'm going to analyze the military budget in a second. I don't believe we are going to pay down the debt. Donald Trump promised before his first term we are going to have such a surplus. We will eliminate the national debt. In reality, the deficit went up and the debt grew even faster.

And we are seeing the exact same thing right now. But that's not the point here. I want to talk about the military budget. What makes this striking is that Trump promised the opposite. He scammed his followers once again. Trump complained for years. We've got a bloated military budget, wasteful, dominated by corrupt contractors. The Pentagon, the defense firms, the endless wars.

He presented himself as the president who would stop writing blank checks to the military industrial complex and people fell for it and Tulsi Gabbard. fell for it. And during the campaign and when he came back to office, he said, we can be strong, but we can spend less because we're going to be smarter. And now he is proposing the biggest military expansion this country has ever seen. Folks, you got bamboozled. He tricked you again. Now, Trump says it's justified because we'll be able to build the dream military and we're going to pay down debt and we're going to give people cash and it's all going to happen. When the military budget jumps by $500 billion in a single year, the money doesn't come from nowhere. It comes from taxpayers.

You are paying for this huge expansion to the military budget. When you are struggling to pay for your groceries or a flat tire or healthcare, do you say to yourselves, we should be giving way more money to the military? Is that what you think? I don't think that's the case for most Americans. Every taxpayer being asked to fund more bombs and bullets and weapons systems while an unexpected $400 expense for nearly half the country means I've got to put it on a credit card or ask someone to lend me the money. The question voters should be asking is were you promised this and did you ask for it and do you want it? And the scale of this proposal is really hard to overstate. At the peak of the war on terror in 2010, military spending was about 690.

billion, roughly 1.1 trillion in today's inflation adjusted dollars. Trump's proposal would blow way past that. Even the Reagan military buildup, which was often considered, if you want to think about when were we most aggressively building up the military to intimidate others, that under Reagan was a doubling over five years. Trump is proposing a 60% increase in a single year historically. The only time the United States has approached that level of military mobilization was World War II, where defense spending was almost 40% of GDP. Trump's plan would likely push defense spending towards like 6% of GDP. That's a Cold War era level of militarization.

And this is supposedly with the anti-war president who doesn't plan on doing any wars. Now, Trump says it'll be paid through tariff revenue. Even if that were true, the tariffs are paid by American companies. and passed on to you. So even if we believe what Trump is saying, we've got so much tariff money, we're going to be able to pay for it. Even if that's true, you are paying for it. Now, of course, Trump is dramatically overstating tariff collections. If you look at history when there have been these large military buildups, it's usually funded through deficit spending or war bonds. There is not a precedent for financing something like this with tariffs. But importantly,

the tariff numbers don't line up. And even if they did, it would just mean that Americans are paying for it. The power of the purse does belong to the House of Representatives. I do want to remind you the president's budget is a political document at the end of the day. The president's budget is a wish list of what the president wants. It is still up to the House of Representatives to approve or say no and they control the spending. Even with the Republican House of Representatives, I don't know that Republicans are willing to do a 60% increase on the military budget and I would hope that there is going to be less. But the takeaway here is you were told and promised one thing, Trump wants a completely different one.

He spent years saying he would rein in military waste and be against the militarization endlessly around the world. And now he is proposing the biggest blank check to the Pentagon that the country has ever seen. And he's saying to us, he's got billions. He's saying to us, you guys are going to foot the bill. What is the average MAGA have to say about this? Not a rhetorical question.

I mean, tell me, if you're a MAGA, do you like this? Is this what you voted for? Let me know. Info at David Pakman.com. Send me an email. Scams and identity theft rarely start with a hacked password. They usually start when your personal information is easy to find online. Your address, phone number, relatives, employment history.

That information lives on countless data broker sites on the internet, accessible to almost anyone unless you actively remove it. Our sponsor, Incogni, is a service that handles that for you. Incogni doesn't just focus on one. category of sites. It works to take down your personal data wherever it appears online, reducing the raw material scammers used to impersonate you or target your family. Incogni will automatically handle removals across hundreds of known sites, but the most powerful feature is custom removals, which is included with the unlimited plan. If you find your info anywhere,

even an obscure directory, a business database, something new, you paste the link into Incogni. Their team will work to get it removed. That level of cover. really matters, even a single exposed profile can lead to fraud, harassment, identity theft. Incogni's removal process is independently verified by Deloitte. And you can get 60% off when you go to incogni.com slash Pacman and use the code Pacman. Really have been looking forward today to speaking with Caleb Ragland, who is the American Soybean Association chairman and also a Kentucky farmer. We've covered some of his. congressional testimony before and uh, Caleb, it's really great to have you on today.

I appreciate it. Good to be here, David. So maybe just to start give, give us a sense of soybean farming, which has become an issue of increasing interest in the context of the tariffs and trade wars that the United States is now engaged in. What your family has been in farming for many generations. Has there been some qualitative change to being a soybean farmer in the United States, even before these tariffs were put in place? Sure. Like in any industry, there's always changes. And we have to learn to adapt, to dodge and find ways to still be competitive in business. My family has farmed for nine generations, a little

over 200 years and certainly having raised soybeans that whole time. Really, soybean production would just go back to my grandfather. So there's been soybeans raised on our farm for around 50 years now or a little more. But there's a lot of work that has been done within our industry to turn soybeans into a much more important crop for our country as a whole than it was a couple generations back. And that's mostly due to the export market that's been developed. And also all of the research and innovation that's found all the uses that this miracle being can be used for it.

Has there been a commodification of soybean farming in the United States in the sense that are you selling directly to entities or is your harvest sort of part of a conglomerate that many farmers like you participate in, which is consolidated for. sale. Really, in my personal situation, the answer would be yes to both. We raise commodity soybeans. We also have a specialty market that we sell into, as in we grow a lot of seed that is used for other farmers, seed for the crop, though plant next year.

So there's just some extra details that go into it, making sure that we keep pure, and the varieties and so forth are kept straight and so forth. It's just a little bit of extra work and effort. But really there would be about three areas. Soybeans are divided into across this country. It would be specially markets, identity preserved, food grade type opportunities where you would work directly to market maybe by containers and so forth. Then there would be just commodity soybeans.

are going to be grown, delivered to the elevator, and then the merchandisers are going to take them. They're going to be commingled with many other farmer soybeans and delivered to markets both domestically at abroad. And then there's a small percentage as well, the farmers that will grow the seed production that will be next year's soybean crop around the country. So we've seen the charts of soybean sales from the United States to China over the last year. And it falls off a cliff. I don't remember if it's late April or early May, something like that. Explain to us, is that because of the tariffs put in place by this administration and

what have those tariffs done to your business? Well, I think it's real that cliff that you alluded to is really when the Brazilian crop was available to come to market. And it was a combination of tariffs. And I think is also a result. of a choice that was made by the Chinese government to prove a point that when tariffs were put in place, retaliatory tariffs on soybeans, that was the result of all of our other trade war on the many other items and tariffs. And it was basically two strong wealth leaders escalated the fight.

And I would tell you that soybeans were the recipient of the backlash of the retaliation. from the Chinese due to the fact that soybeans are the largest agriculture export that the United States has, and China is the largest market in recent history of U.S. soybeans. Over half of all soybeans, the U.S. exports historically have went to China in recent years. So they're a bigger market than all other foreign markets put together for us. another interesting number. China consumes about 61% of all soy consumed in the world. So they are a major, major market,

and it's hard to just say, well, just find another market to ignore the Chinese market because it's such a large percentage. To give a few numbers on U.S. soybean production and consumption, of all U.S. soybean consumption, right at half of our soybeans stay here and home and are used domestically. And that half, about half are used with biofuels. Another half are used with food consumption and livestock and other things.

The other half of our soybean production is exported. Of that half, about half has went to China and half has went to other foreign markets. So it's basically a quarter of all of it was going to China. That's right. Yeah, very easy. You see a field of soybeans and every fourth row has went to China. Another interesting visual before the 2018 trade war, about every third row went to China. So we lost some market share from the first trade war that we've never regained. And now we're hanging in the balances of potentially losing more. That's very concerning for our industry.

And for the economy of rural America and the economy of this country as a whole due to the fact of how important soybeans are to our export market and just agriculture revenue in general. So help me understand some of the politics of this in this sense. Geographically, a lot of the farming is happening more rurally by its nature because you need large spaces where you can plant stuff. Rural America votes more for Republicans than for Democrats. as a matter of general principle. My understanding also is that farmers and ranchers specifically, again, it may be geographic or it may be for other reasons. Farmers and ranchers also tend to

vote more for Republicans than Democrats. And my understanding is that as a community, you all over on average, not everybody, but supported Donald Trump over the Democratic candidate is both in 2016 and also 2020 and 2024. Is that an accurate representation? Are you, were you a Trump supporter? Are you a Trump supporter? What about your colleagues? Is that a fair characterization? When you put all the numbers together as a whole, it's a very true. It's just a fact that rural America, the heartland of America, supported President Trump

in all three elections. The numbers say that for themselves. I mean, you look at the map, the red states and so forth is pretty obvious. me personally. I have voted for President Trump in all three elections. And I would tell you it's not necessarily being all Trump, all raw, and so forth. But more so just looking at policies in general and so forth. And there's a lot of other things besides trade and so forth that come to table,

whether it be regulatory things, tax policy, the, things with our border, there's numerous issues that come into play. And what I would say is in an election, we had two choices for president. And the choice of the voter is to choose between the lesser of two evils. Right.

Oftentimes it's not necessarily that you're picking the perfect president. they're not necessarily on the ballot, but you've got to make a choice. And I would say that very important that we are engaged in that political process. And I would also say that as a soybean farmer and as a representative here of the American Soybean Association, we are not a political organization. We are a policy organization. We have policy in place. We are doing our best to get that policy.

to make the future of our industry better, to make the opportunities for our farmer members better. And is Donald Trump making that job harder for you? In other words, the guy on a personal level that you supported, is he making your employer, employer's job harder? Well, I would say that on some levels, we're doing really well. I think that we have made some good improvements with tax policy. there's some good things that are taking place on the regulatory front.

There's been a huge backlog of approvals that of the crop protection and tools and chemicals and seeds that we needed desperately, that a lot of that has been called up a lot and we have positive developments with waters of the U.S. and some of that policy and so forth. whereas on the trade front, this is not good. I will also say that on the trade front, under President Biden, things were not great either. We were not near as aggressive as we should have been. We were not enforcing a lot of agreements that were in place. President Trump came along here in his second time around, and we do not favor tariffs and duties and things that make the playing field unlevel and put us at a disadvantage.

We support free trade as an organization, so on the trade front, it's been hurtful. So it's a combination of both. Another thing I want to talk about is opportunities within biofuels. We do have some very exciting domestic opportunities coming about the renewable volume obligations for soy-based biofuels. are increasing significantly. They were, they're being finalized now those rules. And it's going to be over a 60% increase from where we were at here in the last few years when these rules are finalized.

And the EPA is in the process of getting that done here. We expect that here within days. And that's going to be really positive for our industry. Also, the 45Z tax credit has. has a lot of potential. That's something Treasury is working on and should get done here in the next couple months, if not sooner.

And those will be significant increases here at home that help us. And biofuels are a very great thing for not only soybean farmers. They're great for rural America because they create jobs. They keep dollars turning over here in our rural communities. They say that a dollar that is earned only, the farm is usually spent seven or eight times in the local economy. So anytime that we have dollars that are being coming back home, being spent, being turned over, that's great.

Biofuels create lots of jobs and they're also keeping that money here at home and keeping the American economy strong. And that's a great opportunity. And that's all really interesting. I mean, I can't help but go back to this idea of I'm trying to put myself in your shoes in some sense, right? And so I imagine, hey, you know, I'm in, I'm in Kentucky. I, uh, I like what Trump's talking about on the border, although I don't know how much it

directly affects me in Kentucky. You can maybe speak to that. I don't know you're feeling on some of the other kind of pet issues of Trump, like his foreign policy outside of tariffs. You know, there's this Maduro thing or Trump talked about getting men out of women's sports as he talked about it. And then I think about the effect on the business of what you're talking about. and exports of soybeans to China going essentially to zero almost overnight.

To me, it seems so out of balance where I would go, hey, putting food on my family's table. And like, it's so much more important than whatever Trump's talking about with, you know, transports or whatever. But it sounds like you're saying that in these parts of the country, it's those things really do matter. Like for people, it's, yeah, it might not be so good for my business, but the border stuff really is appealing to me or the transport stuff, like, it's, it's culturally really ingrained. And it's, it's, it's not so easy to say I'll do what's best for my business. Well, certainly, certainly politics get complex in a hurry.

Everybody has lots of opinions on social issues and so forth. I would say the bottom line is people won't safety and security for their families. They also want stability in their businesses, and they want opportunities. And, you know, it's a very complicated spot right now. I would say that a lot of Americans are in. But I do think that we have some opportunities to make the future brighter. And every human being makes mistakes and can certainly put a policy in place. that maybe doesn't accomplish all the things that they wanted it to.

And I'm not going to speculate where Trump stands on all of that right now. But as an American and as a Kentucky farmer, I hope he's successful because like him or hate him, he's in charge. He's our leader. I want to see our country continue to move forward, to be stronger, to be successful. and I want there to be opportunities for not only my kids coming along, but for everybody else's. I want to see there be prosperity for our country. I want there to be safety and security for our country, opportunities for everyone.

We're the greatest nation on earth, and we have the greatest farmers in the world, and, you know, it's a great place to be. There's certainly problems or certainly things that we disagree on day to day. America and America agriculture is a great place to work and to be involved. I'm thankful I have that opportunity. And, you know, I engage on the policy level because I believe it's important not only for me and my family personally, my bottom, my livelihood, but I think we can help make a difference for the future. And as I alluded to earlier, policy and politics are different.

One thing that I like about being involved with what I've been able to do leading the American Soybean Association is, you know, we go around, we start at the grassroots level at the local level, then the state level, then the national level, getting farmers' opinions and coming together and coming up with a policy that we agree on. And that's going to be our roadmap that we work towards as we help to try to shape policy that impacts our. soybean farmers. And we have done our best, whether it agrees or disagrees with the president or a Congress or whoever, but we try to consistently speak the truth on where we stand as an industry and what will make the future better for soybean farmers and the soy industry. Caleb, I want to ask you before I let you go. You know, I've known some of the greatest brisket cutters in the world. And they say, I don't get sick of the brisket. I still love a good brisket sandwich. Are you, as a soybean farmer, are there soy-based products that you just love,

or are you just sick of the stuff at this point? And you'll leave the eating to other people. Well, soy is a part of so many things we take for granted. I really like a good pork chop. You know, that soy protein that helps raise the pig is great. You know, that soy protein that helps grow the chicken that lays the egg. I enjoy some eggs for my breakfast. Soy protein helps produce the milk that the cows produce. And of course, soy protein helps with its smaller amount, but it's still part of getting that good piece of brisket or that good steak, you know. So I don't hear you saying like stinky tofu is very high on your list of things you're looking more. Not necessarily, but that soybean is such an amazing crop. It can do so many things. It can

produce fuel, can produce protein. The oils are used in thousands of products, both that we eat and in other things that we use every day. I mean, you can use soybean oil to make rubber. You can use soybean oil to help make the oil that's used in the sealer on our roads. I mean, we all like to drive places instead of have to walk, you know. We take for granted and we're even unaware of the diverse uses that this product has. And so helping to grow that and help to just make things better for my fellow person here in the country is just wonderful. It's, I think we're doing something that is very beneficial for mankind and for all Americans, no matter where we're on politically. issues and stuff. We're doing something that's good and helping fulfill needs that everybody has.

All right. Well, if you and I get together someday, we'll call it the Agadashi Tofu summit and I'll bring some and we'll try it together. Well, sounds good. Just don't make me spell it. We've been speaking with Caleb Ragland, who is the chairman of the American Soybean Association and also a farmer in Kentucky. Caleb, really appreciate your time today. Thank you. Well, thanks for the opportunity, David. Take care. Hope we can talk again. The core issue in political journalism isn't access to facts. It's really framing. Different outlets can start from the same underlying facts and still produce very different narratives. Ground news is built to make those

differences explicit. Our sponsor, Ground News, aggregates coverage of a single story from across the political spectrum and presents it visually. You can see ideological lean, ownership, reliability of each outlet at a glance. The feature I use the the most is the side-by-side headline view. Seeing multiple outlets describe the same event differently makes the framing choices very obvious. What's emphasized, what's downplayed, what's the context, what's left out. Ground news also offers a blind spot feed. That lets you highlight stories that are receiving little attention from one side of the spectrum. That helps expose possible gaps that disagreement alone won't reveal. You can also personalize your

feed by topic. You can make a little bit. it easier to track the issues you personally care about without unnecessary noise, go to ground. dot news slash Pacman to get 40% off the ground news vantage plan. You can also gift a subscription to a friend. The link is in the description. Donald Trump's White House press secretary Caroline Levitt has resurfaced after another one of these breaks from press briefings. And this one didn't go well.

And I don't know if it is because she. is in an increasingly untenable situation where she is constantly asked to defend the indefensible that these are going more and more poorly or whether she's simply losing momentum with the job. After all, it's got it's got to be kind of stressful to just have to go out there and lie for the president all the time. The topic of Venezuela, of course, came up. Question for a reporter. Trump has been adamant that Delci Rodriguez is, uh, rather, Trump has been adamant that he will be

running the country of Venezuela, but Delci Rodriguez says the government of Venezuela is running Venezuela. What is going on here? And as usual, Caroline Levitt put in one of these positions of having to figure out how to not anger Donald Trump while giving questions that will at least pacify momentarily the press corps so that she can end the press briefing and move on. Rachel, on a start. Thank you, Caroline.

The president has been adamant that he is now in charge of Venezuela, but Deli Rodriguez, said the government of Venezuela runs her country, no one else saying, quote, there's no external agent governing Venezuela. So which one is it? Let me just be very clear. This is the first time that I've addressed to Venezuela. By the way, when she says she's going to be clear, she's almost certainly going to obfuscate. From the podium since being back and since the historic and incredibly successful military operation, law enforcement operation conducted by our United States military that you all saw and the world witnessed last week. The skill. the might of the United States military and our...

You know that she's going to lie when instead of addressing the substance of who's in charge, she says it was just such a mighty and powerful military. A country under the leadership of this president is on full display to the rest of the world. And let's just set the record straight. There is another military in the world who could have pulled off this operation. There also might not be another one that would have thought it was a good idea to do something so absurd.

There is not another president in the world or in our nation's history who had a, you had a the courage to authorize such a mission. And I think the world has taken notice that America is truly back. With respect to Venezuela, the Trump administration led by Secretary Rubio, the vice president, and the president's entire national security team, is in close correspondence with the interim authorities in Venezuela. We obviously have maximum leverage over the interim authorities in Venezuela right now, and the president has made it very clear that this is a country within the United States, the Western Hemisphere, close by the United States, that is no longer going to be sending illegal drugs to the United States of America.

It's no longer going to be sending and trafficking illegal people and criminal cartels to kill American citizens as they have in the past. Notice that she still hasn't answered who is in charge. And the president is fully deploying his peace through strength foreign policy agenda. So we're continuing to be in close coordination with the interim authorities and their decisions. are going to continue to be dictated by the United States of America. All right. So I guess her position is, yes, there are those authorities, but we're telling them what to do now.

And of course, not as a supporter of regime change, do I say this, but just as a supporter of the truth and logic and thinking critically, if you have removed the regime, but everyone from the regime other than one guy is still there, have you really removed the regime? I don't know. I don't know. Caroline Levitt asked about Greenland. Oh, there was a funny moment where she said, I believe that this was not part of it. She says that this, Venezuela is a country within the United States. Authorities in Venezuela right now.

And the president has made it very clear that this is a country within the United States, the Western Hemisphere. Yeah. Anyway, just a little funny thing there. She is asked about Greenland. And this is, this is kind of news. She says the US might make an offer to buy Greenland, but they're considering military action also. Maybe we'll steal it, maybe we'll buy it.

Also been reports that the US could potentially buy Greenland as one potential option on the table. What would such an offer look like? Is there anything monetarily you could provide a detail there? Well, that's something that's currently being actively discussed by the president and his national security team. And I would point out that the acquisition of Greenland by the United States is not a new idea. This is something that president's dating back to the 1800s have said is advantageous for America's national security. The president has been very open and clear with all of you and with the world that he views

it in the best interests of the United States to deter Russian and Chinese aggression in the Arctic region. And so that's why his team is currently talking about what a potential purchase would look like. A potential purchase. So Trump considering buying Greenland now. But of course, it needs to be for sale. Now, there are those who say, everything's for sale at the right price.

You looking to sell your house right now? No. Well, there must be some amount of money you would accept to sell it, right? Everything's for sale if you've got the right price. But this entire Greenland gambit is less about Greenland itself. And it's more about the desperation from Trump, number one, to confirm his alpha male bona bona fides of strength that he does what he wants at the end of the day. and also legacy.

And I think Trump, as he realizes, he may well lose the house in November and be the lamest of lame ducks for the rest of his presidency is thinking, well, listen, if I can physically change the White House by building this ballroom and then I can kidnap Maduro and maybe by Greenland, I will have left a United States that is different than the one when I entered. Now, the truth is even if he didn't do any of this dumb stuff, the United States is going to be very different after Trump than it was before. as he has been just a wrecking ball influence, not only on the Republican Party, but on American

politics more broadly. But as far as Caroline Leavitt is concerned, you know, it's, uh, she's going to need a bigger cross hanging from her neck after some of the doozies that she's been telling lately. Let me put it that way. The Trump administration has decided to solve obesity. Yeah. They're not doing it through healthcare access. They're not doing it through food affordability.

They're not doing it by addressing poverty, stress or work schedules. to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the Secretary of Health and Human Services, Trump has ordered obesity to end. There is also a new food pyramid, which we are going to talk about. Here is Bobby explaining it with Dr. Oz behind him and Marty McCarrie and a whole cast of characters. Then to addict us to ultra-process foods, it's shocking that our own government helped to drive these cataclysmic changes in our diet.

The damage is real. It is preventable and President Trump has ordered it to end. If the United States reduced obesity, type 2 diabetes, heart disease and Alzheimer's, the Japanese levels, we would save approximately $600 billion a year. About 50% of Medicare's projected long-term deficit or $5,000 per family annually. Current policy worsens the problem, 42 million American. And Americans rely on SNAP or common purchases include sugary drinks, candy, and chips. 78% of SNAP recipients are enrolled in Medicaid.

And 90% of Medicaid spending goes to chronic disease. All right. So listen, here's the thing with RFK Jr. and this entire approach to nutrition. They sometimes have kernels of things that make sense. But they're expanded in ways that make no sense. So for example, you should have. avoid food dyes. We're going to ban certain food dies. You know, you look at the details. They're not really banning them. They're asking manufacturers not to use them. Fine. I mean,

listen, get rid of food dyes. The truth is that food dyes primarily exist in ultra-processed and the quantity of actual food die anyone is consuming. Even if you eat a bunch of these foods is relatively small because food dyes are like the last final, final ingredient that's listed. The health effects of these food dies, a question mark. I don't think it's good. But the truth is that the amount of food die anyone would be consuming if a diet is made up of under 10% ultra-processed food is negligible. It's so negligible as to be insignificant.

On the other hand, there are people who are consuming so much saturated fat and sodium that that is a big area that you should really be handling. And unfortunately, when Robert F. Kennedy Jr. goes, here's a fast food place that uses beef tallow, so it's great. If you gear yourselves towards eating more of that, the amount of sodium and saturated fat that you will be consuming is a disaster. Now, this is what gets us to the next aspect of this revolution when it comes to nutrition. They've unveiled a new food pyramid and the pyramid kind of flips a bunch of stuff. And it says at the top of the pyramid, what you really want to be consuming

is red meat, cheese, whole milk, protein, and fats. You want a whole bunch of that. And then whole grains are moved to the bottom. And Kennedy says, we need to end the war against saturated fat. Now, with all of these things, the devil is kind of in the details. But overconsumption of saturated fat isn't good for you. You look at longitudinal studies and meta-analyses. If you consume, the more saturated fat you consume, the more likely you are to have hearty, you're not. attack and stroke and to have those sorts of problems, especially as you age. Now, is it true that there have been periods during which, for example, like the egg was maligned as the worst possible food and it turns out it's actually kind of okay.

Five eggs a week is like probably fine. And, you know, yes, there have been instances of that. But one of the greatest things that they are doing wrong here is that when 70% of Americans are overweight or obese and realizing that we need to treat this as a public health challenge and we need dietary guidelines that actually comport with the data. Figure out what kids are being fed in school. Figure out what is being most being made available based on what is cheaper based on the subsidies that exist and all of this different stuff.

The idea of saying to people what you really want to focus on is eating cheese and red meat and by the way, throw beef tallow in there and use whole fat milk. That is a crazy amount of saturated fat. And if you think about, you know, even for breakfast, if you have an egg and a piece of processed white toast and bacon versus you have an egg and a piece of like whole grain toast and half an avocado instead of the bacon, just that over a year has a significant health and caloric effect. And they're basically recommending the the opposite.

So I'm kind of sick of this entire Bobby Kennedy Jr. thing. And there are people convinced that this guy is an absolute just genius when it comes to this stuff. And the funniest part, all of it is. Trump is, he's ending obesity. He's just, he's going to end the entire thing. Over simplification, oversimplification of a problem, blaming individuals and declaring victory is the sort of M.O that Donald Trump has put in place. And he's pushing it through Bobby Kennedy Jr. through HHS.

And it is not how health works. and seeing Dr. Oz and Marty McCarrie standing behind a Bobby nodding along to this nonsense, this is this is leading people in the wrong direction. Now, we've got a great bonus show for you today, which relates to this. GLP ones may be a forever drug. You know, Trump talks about ending forever wars. GLP ones increasingly, it seems, to really function at keeping weight off. You might need to be on it forever.

And increasingly, it seems like that's not a very good idea health-wise. Finally, how long does the U.S. want to run Venezuela? We will discuss that on the bonus show as well. Get instant access by signing up at join packman.com.