UNBIASED - October 3, 2024: Vice Presidential Debate Fact-Check, Biden Admin Extends Asylum Restrictions, Plus Addressing Rumors: Did FEMA Spend $640M on Noncitizen Migrants?

Episode Date: October 3, 2024

Welcome back to UNBIASED. In today's episode: Vice Presidential Debate Recap and Fact-Check (0:44) Quick Hitters: Biden Administration Extends Asylum Restrictions, Judge Unseals Jack Smith's Motion Against Trump, DOJ Seeks Indefinite Trial Delay for Attempted Assassination Suspect (13:20) Rumor Has It: Did Walz Say He's Made Friends With School Shooters? Did FEMA Spend $640M on Noncitizen Migrants? (16:13) (*More Context: the $640M, which FEMA Spent on the SSP program, was transferred by CBP per DHS's order. Meaning the $640M was not part of FEMA's original annual FY2024 budget.) Daily Critical Thinking Exercise (21:16) Listen/Watch this episode AD-FREE on Patreon. Watch this episode on YouTube. Follow Jordan on Instagram and TikTok. All sources for this episode can be found here.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Kick off an exciting football season with BetMGM, an official sportsbook partner of the National Football League. Yard after yard, down after down, the sportsbook born in Vegas gives you the chance to take action to the end zone and celebrate every highlight reel play. And as an official sportsbook partner of the NFL, BetMGM is the best place to fuel your football fandom on every game day. With a variety of exciting features, BetMGM offers you plenty of seamless ways to jump straight onto the gridiron and to embrace peak sports action. Ready for another season of gridiron glory? What are you waiting for? Get off the bench, into the huddle, and head for the end zone all season long.

Visit BetMGM.com for terms and conditions. Must be 19 years of age or older. Ontario only. Please gamble responsibly. Gambling problem? For free assistance, call the Conax Ontario helpline at 1-866-531-2600. BetMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with iGaming Ontario. Welcome back to Unbiased, your favorite source of unbiased news and legal analysis. Welcome back to Unbiased. Today is Thursday, October 3rd, and this is your bi-weekly news rundown. As a reminder, for the next couple of weeks, episodes will be releasing only on Tuesdays and Thursdays. The episodes will also be coming out a little bit earlier in the day than usual.

But once we get into the last week of October, we'll be back to four episodes per week and back to the usual 5 p.m. Eastern Time release time. As far as what you can expect in today's episode, we'll do a little vice presidential debate recap. And then we'll do just a few quick hitters before we move on to Rumor Has It. And then we'll finish with that daily critical thinking exercise. So with those things out of the way, let's get into today's stories. As we know, Tuesday night, Senator J.D. Vance and Governor Tim Walz went head to head for the first and only vice presidential debate ahead of the election. So how this recap will work is I'll do a very

quick rundown of the major topics that were discussed and what each candidate generally had to say about each of those topics. And then we'll fact check some of the claims made by each candidate. So the candidates were first asked about foreign policy. Generally, Walls kept a stance that Donald Trump's leadership is too erratic and unpredictable to be relied upon for foreign affairs. Vance countered this by saying Trump does make a stable leader and highlighted how during Trump's presidency, no major new conflicts began. On the topic of immigration, Vance criticized the surge of immigration during the Biden administration and blamed the surge on Harris. Walls reminded viewers of Trump's

stance against the border protection bill from earlier this year, which ultimately failed to pass, in part because of Trump's influence on Republican lawmakers. When asked about the economy, both candidates discussed their middle class upbringings. Vance talked about how Harris has been in a position as vice president for the last three years to implement all of these policies that she's proposed since announcing her candidacy for president and has not done so. Vance also pointed to the fact that both food and housing costs are up. Walls, on the other hand, claimed that the higher prices during the Biden administration were actually a result of how Trump dealt with the pandemic, not a result of the policies of the Biden-Harris administration. Walls also attacked Trump's sales tax and tariff plans,

as well as tax cuts for the upper class, and took a moment to highlight his own pro-union stance. The final question of the night was regarding democracy. Specifically, the question was posed to Vance about whether he'll seek to challenge this year's election results, even if every state governor certifies them. Vance's response was that he and Donald Trump have issues surrounding the 2020 election, and that all he's said and all Trump has said is that we need to be able to peacefully debate these issues in the public square. Vance pivoted that threat to democracy issue to the

threat of censorship. He dove into the allegations of censorship on social media by the Biden administration, specifically during the pandemic, and Harris saying that misinformation needs to be censored. Vance says that debate needs to be permissible and unrestricted. Walls' response focused on January 6th and Trump's refusal to acknowledge that Biden had won the election. Walls asked Vance to affirmatively state that Trump did in fact lose the 2020 election. However, Vance would not answer. Instead, Vance's response focused on the First Amendment and censorship by the Biden-Harris administration. And both candidates accused each other of avoiding the questions asked of one another.

Now, what we just went through obviously was not an exhaustive list of the topics and issues discussed, but we'll touch on more as we do the fact check. So these fact checks are in no particular order, but we're going to start with Walls saying, quote, Project 2025 is going to have a registry of pregnancies. This is false. Project 2025 does not call for a registry of pregnancies. It does call for federal agencies to collect more accurate data regarding abortion. So these abortion policies laid out in Project 2025 aren't necessarily policies Trump and or Vance agree with. It is true that many of the authors of Project 2025 served in Trump's administration, and he is close with the Heritage Foundation as many previous Republican presidents are. But if you are interested in learning Trump's agenda,

it's a much lesser known about agenda because Project 2025 has been so in the spotlight. It's called Agenda 47, and you can find that on his website. Moving on, Vance claimed that 25 million illegal aliens competing with Americans for scarce homes is one of the most significant drivers of home prices in the country. This claim does have some truth to it, but it is a bit misleading. Generally, immigration, including illegal immigration, contributes to population growth and therefore the demand for housing. And research does indicate that a growth in immigration under the Biden administration is one factor fueling housing demand. However, economists and housing experts have said that the primary reason

for the high prices in the housing market is from a decline in new residential construction. Walls claimed Trump hasn't paid any federal tax in the last 15 years, and then added, quote, in the last year as president, end quote. First part of that claim is false. Second part is true. First off, we don't have access to all of Trump's tax records for the last 15 years, but we do know, according to a release of his 2015 to 2019 tax returns, that Trump has paid federal taxes in the last 15 years.

In 2018, he paid just under a million in federal income tax. However, in 2020, his last year as president, he did not pay any federal income tax. And this is because he reported losing more money than he made. So yes, Trump has paid federal taxes in the last 15 years, but he did not pay federal taxes his last year as president. Vance claimed that offshoring manufacturing bases to China has not made goods less expensive. This is false. By sending production to China, companies can pay lower wages and therefore charge American consumers far less for their products. Studies have shown that since China's entry into the World Trade Organization in 2001, U.S. prices have fallen substantially.

Vance also claimed, quote, We have 320,000 children that the Department of Homeland Security has effectively lost, end quote. This claim needs context and its validity really depends on how you define lost. who illegally entered the United States had not shown up for their immigration court hearings, and more than 291,000 didn't receive their summons to appear in court. The purpose of that report was to detail a quote-unquote urgent issue with how immigration officials are handling cases involving unaccompanied migrant children. By law, the HHS is responsible for the care of unaccompanied migrant children. So after they are initially taken into custody, it's ICE's role to transfer those children to HHS, which then often places them in shelters or qualified homes. But the report was essentially saying that ICE and

the HHS aren't doing their jobs adequately because so many children had either not been placed into immigration proceedings, hadn't been served their summons, or hadn't shown up for court hearings. So again, it depends how you define lost, but that's the context there. Speaking of immigration, Walls claimed border crossings are down compared to when Trump left office. While this is true, it is only true if we consider the last two months of this year and compare them to the last two months of Trump's presidency. As we know, because of Biden's June proclamation restricting asylum at the border, border encounters have dropped significantly. And currently, border encounters are less than what they were in the last month of Trump's administration. But when we compare border

crossings under each administration overall, we know that they are not the same. To illustrate using numbers, this past August, migrant apprehensions at the border were 58,038. When Trump left office, apprehensions along the border were 75,316. However, yearly apprehensions at the border reached record highs under Biden. And generally speaking, border encounters under Trump's administration were much lower than the encounters under Biden's. In fiscal year 2023, the yearly apprehensions reached 2.2 million. Under Trump's administration, the year with the highest annual apprehensions was 2019, when the number reached just 852,000. And speaking of the border, Walls claimed that Trump built less than 2% of the border wall despite promising a, quote, big, beautiful wall. This is misleading. So Walls' campaign pointed to a January 2021 report in support of its claim

that said under Trump, 52 miles of, quote, unquote, new primary wall were built, plus 33 miles of quote new secondary wall, end quote. That report did not include sections in which existing barriers were replaced or reinforced. So including those sections, Trump built 458 total miles, or about 23%, and that 23% is the number used by U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Vance claimed Iran has received over $100 billion in unfrozen assets by the Biden-Harris administration. This is false. Vance seems to be referencing at least in part the Obama administration's 2015 Iran nuclear deal, which allowed for a total of $100 billion to be unfrozen if Iran completed certain nuclear steps, but the agreement fell apart because those steps

weren't completed, and only half of those assets were ultimately unfrozen. So roughly 50 billion. Biden was obviously VP at this time. Harris was not involved in that administration. In 2018, during Trump's administration, Iran was given access to about 10 billion of frozen assets. And later under Biden's administration, that Trump deal was extended, which released another $10 billion in assets to Iran. And most recently, in 2023, another $6 billion of Iranian assets were released as part of a prisoner exchange. So if we total up all of these releases, Iran has had about $76 billion in assets unfrozen by the U.S., but not by the Biden-Harris administration specifically. Vance, in referencing a Minnesota law enacted by Walz,

said the law says that a doctor who presides over an abortion where the baby survives, that doctor is under no obligation to provide life-saving care to the baby. Let's add some context here. Walz signed a new state law in 2023 that made changes to an existing Minnesota law when it comes to medical care for infants that are quote-unquote born alive after an abortion. Both the previous version and the new version of that law say that a baby that is born alive must be fully recognized as a human person and afforded the protections that are otherwise afforded to humans. The change that was made though updated the language to say that when a baby is born alive medical personnel are

required to take all reasonable measures to quote care for end quote the infant previously the language said medical personnel must take all reasonable measures to quote preserve the life and health end quote of the infant so that is the change that vance was referring to and finally last fact check walls was asked about a previous statement he made about being in China during the deadly Tiananmen Square protests in 1989. The reason he was asked about it is because various news reports have placed him in Nebraska at the time of the protests, not China, like he said. So the question for Walls was for him to explain the discrepancy between his account and the reports from the news outlets. His first answer didn't answer the question at all. So the moderator repeated it again

after his two minutes and Walls responded with, quote, all I said on this is that I got there that summer and misspoke on this. That's what I said. So I was in Hong Kong and China during the democracy protests and went in. And from that, I learned a lot of what needed to be in governance end quote so essentially just to give you the full story here back in 2014 in a congressional hearing Walls specifically spoke about his time in Hong Kong in May 1989 during the Tiananmen protests he proceeded to go into detail about his time spent in Hong Kong at this time. Later in a June 2019 radio interview, he also said he was in Hong Kong in May and June, including on the day the massacre occurred. He said, quote, I was in Hong Kong on June 4th, 1989, when of course Tiananmen Square

happened and I was in China after that, end quote. News reports, though, recently surfaced, which placed walls in Nebraska at the time of the massacre, not Hong Kong. So as he clarified on Tuesday night, his statements about being in Hong Kong at the time of the protests were not true. Get ready for Las Vegas style action at BetMGM, the king of online casinos. Enjoy casino games at your fingertips with the same Vegas drift excitement MGM is famous for when you play classics like MGM Grand Millions or popular games like Blackjack, Baccarat, and Roulette. Download the BetMGM casino app today. That was your debate recap. And now we can move on to quick hitters. I just have a few quick hitters for you today, but the quick hitters will be a little bit lengthier than usual. It's just that this episode is already longer than usual. So I just wanted to stick to a few. The first is that the Biden administration announced earlier this week that it will expand

its asylum restrictions at the border. As we've discussed in June, Biden signed a proclamation that cut off access to asylum at the border for those who cross between lawful ports of entry if border encounters exceeded a 2,500 average over the course of a week. The administration has now finalized a rule which makes the policy a bit more permanent and in some sense even tougher. So previously under Biden's proclamation, asylum processing could restart once border crossings averaged 1,500 over seven consecutive days. Now under the new final rule, border crossings have to average 1,500 over 28 consecutive days for asylum processing to restart. At this point, border crossings have to average 1,500 over 28 consecutive days for asylum processing to

restart. At this point, border crossings have yet to decrease below 1,500 for seven days, much less for 28 days, which means that the asylum restrictions will remain in place for the foreseeable future. And a federal judge unsealed most of Jack Smith's 165-page motion for immunity determinations in the election interference case against Trump. And because of it, the public now has a bit of insight into the evidence Smith plans to use at trial, when and if that trial happens. The document is broken up into four sections. So the first section lays out the case against Trump, including a summary of the evidence. The second gives the judge a roadmap for how to assess which of Trump's actions are potentially covered by immunity and which are not in accordance with that recent Supreme Court decision. The third walks through how the

principles should apply to Trump's case. And the fourth is just a short conclusion that is standard in any motion and asks the judge to rule that, you know, in the prosecution's favor. So in this case, that the actions described are not protected by immunity. The appendix, which contains much of the evidence, remains under seal. However, the judge did ask both sides to weigh in on how much of the appendix should be made public. So I'll keep you updated with that. But regardless of whether the appendix or portions of it are made public, the judge will rule sometime in the near future on which of Trump's actions are entitled to immunity and which are not. And finally, the DOJ has asked a judge for an indefinite delay in scheduling a

trial for Ryan Ruth, the man who tried to assassinate Trump on the golf course last month. The DOJ says it has gotten a massive amount of evidence that it needs time to comb through to gain further insight into Ruth's actions leading up to his attempt. Prosecutors say that over the last two weeks, the government has interviewed hundreds of witnesses, executed 13 search warrants across three states, and seized hundreds of items of evidence, including videos, pictures, text files, and audio files. And now onto Rumor Has It. This is the segment where I confirm, dispel, or add context to recent rumors. Rumor has it that Governor Walz said he's made friends with school shooters.

This is true. He did say that. But the content of the statement is false. In other words, he says he misspoke. At Tuesday's debate, Walz was asked about his previous opposition to an assault weapons ban that was years ago and why he's changed his stance on that at this point in his career. He responded by explaining that he sat in an office with the parents of the Sandy Hook victims and proceeded to say, quote, I've become friends with school shooters, end quote. That next day, though, on Wednesday, Walls was asked about his statement by a reporter.

And this is what he said. I'm super passionate about this. The question come up about school shooting. We're talking about everything except school shootings. And I sat as a member of Congress with the Sandy Hook parents and it was a profound movement. David Hogg is a good friend of mine. You have seen me do this. I'm talking about being people where there are school shooters. And I need to be more specific on that. But I am I am passionate about this. This one for my wife and I is just as teachers, as parents, it's so personal. The second and final rumor is sort of an offshoot from the rumor we addressed on Tuesday. Rumor has it that FEMA spent $640 million on illegal immigrants this year and now has no money for disaster relief. This statement is misleading

and needs context. This rumor stems from a viral post on social media that claims exactly that, that FEMA spent $640 million on illegal immigrants this year and now has no money for disaster relief in the wake of Hurricane Helene. So here's the backstory. This past April, the Department of Homeland Security, through FEMA and the United States Customs and Border Protection, announced $300 million in grants through a program called the Shelter and Services Program, and at the same time announced another $340.9 million through the Shelter and Services Program Competitive Grant Program. In total, that's roughly $640 million in grants. That's where that $640 million number comes from in that

social media post. Now, these grants are not new. In fact, last year, more than $780 million was awarded through these same programs. But to tell you a little more about the program, the Shelter and Services Program, or the SSP, is administered by FEMA in partnership with the United States Customs and Border Protection. And it's to provide financial support to non-federal agencies that provide humanitarian services to non-citizen migrants following their release from DHS custody. According to FEMA, the program's primary purpose is to relieve overcrowding in short-term holding facilities of CBP by placing these non-citizen migrants elsewhere in communities and incentivizing non-federal agencies to assist by offering these grants. So basically,

non-federal agencies that take care of these non-citizen migrants that have been released from DHS custody can apply for federal funds or federal grant through this program to help them provide temporary shelter, transportation, personal hygiene supplies, etc. To be clear, it's the non-federal agencies that are applying for and potentially receiving this money, not the migrants themselves. Eligible applicants can include counties, cities, and states, certain state health centers, charities, etc. So yes, FEMA administers this program, which dispersed just under $641 million last fiscal

year. But here's what's critical to understand. If $640 million is designated for grants under this particular program, SSP, that money cannot be then used for disaster relief. They're two entirely separate things. Moreover, phase one of this grant money was awarded to applicants on April 12th, 2024. Phase two was awarded on August 28th, 2024. Hurricane Helene didn't happen until late September after that money was already gone. Now, could you say that had FEMA not provided

this grant money that it would have more money to now spend on disaster relief? Sure. But as I said before, this grant money or this grant program is not new. And as I mentioned in the fiscal year prior, FEMA awarded even more than it did this past fiscal year. Also, who's to say that FEMA wouldn't have just spent that $640 million on something else and been in the same financial position as it is now because its money eventually runs out before the end of the fiscal year anyway on September 30th. So to bring this all back home, saying that FEMA spent $640 million on non-citizen migrants and now doesn't have any money for hurricane relief is misleading for multiple reasons. One, the $640 million was grant money

for an already existing and entirely separate program. Two, that grant money is not the sole reason FEMA is low on funds. And three, FEMA does have money, it just doesn't have a lot. That recent continuing resolution that we've talked about provided $20 billion for FEMA this fiscal year. So FEMA has money, it's just that it's going to run out quick given the disaster that Hurricane Helene left behind. So there you have it. Now let's finish this episode with some critical thinking. For those that may be new here, I introduced this critical thinking segment as a way to get you thinking about various current events and issues on a deeper level. Critical thinking is a lost

skill in a lot of ways and oftentimes we just have other people typically on the tv or social media telling us how and what to think so i'll usually tie this segment back to a story we spoke about earlier in the episode and then just pose a couple of questions to get you thinking about it for today's segment i want to stick with that fema grant program that we just talked about the shelter and services program as i, that program is a way to provide federal funding to non-federal agencies that care for non-citizen migrants. The program's primary goal, according to FEMA, is to reduce the number of non-citizen migrants in DHS custody and prevent overcrowding. First, I want you to think about the pros and cons of this program and really think

about it. So to give you a launching pad, think about what some of the effects would be if this program didn't exist, both good and bad. Next, does your opinion on the program change depending on whether the non-citizen migrants came in legally or illegally, and why or why not. As always, if your immediate inclination is to answer one way or the other, challenge yourself to answer for the other side. That's how we get better at this law skill that is critical thinking. That is what I have for you today. Remember, there will be no episode on Monday, so have a great weekend, have a great Monday. And I'll talk to you again on Tuesday.