What A Day - The Florida Voter Suppression Project

Episode Date: January 17, 2020

Florida’s Supreme Court passed a ruling that will restrict voting rights for people who have been convicted of a crime, which effectively instates a poll tax. Crooked Media’s editor-in-chief Brian Beutler joins us for an impeachment update: the Senators got sworn in on Thursday, Chief Justice John Roberts got sworn in to preside, and we want to talk about it. And in headlines: USCMA passes, bad men arrested, and high cream crimes and misdemeanors.

It's Friday, January 17th. I'm Akilah Hughes. I'm Gideon Resnick, and this is What A Day, the absolute best way to kick off your casual Friday. I'm telling you to untuck it. I'm telling you very specifically, untuck that shit. Let that shirt flap in the wind, you crazy lunatic. It's Friday. On today's show, Florida Supreme Court upholds voter suppression tactics in the state, and then some headlines. But first, impeachment. And to help us with that, we've got Crooked Media's editor-in-chief and host of our weekly impeachment podcast, Rubicon, Brian Boitler. Hey, Brian, what's going on?

Hey, Gideon, how are you? I'm good. Well, OK, before we get chatting, let's run down the latest news. So here goes. Senators were sworn in on Thursday for the impeachment trial of President Trump and Chief Justice John Roberts was sworn in to preside before the trial gets truly underway next Tuesday. SEN. JOHN ROBERTS, Presidential Candidate for Justice, Senate of the United States, Senators, I attend the Senate in conformity with your notice for the purpose of joining with you for the trial of the president of the United States. I am now prepared to take the oath.

SEN. JOHN ROBERTS, Presidential Candidate for Justice, Senate of the United States, Will you place your left hand on the Bible and raise your right hand? Do you solemnly swear that in all things appertaining to the trial of the impeachment of Donald John Trump, President of the United States, now pending, you will do impartial justice according to the Constitution and the laws, so help you God? I do. God bless you. The whispered God bless you got me both times. So much strange pomp and circumstance on this day. But earlier in the day, the Government Accountability Office, which is a

nonpartisan agency that reports to Congress, determined that the White House violated federal law and its hold on aid to Ukraine last year. Now, the report on its own does not result in penalty for the White House. And Republicans seem to think that the timing of the release was suspicious instead of dealing with what the release determined on its own. Hmm. Facts are hard. Now, that withholding of aid is obviously at the center of the impeachment case as Trump directed the withholding in order to get a promise of an investigation into the Bidens from Ukraine. Yeah. And Republicans also spent parts of Thursday trying to knock down the incendiary claims that Lev Parnas, who is an associate of Rudy Giuliani, now infamous, made an interview with Rachel Maddow on Wednesday night. Both Trump and Vice President Pence said that they did not know him at all. But Parnas's lawyer responded with a

video allegedly taken at Mar-a-Lago in 2017, showing Trump and Parnas together speaking. Hate to see it. Every bad criminal has some kind of photo with Trump at Mar-a-Lago. It truly never fails. The Senate has also formally issued a summons to Trump and his legal team, inviting them to respond by Saturday evening. The House managers are also expected to prepare legal briefs. And then this whole show will finally get on the road on Tuesday. But let's step back here for just a second from all the sort of insider

processes stuff to assess where we're at. Brian, that's where you come in. So it sort of feels like it's a, it's a discordant thing because it's obviously a historic moment, but it feels as though the impeachment is kind of playing out as just another passing thing. Do you agree with that? And if so, you know, why do we think that that is? I don't, I don't personally agree with that.

Good answer. But I do know what you're talking about. And part of it, I think, is just the Trump effect that we're all used to, that we can't focus on any single outrage or momentous event for more than a day or two, because we have to move on to the next two, three, or four crazy things that he injects into the news environment. And impeachment is more important than most of the things that came before it, but it's susceptible to the same kind of distraction phenomenon. Trump, you know, nearly launched a war in Iran in the middle of the impeachment fight. So of course, it's very hard to kind of keep impeachment in mind as like the signal event, news event of the moment. Part of it, I think, is also on us. And hopefully we can be good citizens about this, that we have kind of internalized and just kind of in an almost rote habitual way uh come to believe that like lol

nothing matters yeah like there's a there's a a famous tweet and i forget who wrote it uh it's like you know let's just wait and see if donnie trump can wriggle his way out of this yeah he wriggles his way out of it easily he's like oh well nevertheless um and even if you believe that he's likely to be acquitted it it is important for everyone who cares about truth, who cares about justice to pay attention to see what senators do what and how the process of acquitting conflicting, you know, what do you want to call them? Sensations, views, feelings about impeachment that you described. But it will take some work from us. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, there's also been a lot of analysis floating around about the Democrat strategy and what the Republican strategy is going to be. So let's just dive into some of the speculation. So with all of the accusations from Lev Parnas, you know, a couple nights ago,

you know, that came to light. Democrats are trying to make sure we hear from witnesses like Parnas or John Bolton. But do you think that they're going to be able to get the votes for something like that? Without predicting, I think that the likelihood of Republicans being able to succeed in a cover up, a.k.a. gather 51 votes to say no to any new witnesses or documents has gone way down. And a lot of that is a result of Nancy Pelosi's strategy of withholding the articles of impeachment. Why? That worked on two fronts. One is that in the absence of a trial immediately following the actual impeachment of the president, there was not that much for reporters to cover about the impeachment question, the pressure on them went up. And it just became harder and harder and harder for them to find, you know, reasons to leave themselves wiggle room to ultimately vote to help him complete the cover up. So it worked on that channel. But it also created like an information

vacuum and into that information vacuum, uh, a bunch of things flowed, right? Like, because, you know, if, if Republicans are really going to vote to not hear from any witnesses or not get any documentation, uh, you know, it, reporters get to work, witnesses get to work, leakers get to work. And, and, and so we learned a ton of stuff in the intervening three or four weeks. Um, And that wouldn't have been possible if Nancy Pelosi hadn't created the space, right? Even if it didn't actually like work like a vacuum to suck the information, you know, out of various sources, like the Parnas developments came in just under the wire, right? Like, like, within hours of them transmitting the articles of impeachment over to

the Senate. And now that's part of the official record. And if the trial had begun whenever Mitch McConnell wanted it to begin, then, you know, it would be over. We'd be in the middle of it. This stuff would be breaking. And it would be hard to make Republican senators answer for that aspect of the Ukraine scandal that we didn't even know until now. So the strategy has been effective at making the case before the Senate stronger, making it harder for Republicans to orchestrate a cover up. And I think most of that's about Nancy Pelosi, but I think generally Democrats have done a good job of cornering Republicans on this issue. And I don't know what they're going to do, but it's going to be clear to everyone if they do go forward with the cover up just what they did.

Well, we will keep you all updated on the trial as it gets underway. So stay tuned and definitely check out Brian's podcast Rubicon. If you haven't already, we stand. In 2018's midterm elections in Florida, reinstating the right to vote for people convicted of felonies was on the ballot. It was Amendment 4 and it passed overwhelmingly. Considered one of the biggest wins for voting rights, over a million people were potentially regaining the right to vote in the state after it passed. But that same year, Floridians also narrowly voted in a Republican governor, Ron DeSantis, and voted in a Republican legislature, which quickly passed the law to make those formerly incarcerated people pay all associated fees prior to getting their

voting rights back. This is essentially a poll tax, one that would suppress these new potential voters from being involved in the democratic process. That got challenged in court. And yesterday, Florida Supreme Court ruled that any fees or fines associated with a felony record must be paid in full for that right to be reinstated. Okay, Akilah, are there any more specifics to this ruling we need to know about? Yeah. So quick background here. The amendment passing meant that an estimated 1.4 million people were going to be regaining the right to vote, which is in Florida, a state that disproportionately charges and finds African-Americans and Hispanics guilty of felonies. According to the New York Times, one in five African-Americans in Florida has lost the right to vote for life because of their felony record. So requiring people to pay

fees and fines associated with their charges is a clear way to restrict the impact of the amendment by just throwing up a hurdle. A lot of people don't even know how much they owe since, you know, those fees are not always listed on sentencing documents. And it also sets up a precedent that if you commit a felony, you can buy the right to vote afterwards. And who is most likely to have the money to buy their right to vote? I'm going to guess it's not African-American and Hispanic people. That's exactly right. So beyond the obvious quantifiable wealth disparity, finding work after a felony is hard enough. And finding a high paying job after a felony conviction is a pipe dream for people of color. It just doesn't really happen that often. Nancy Abudu, the Southern

Poverty Law Center's deputy legal director, said of the ruling, quote, the Florida Supreme Court's decision is disappointing and cuts the 1.4 million people who voters expressly intended to re-enfranchise almost in half. Yeah, I mean, this was not something that barely passed. Yeah, it was 65 percent of voters in Florida wanted it bipartisan in a lot of senses, too. Obviously, by nature of the votes, you had to have crossovers between this and the governor who was responsible for these actions afterwards, which is an insane irony. But this is likely to be appealed, and that's going to take time, and it may not get resolved before the next big election that's coming up. If people want to help immediately, what's the best way they can? Great question. Well, if you'd like to donate directly to paying Florida's returning citizens

fines and fees so that they can vote, which, you know, sidebar is just a fucked up thing and like a functioning democracy. You should go to we got the vote dot org slash fines and fees or text fees. That's F.E.S. to eight to six to three and spread the story around, you know, if you know people who aren't interested in voting, maybe let them know how important it is on a state and local level to have representatives that vote with your expressed interest since, you know, obviously these representatives are not representing their constituents. Boot them out. Let's wrap up with some headlines. Headlines. the USMCA, for folks in the know, will replace NAFTA, the old trade agreement that Trump loved. He called it, quote, the worst trade deal ever made. The deal marks a political victory for

the president, but Democrats in the House last month did not let the initial bill as written pass without significant changes, including more support for US workers. Even with those tweaks, some Democrats in the Senate, including independent Senator Bernie Sanders, Democratic Senator Kamala Harris, and minority leader Chuck Schumer, voted against it, arguing that the deal doesn't go far enough to address the climate crisis. The first black congresswoman in Massachusetts, Ayanna Pressley, revealed that she has alopecia, which is an autoimmune disease that causes baldness. In an exclusive video published by The Root, Presley opens up about her hair loss journey, starting from when she was sworn into Congress with her signature twists to when she lost the final piece of her hair the night before President Trump's impeachment vote. She spoke about how vulnerable she felt at times in the process and concluded the video by showing off her full bald glory. Go off, Ayanna. Some of you will remember that last summer, some teens nationwide

got the idea to record themselves in grocery stores licking tubs of ice cream and putting them back in the freezer for clout. Gen Z, you are our nasty future. Well, the criminal justice system has always defended our right to spit free desserts. And in this case, it is no different. A guy who licked ice cream in Texas was brought to trial and as of Wednesday he has pled guilty to criminal mischief. To review one last time what this guy did, here's the county's district attorney. He went and licked the ice cream and then on video he put it back into the refrigerator and left. So that causes a big chain of events to occur. Indeed, the big chain of events is, of course, me giving the man's video a massive freaking RT. Seriously, this guy faces up

to a year in prison for this, which is insane because he bought the ice cream that he licked. Ice cream got a ton of free press from this. So if you ask me, his legal fees should be paid by Big Dairy. Yeah, Big Dairy, do your thing. Quick update on our Virginia story from this. So if you ask me, his legal fees should be paid by Big Dairy. Yeah, Big Dairy, do your thing. Quick update on our Virginia story from yesterday. You may remember Governor Ralph Northam declared a state of emergency ahead of a gun rights demonstration so that extremist groups couldn't bring their weapons to the Capitol grounds. Well, now the FBI has stepped in, arresting three armed neo-Nazis who had planned on attending. The men were members of The Base, a group that wants to create a white ethnostate. Guys, this exists.

It's called a 311 concert. Apart from your average illegal gun possession and conspiracy crimes, one of the guys was Canadian and the crime they got the other guys on was, quote, transporting and harboring aliens for helping him cross the border. Okay, so that's why these guys

want to secure the border so bad. They're actually trying to keep themselves out because they know they make people angry. The trio faced court in Maryland yesterday. Sorry, you have to miss your little hate party. And those are the headlines. That's all for today. By the way, we're off on Monday for Martin Luther King Day. So we'll be back with you on Tuesday.

If you like the show, make sure you subscribe, leave a review, give us a rating, find a potato chip that looks like us and sell it to a museum, and tell your friends to listen. By the way, if you are into reading and not just absolutely devastating reviews of the latest talking animal movie like me, What A Day is also a nightly newsletter. Check it out and subscribe at crooked.com slash subscribe. I'm Akilah Hughes. I'm Gideon Resnick. And that's how you give the business to Big Dairy.

Look at all that ice cream. What A Day is a product of Crooked Media. It's recorded and mixed by Charlotte Landis. Sonia Tun is our assistant producer. Our head writer is John Milstein and our senior producer is Katie Long. Our theme music is by Colin Gilliard and Kashaka.