WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.040 Welcome to the Deep Dive, where we take your 00:00:02.040 --> 00:00:04.299 sources and unlock the most important insights, 00:00:04.540 --> 00:00:07.759 surprising facts, and connections you might miss 00:00:07.759 --> 00:00:10.160 otherwise. Think of us as your guides, sort of 00:00:10.160 --> 00:00:12.279 cutting through the noise and getting straight 00:00:12.279 --> 00:00:14.339 to what matters in the information you shared 00:00:14.339 --> 00:00:17.339 with us. Yeah, exactly. And today's Deep Dive 00:00:17.339 --> 00:00:19.839 pulls from a really fascinating stack of articles. 00:00:19.899 --> 00:00:22.719 We've got everything from, well, high stakes 00:00:22.719 --> 00:00:26.140 political views, Supreme Court decisions. Cultural 00:00:26.140 --> 00:00:29.420 shifts, local elections. It's quite a mix, yeah. 00:00:29.609 --> 00:00:32.210 We're going to unpack the key takeaways for you, 00:00:32.369 --> 00:00:34.570 highlight the stories and the facts that really 00:00:34.570 --> 00:00:37.530 stand out. Our mission, as always, to help you 00:00:37.530 --> 00:00:40.729 get well informed quickly and thoroughly on a 00:00:40.729 --> 00:00:42.590 whole range of topics shaping the news right 00:00:42.590 --> 00:00:44.909 now. So let's dive into this material you've 00:00:44.909 --> 00:00:46.590 put together. OK, let's start with that first 00:00:46.590 --> 00:00:49.530 big one, this political showdown, Trump versus 00:00:49.530 --> 00:00:52.070 Musk. Right. Yeah, it's something everyone's 00:00:52.070 --> 00:00:54.509 border saw coming, didn't they? But maybe not, 00:00:54.530 --> 00:00:56.450 maybe not quite this quickly or getting this 00:00:56.450 --> 00:00:59.070 ugly this fast. Your sources describe it as a 00:00:59.070 --> 00:01:01.750 like a rapid descent into open warfare, like 00:01:01.750 --> 00:01:03.810 something that was brewing but just exploded. 00:01:04.310 --> 00:01:08.390 Absolutely. And the The ostensible reasons, the 00:01:08.390 --> 00:01:10.010 ones stated, they're kind of layered. You've 00:01:10.010 --> 00:01:12.129 got the big budget bill. The one Trump calls 00:01:12.129 --> 00:01:14.870 big, beautiful. That's the one. But it, well, 00:01:14.930 --> 00:01:16.969 it increases the deficit potentially massively. 00:01:17.230 --> 00:01:20.069 And that runs counter to what Musk was apparently 00:01:20.069 --> 00:01:22.670 pushing for with that DOGE initiative he was 00:01:22.670 --> 00:01:24.790 involved with earlier. OK, so there's that policy 00:01:24.790 --> 00:01:27.569 clash. Yeah. And then there were maybe some potential 00:01:27.569 --> 00:01:30.909 cuts to EV subsidies floating around that obviously 00:01:30.909 --> 00:01:33.390 wouldn't sit well with Musk's business interests, 00:01:33.469 --> 00:01:35.670 you know, Tesla and all that. Right. Makes sense. 00:01:35.950 --> 00:01:38.469 So you have these specific points, but reading 00:01:38.469 --> 00:01:42.269 between the lines in your sources, there's this 00:01:42.269 --> 00:01:44.590 underlying rivalry, too. Oh, definitely. The 00:01:44.590 --> 00:01:46.870 source mentions this idea of this country isn't 00:01:46.870 --> 00:01:49.049 big enough for the two of us. They're both fighting 00:01:49.049 --> 00:01:52.090 for the spotlight for that alpha dog title. And 00:01:52.090 --> 00:01:55.209 that tension just blew up yesterday. Yeah. In 00:01:55.209 --> 00:01:57.450 a very public way. It really did. The play by 00:01:57.450 --> 00:01:59.890 play is kind of wild. Trump kicked it off, calling 00:01:59.890 --> 00:02:02.870 Musk very disappointed, saying he had Trump Derangement 00:02:02.870 --> 00:02:04.829 Syndrome. And Musk didn't waste any time hitting 00:02:04.829 --> 00:02:07.769 back. Not at all. Fired right back. Your sources 00:02:07.769 --> 00:02:09.689 say he claimed Trump would have actually lost 00:02:09.689 --> 00:02:11.830 the election without him, without his help with 00:02:11.830 --> 00:02:15.430 the House and Senate positions. Wow. OK, so that's 00:02:15.430 --> 00:02:17.830 a direct challenge. How did Trump respond? Predictably, 00:02:18.030 --> 00:02:20.229 maybe. Retorted, he would have won easily anyway. 00:02:20.629 --> 00:02:24.930 But then he escalated, seriously escalated, suggesting 00:02:24.930 --> 00:02:26.849 maybe they should cancel government contracts 00:02:26.849 --> 00:02:30.000 with Musk's companies. Whoa. Those contracts 00:02:30.000 --> 00:02:32.539 are huge, aren't they? Ruby tight, like. Your 00:02:32.539 --> 00:02:35.259 sources estimate somewhere in the realm of $40 00:02:35.259 --> 00:02:38.319 to $50 billion. It's a massive amount of money, 00:02:38.939 --> 00:02:42.000 a huge potential blow. It really is. And Musk's 00:02:42.000 --> 00:02:44.419 response to that threat. He reportedly hit back 00:02:44.419 --> 00:02:46.719 with another big one, threatened that SpaceX 00:02:46.719 --> 00:02:49.419 might just decommission its Dragon spacecraft, 00:02:49.719 --> 00:02:52.000 the one NASA uses, meaning the US would have 00:02:52.000 --> 00:02:53.919 to go back to paying Russia to get astronauts 00:02:53.919 --> 00:02:56.800 to the ISS. And then almost immediately after, 00:02:56.960 --> 00:02:58.780 he suggests on ex -Twitter that Trump should 00:02:58.780 --> 00:03:01.099 be impeached. This is just spiraling. Did it 00:03:01.099 --> 00:03:03.819 stop there? Nope. Trump then comes out saying 00:03:03.819 --> 00:03:06.659 Musk had been wearing Finn and that he had asked 00:03:06.659 --> 00:03:08.979 Musk to leave his government role, trying to 00:03:08.979 --> 00:03:11.960 reframe it. OK, and then Musk. Then Musk dropped 00:03:11.960 --> 00:03:15.599 what he called the really big bomb on ex Twitter, 00:03:15.819 --> 00:03:18.060 claimed the Epstein files are still sealed because 00:03:18.060 --> 00:03:21.080 Trump's name is all over them, essentially threatening 00:03:21.080 --> 00:03:24.240 to out Trump as a pedophile. Good grief. Your 00:03:24.240 --> 00:03:26.840 source quoted Ron Burgundy, right? Yep. Boy, 00:03:26.879 --> 00:03:28.860 that escalated quickly. I mean, that really got 00:03:28.860 --> 00:03:33.280 out of hand fast. It kind of sums it up perfectly. 00:03:33.500 --> 00:03:36.560 And the role of social media in all this. It's 00:03:36.560 --> 00:03:38.860 central, isn't it? Oh, completely. Like, your 00:03:38.860 --> 00:03:41.280 source says, he who lives by the social media 00:03:41.280 --> 00:03:43.259 dies by the social media. This whole thing played 00:03:43.259 --> 00:03:46.280 out in real time, very publicly. And unleashed 00:03:46.280 --> 00:03:49.379 a flood of commentary. And memes, of course. 00:03:49.479 --> 00:03:51.460 Of course. The internet responded instantly. 00:03:51.819 --> 00:03:53.900 Your source lists a bunch of examples. The Cybertruck 00:03:53.900 --> 00:03:56.469 one, buyer's remorse about Trump. References 00:03:56.469 --> 00:03:58.550 to movies like Fatal Attraction, the Kendrick 00:03:58.550 --> 00:04:00.610 Lamar Drake thing, and the one for the kiddies 00:04:00.610 --> 00:04:03.349 meme. A historical one, the Stalin Yezhov reference 00:04:03.349 --> 00:04:06.150 about erasing people from photos. Digging up 00:04:06.150 --> 00:04:08.930 old tweets, internet is forever, the straight 00:04:08.930 --> 00:04:12.419 man variations, foreign affairs jokes. Michael 00:04:12.419 --> 00:04:15.840 Jackson's thriller, The You Say Tomato, one about 00:04:15.840 --> 00:04:18.259 different Republican groups, even a Game of Thrones 00:04:18.259 --> 00:04:20.899 comparison. People were definitely having a field 00:04:20.899 --> 00:04:23.560 day online. But not everyone's laughing. Speaker 00:04:23.560 --> 00:04:25.579 Mike Johnson, for instance, he's been trying 00:04:25.579 --> 00:04:27.899 to manage Trump. Yeah, trying to build that relationship. 00:04:27.980 --> 00:04:30.279 And now he's got another unpredictable player, 00:04:30.779 --> 00:04:33.939 Musk, attacking the very budget bill he barely 00:04:33.939 --> 00:04:36.199 managed to get through the House. The source 00:04:36.199 --> 00:04:38.860 says he was beside himself. And other Republicans 00:04:38.860 --> 00:04:40.980 in Congress, what's their take? It's interesting. 00:04:41.199 --> 00:04:43.560 The source suggests some are kind of... They're 00:04:43.560 --> 00:04:46.379 quietly happy to see Musk taking the heat as 00:04:46.379 --> 00:04:48.899 a budget hawk champion, especially from the right 00:04:48.899 --> 00:04:50.699 flank. But they don't want it to go too far. 00:04:51.000 --> 00:04:52.779 Exactly. They really, really hope it doesn't 00:04:52.779 --> 00:04:56.000 become a full -on hot war. The last thing they 00:04:56.000 --> 00:04:58.519 want is to be forced to choose sides between 00:04:58.519 --> 00:05:01.319 Musk with his money and massive social media 00:05:01.319 --> 00:05:04.279 reach and Trump with his base and, you know, 00:05:04.360 --> 00:05:07.040 his history of going after anyone he sees as 00:05:07.040 --> 00:05:09.040 disloyal. Makes sense. What about Democrats? 00:05:09.160 --> 00:05:11.120 Are they just enjoying the popcorn? Pretty much, 00:05:11.180 --> 00:05:14.019 yeah. Just watching the show. Your source mentions 00:05:14.019 --> 00:05:16.779 there was some chatter some debate among certain 00:05:16.779 --> 00:05:21.540 Democrats about maybe trying to Bring Musk back 00:05:21.540 --> 00:05:23.579 into the tent. Well, what's the argument against 00:05:23.579 --> 00:05:26.779 that? Well, your source, citing the work, lays 00:05:26.779 --> 00:05:29.120 out a pretty strong case against courting him. 00:05:29.500 --> 00:05:32.019 They argue he's actually quite unpopular overall, 00:05:32.120 --> 00:05:34.639 not really aligned with Democrats on policy. 00:05:35.220 --> 00:05:37.720 Frankly, the source uses terms like fascist and 00:05:37.720 --> 00:05:41.040 racist. Plus, they say he's mercurial. His money 00:05:41.040 --> 00:05:43.259 didn't seem to help much in that Wisconsin race. 00:05:43.639 --> 00:05:45.720 Getting close to him could hurt Democrats own 00:05:45.720 --> 00:05:47.639 brand. And hey, they kind of get the benefit 00:05:47.639 --> 00:05:50.000 of his attacks on Republicans anyway. And oh, 00:05:50.060 --> 00:05:52.100 yeah, they repeat, he's a fascist and a racist. 00:05:53.080 --> 00:05:55.680 So not much appetite there. Given all that back 00:05:55.680 --> 00:05:58.240 and forth, the threats, what's the prediction? 00:05:58.519 --> 00:06:00.939 Does this feed last? The source actually guesses 00:06:00.939 --> 00:06:03.160 it probably won't last long. They think it'll 00:06:03.160 --> 00:06:07.120 likely end in some kind of uneasy truce. Well, 00:06:07.279 --> 00:06:09.939 a couple of reasons. Trump probably doesn't need 00:06:09.939 --> 00:06:12.379 this extra headache during a really tricky budget 00:06:12.379 --> 00:06:15.439 fight that's already showing GOP divisions. And, 00:06:15.519 --> 00:06:17.740 you know, you have to wonder what Musk might 00:06:17.740 --> 00:06:20.800 know from his time inside. Maybe stuff from Twitter 00:06:20.800 --> 00:06:25.290 DMs. Potential leverage. Could be. And on Musk's 00:06:25.290 --> 00:06:27.949 side, he really can't afford to lose those government 00:06:27.949 --> 00:06:31.490 contracts, SpaceX especially. Plus, he's already 00:06:31.490 --> 00:06:34.110 taking a massive financial hit just from this 00:06:34.110 --> 00:06:37.610 spat. Tesla shares dropped 16 % since he started 00:06:37.610 --> 00:06:39.470 complaining about the budget. How much is that 00:06:39.470 --> 00:06:42.990 in dollar terms for him? About $34 billion wiped 00:06:42.990 --> 00:06:46.129 off his personal wealth, and nearly $27 billion 00:06:46.129 --> 00:06:49.449 of that vanished in just one day. That kind of 00:06:49.449 --> 00:06:51.449 stings. Yeah, that definitely makes that kayfabe 00:06:51.449 --> 00:06:53.569 theory that it's all just a stage performance 00:06:53.569 --> 00:06:55.949 seem pretty unlikely. Losing billions isn't usually 00:06:55.949 --> 00:06:58.389 part of the act. Exactly. It doesn't really track. 00:06:58.829 --> 00:07:01.290 Which brings us to Musk's actual standing with 00:07:01.290 --> 00:07:03.790 the Republican base. How popular is he? That's 00:07:03.790 --> 00:07:05.910 a key question, right? It is. And your source 00:07:05.910 --> 00:07:08.970 cites an economist YouGov poll showing his approval 00:07:08.970 --> 00:07:12.129 among Republicans is 76%. Well, that's only nine 00:07:12.129 --> 00:07:14.870 points lower than Trump's 87%. It's remarkably 00:07:14.870 --> 00:07:17.430 high. Wow. So he has real pull with that base. 00:07:18.429 --> 00:07:21.430 And that explains why you didn't hear many Republican 00:07:21.430 --> 00:07:24.350 politicians jumping to criticize his comments 00:07:24.350 --> 00:07:27.069 about the budget bill. They know he resonates. 00:07:27.550 --> 00:07:30.790 People like his perceived willingness to cut 00:07:30.790 --> 00:07:33.350 government. He's seen as this larger -than -life 00:07:33.350 --> 00:07:36.009 figure, a separate power center. And his ex -Twitter 00:07:36.009 --> 00:07:38.430 following is massive compared to Trump's site. 00:07:38.589 --> 00:07:41.529 Huge difference. Around 220 million followers 00:07:41.529 --> 00:07:44.389 versus whatever Trump has. It means Trump probably 00:07:44.389 --> 00:07:46.389 has to be careful if he wants to retaliate. He 00:07:46.389 --> 00:07:49.850 can't just, you know, publicly purge Musk's allies 00:07:49.850 --> 00:07:52.310 or attack him head on in his usual style. Might 00:07:52.310 --> 00:07:54.029 have to be more subtle, like transferring people 00:07:54.029 --> 00:07:56.589 to Alaska as the source jokes. Maybe something 00:07:56.589 --> 00:07:59.589 like that. Or your source details some other 00:07:59.589 --> 00:08:02.110 potential ways Trump could hurt Musk more discreetly. 00:08:02.149 --> 00:08:04.509 Things that are kind of in the weeds but would 00:08:04.509 --> 00:08:07.769 have a real impact. Like what? Like a really 00:08:07.769 --> 00:08:10.629 vig - of existing laws where Musk's companies 00:08:10.629 --> 00:08:13.509 might be vulnerable, or creating new regulations 00:08:13.509 --> 00:08:15.449 specifically targeting things like self -driving 00:08:15.449 --> 00:08:19.250 taxis, killing off federal tax credits for EVs, 00:08:19.410 --> 00:08:21.470 batteries, charging stations that would hurt 00:08:21.470 --> 00:08:23.790 Tesla. And maybe boosting competitors. Yeah, 00:08:23.829 --> 00:08:26.829 like subsidizing Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin to make 00:08:26.829 --> 00:08:29.569 them a stronger competitor for SpaceX's government 00:08:29.569 --> 00:08:32.809 contracts. These moves would hit Musk financially, 00:08:32.870 --> 00:08:35.830 but wouldn't necessarily be a big, visible fight 00:08:35.830 --> 00:08:38.559 that rallies his base. Okay, that makes sense. 00:08:38.820 --> 00:08:40.799 Which leads us right into this whole issue of 00:08:40.799 --> 00:08:43.620 the embedded doggies, right? Yeah. The people 00:08:43.620 --> 00:08:46.000 Musk apparently left behind in government. Exactly. 00:08:46.440 --> 00:08:49.460 This is a fascinating and maybe slightly chilling 00:08:49.460 --> 00:08:51.379 part of the story, according to your sources. 00:08:52.000 --> 00:08:54.539 The idea that Musk embedded these individuals 00:08:54.539 --> 00:08:57.639 described sometimes as 20 -something hacker kids 00:08:57.639 --> 00:09:00.909 or doggies inside various government departments. 00:09:01.149 --> 00:09:03.049 Like political commissars, the source compares 00:09:03.049 --> 00:09:05.990 them to. People there to enforce loyalty or gather 00:09:05.990 --> 00:09:08.590 intel. That's the comparison, yeah. And the report 00:09:08.590 --> 00:09:11.289 is they're still there, still potentially wreaking 00:09:11.289 --> 00:09:13.730 havoc, cutting budgets, maybe firing federal 00:09:13.730 --> 00:09:16.330 workers, and this seems key, hoovering up data. 00:09:16.549 --> 00:09:19.169 Data from Musk. That's the implication. Your 00:09:19.169 --> 00:09:22.330 source gives specific examples. Carl Coe at the 00:09:22.330 --> 00:09:24.110 Department of Energy, acting as chief of staff, 00:09:24.350 --> 00:09:27.370 apparently filtering communications. Tyler Hassan 00:09:27.370 --> 00:09:29.929 at Interior, reportedly having the power to fire 00:09:29.929 --> 00:09:32.629 staff and cancel contracts without the secretary's 00:09:32.629 --> 00:09:34.590 sign -off. And there were examples of contracts 00:09:34.590 --> 00:09:37.429 canceled that seemed politically motivated. Yeah, 00:09:37.570 --> 00:09:40.190 linked to disputes Trump had with Harvard and 00:09:40.190 --> 00:09:42.909 Maine. And then at the Social Security Administration, 00:09:43.169 --> 00:09:46.090 you have Aram Moghadasi and Michael Russo as 00:09:46.090 --> 00:09:48.529 co -chief information officers. Why would Musk 00:09:48.529 --> 00:09:51.190 want all this data? What's the speculation? Train 00:09:51.190 --> 00:09:54.570 AI bots. Spy on competitors. The sources admit 00:09:54.570 --> 00:09:56.730 it's not entirely clear. Could be any number 00:09:56.730 --> 00:09:59.309 of reasons. So how do these people get removed, 00:09:59.590 --> 00:10:01.799 if they can be? Well, a couple of possibilities 00:10:01.799 --> 00:10:04.460 mentioned. If the Trump -Musk feud really blows 00:10:04.460 --> 00:10:07.000 up again, Trump might order a purge, seeing them 00:10:07.000 --> 00:10:09.240 as Musk loyalists. But there's a complication. 00:10:09.559 --> 00:10:12.460 Right. OMB Director Russell Vought. His goal 00:10:12.460 --> 00:10:14.740 seems to be dismantling government structures. 00:10:15.419 --> 00:10:17.679 So he might actually want these deogies there 00:10:17.679 --> 00:10:19.860 because they're effective at cutting budgets 00:10:19.860 --> 00:10:23.179 and staff, maybe even defying a Trump order if 00:10:23.179 --> 00:10:26.500 it serves Vought's own agenda. And there's a 00:10:26.500 --> 00:10:29.029 legal challenge, too. Yes, a pending lawsuit 00:10:29.029 --> 00:10:32.409 arguing the whole DOGE operation is unconstitutional 00:10:32.409 --> 00:10:35.529 because these officers hold significant power 00:10:35.529 --> 00:10:38.169 but were never confirmed by the Senate, which 00:10:38.169 --> 00:10:40.649 is usually required. That lawsuit could potentially 00:10:40.649 --> 00:10:43.019 end the whole thing. regardless of the politics. 00:10:43.340 --> 00:10:45.080 Okay, speaking of the courts, let's shift to 00:10:45.080 --> 00:10:47.539 the Supreme Court. Your sources mentioned some 00:10:47.539 --> 00:10:50.580 recent rulings were maybe less dramatic than 00:10:50.580 --> 00:10:53.080 usual. Yeah, unremarkable was the word used, 00:10:53.159 --> 00:10:55.519 mostly unanimous decisions. The source sort of 00:10:55.519 --> 00:10:57.940 joked the court was maybe taking pity on the 00:10:57.940 --> 00:10:59.960 country after some really contentious terms, 00:11:00.379 --> 00:11:02.259 a bit of a breather perhaps. So what were the 00:11:02.259 --> 00:11:04.340 notable ones they covered? Okay, first up was 00:11:04.340 --> 00:11:07.259 Ames v. Ohio Youth Department, unanimous decision. 00:11:07.379 --> 00:11:09.860 It reversed a lower court ruling about the evidence 00:11:09.860 --> 00:11:12.000 standard needed for discrimination claims under 00:11:12.000 --> 00:11:18.840 Title VII. That's right. The lower court had 00:11:18.840 --> 00:11:21.100 required her to meet a higher standard of proof 00:11:21.100 --> 00:11:23.860 just to make her initial case than someone from 00:11:23.860 --> 00:11:28.070 a minority group would need to meet. No, that 00:11:28.070 --> 00:11:30.490 violates Title VII. The standard to get your 00:11:30.490 --> 00:11:32.450 foot in the door can't be different based on 00:11:32.450 --> 00:11:34.549 whether you're in a majority or minority group. 00:11:34.730 --> 00:11:36.809 So it standardizes that first step. Exactly. 00:11:37.049 --> 00:11:40.049 It's about that initial prima facie case in the 00:11:40.049 --> 00:11:42.769 McDonnell Douglas framework. Plaintiff presents 00:11:42.769 --> 00:11:46.269 evidence. Defendant rebuts. Plaintiff shows pretext. 00:11:46.690 --> 00:11:49.330 The court clarified that first step isn't supposed 00:11:49.330 --> 00:11:51.490 to be super difficult and the standard is the 00:11:51.490 --> 00:11:53.690 same for everyone. What's the expected impact? 00:11:54.190 --> 00:11:57.230 More reverse discrimination suits. Some commentators 00:11:57.230 --> 00:11:59.470 think so, maybe weakening diversity efforts, 00:11:59.649 --> 00:12:01.830 but your source suggests it might mostly just 00:12:01.830 --> 00:12:04.370 create consistency, as many courts already applied 00:12:04.370 --> 00:12:07.710 this standard. And they note Ames' specific case 00:12:07.710 --> 00:12:10.129 might still fail anyway, because according to 00:12:10.129 --> 00:12:12.590 Ohio's lawyer, there wasn't much actual evidence 00:12:12.590 --> 00:12:15.610 of anti -straight bias presented. Okay. What 00:12:15.610 --> 00:12:18.559 else from SCOTUS? Another unanimous one. Catholic 00:12:18.559 --> 00:12:21.539 Charities v Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review 00:12:21.539 --> 00:12:25.299 Commission described as very narrow. The court 00:12:25.299 --> 00:12:27.639 found Wisconsin discriminated against Catholic 00:12:27.639 --> 00:12:29.740 charities based on religion under the First Amendment 00:12:29.740 --> 00:12:32.379 when it denied them an unemployment tax exemption. 00:12:32.820 --> 00:12:35.289 Why did Wisconsin deny it? Because the state 00:12:35.289 --> 00:12:37.830 decided Catholic charities wasn't religious enough 00:12:37.830 --> 00:12:40.169 since they didn't actively proselytize as part 00:12:40.169 --> 00:12:42.470 of their work. The court said that's drawing 00:12:42.470 --> 00:12:45.090 lines between religions based on their specific 00:12:45.090 --> 00:12:47.110 theological practices, which the First Amendment 00:12:47.110 --> 00:12:49.529 forbids. Got it. And the gun manufacturer case. 00:12:49.909 --> 00:12:52.230 Mexican government v gun manufacturers. Another 00:12:52.230 --> 00:12:54.909 unanimous dismissal. The court essentially just 00:12:54.909 --> 00:12:58.590 reaffirmed that a 2005 federal law protects the 00:12:58.590 --> 00:13:00.850 gun industry from lawsuits over the misuse of 00:13:00.850 --> 00:13:03.490 their products by other people. They said Congress 00:13:03.440 --> 00:13:06.559 pass that law specifically to prevent those kinds 00:13:06.559 --> 00:13:10.080 of downstream damages lawsuits. If Mexico or 00:13:10.080 --> 00:13:11.940 anyone else wants to change that, they need Congress 00:13:11.940 --> 00:13:14.840 to change the law. Okay. Now, circling back to 00:13:14.840 --> 00:13:17.419 those embedded DOGs and the Social Security data, 00:13:17.960 --> 00:13:20.659 there was a specific SCOTUS ruling on that just 00:13:20.659 --> 00:13:23.909 last Friday. Yes, this is a significant development 00:13:23.909 --> 00:13:27.549 reported in your sources, an unsigned 6 -3 ruling. 00:13:28.370 --> 00:13:30.309 The Supreme Court reversed the lower court's 00:13:30.309 --> 00:13:32.789 temporary block that had stopped Deoghese from 00:13:32.789 --> 00:13:35.870 accessing the full SSA databases and required 00:13:35.870 --> 00:13:38.690 them to destroy copied data. So the lower courts 00:13:38.690 --> 00:13:41.639 had blocked them. Why? The original lawsuit brought 00:13:41.639 --> 00:13:44.440 by unions and retire groups argued that giving 00:13:44.440 --> 00:13:47.279 these unvetted individuals sweeping access likely 00:13:47.279 --> 00:13:50.500 violated the 1974 Privacy Act. Judge Hollander 00:13:50.500 --> 00:13:52.460 initially agreed, saying the government hadn't 00:13:52.460 --> 00:13:55.000 shown why they needed full live access instead 00:13:55.000 --> 00:13:58.440 of, say, anonymized data for finding waste. The 00:13:58.440 --> 00:14:00.759 Fourth Circuit upheld her temporary injunction, 00:14:01.120 --> 00:14:03.399 citing major privacy risks. But the Supreme Court 00:14:03.399 --> 00:14:05.600 majority disagreed, at least for now. Right. 00:14:05.659 --> 00:14:07.799 They lifted that temporary injunction. And this 00:14:07.799 --> 00:14:09.539 is where those privacy concerns really flare 00:14:09.539 --> 00:14:12.360 up. The dissenting justices warned about grave 00:14:12.360 --> 00:14:14.720 privacy risks for millions of Americans. We're 00:14:14.720 --> 00:14:16.679 talking social security numbers, health info, 00:14:17.100 --> 00:14:19.460 financial details, incredibly sensitive stuff. 00:14:19.779 --> 00:14:22.120 And the contrast with regular access is stark. 00:14:22.399 --> 00:14:25.320 Very much so. Your source highlights Kathleen 00:14:25.320 --> 00:14:28.740 Romig, a former SSA employee. To look at anonymized 00:14:28.740 --> 00:14:31.360 data for research, she needed fingerprints, a 00:14:31.360 --> 00:14:34.730 background check, rigorous protocols. These doggies 00:14:34.730 --> 00:14:37.610 now have what she calls god -level access to 00:14:37.610 --> 00:14:40.429 the live identifiable data of millions, at least 00:14:40.429 --> 00:14:42.330 until the full case is decided, which could take 00:14:42.330 --> 00:14:44.809 ages. What's the official justification? The 00:14:44.809 --> 00:14:48.110 new SSA head, Frank Bisignano, hailed it as a 00:14:48.110 --> 00:14:50.629 major victory for American taxpayers, saying 00:14:50.629 --> 00:14:53.840 it helps fight waste and fraud. The Solicitor 00:14:53.840 --> 00:14:56.539 General, John Sauer, argued the courts shouldn't 00:14:56.539 --> 00:14:59.419 micromanage this effort, but notably didn't really 00:14:59.419 --> 00:15:01.679 explain why this level of access was an emergency 00:15:01.679 --> 00:15:04.039 needed right now before the privacy issues were 00:15:04.039 --> 00:15:06.559 fully litigated. Wow. Okay, any other legal updates, 00:15:06.740 --> 00:15:09.220 Mincher? A couple quick ones. Judge Alison Burroughs 00:15:09.220 --> 00:15:11.620 extended her injunctions stopping Trump's order 00:15:11.620 --> 00:15:13.620 that tried to prevent Harvard from enrolling 00:15:13.620 --> 00:15:15.759 foreign -born students. Your source noted this 00:15:15.759 --> 00:15:18.019 is after DHS already revoked the order itself. 00:15:18.139 --> 00:15:20.080 So kind of bells and suspenders. The source had 00:15:20.080 --> 00:15:22.759 a joke about it? Yeah, something about maybe 00:15:22.759 --> 00:15:25.659 Trump should get Oprah or Taylor Swift to issue 00:15:25.659 --> 00:15:27.440 the order next time to see if that works. But 00:15:27.440 --> 00:15:30.600 a dark humor there. OK. And the El Salvador detainee 00:15:30.600 --> 00:15:34.559 case. Right. The case before Judge James Boasberg. 00:15:35.139 --> 00:15:37.519 This involves men deported from the U .S. to 00:15:37.519 --> 00:15:39.940 that high security prison in El Salvador without 00:15:39.940 --> 00:15:43.700 due process. The ACLU sued. The U .S. government 00:15:43.700 --> 00:15:46.039 claims they have no control once the men are 00:15:46.039 --> 00:15:48.220 in El Salvador. But there is evidence suggesting 00:15:48.220 --> 00:15:51.659 otherwise. Statements from officials. Exactly. 00:15:52.000 --> 00:15:54.080 Boasberg was looking into constructive custody, 00:15:54.240 --> 00:15:56.100 whether the U .S. still effectively controls 00:15:56.100 --> 00:15:58.440 them. You had Trump admitting he could get one 00:15:58.440 --> 00:16:01.240 man back but didn't want to. Carolyn Livett admitting 00:16:01.240 --> 00:16:03.899 the U .S. paid El Salvador $6 million to hold 00:16:03.899 --> 00:16:06.740 them. Kristi Noem calling CECOT a tool in our 00:16:06.740 --> 00:16:08.980 toolkit. So what did Boasberg rule recently? 00:16:09.340 --> 00:16:11.700 He granted the detainees class status and found 00:16:11.700 --> 00:16:13.720 their due process rights were violated by being 00:16:13.720 --> 00:16:16.620 removed without a proper hearing. But interestingly, 00:16:17.019 --> 00:16:19.100 despite the payment and the statements, he did 00:16:19.100 --> 00:16:21.240 not find the U .S. had constructive custody. 00:16:21.679 --> 00:16:23.659 He said he'd take Trump's word that the U .S. 00:16:23.759 --> 00:16:25.659 doesn't control them, even with the $6 million. 00:16:25.960 --> 00:16:28.450 So what's the remedy then? He ordered the government 00:16:28.450 --> 00:16:31.350 to propose, by June 11th, how they can provide 00:16:31.350 --> 00:16:33.950 due process to these men while they remain outside 00:16:33.950 --> 00:16:37.190 the U .S. A tricky legal needle to thread. So 00:16:37.190 --> 00:16:39.809 yeah, a busy week in the courts. As your source 00:16:39.809 --> 00:16:43.700 said, like Batman, justice never sleeps. Indeed. 00:16:44.200 --> 00:16:46.399 Okay, let's pivot now. Your sources also tracked 00:16:46.399 --> 00:16:49.039 some other shifts, university politics, cultural 00:16:49.039 --> 00:16:50.980 commentary. Right, starting with that story about 00:16:50.980 --> 00:16:53.419 San Ono, the former University of Michigan president. 00:16:54.200 --> 00:16:57.820 Your source uses him as an example of maybe administrators 00:16:57.820 --> 00:17:01.799 treating jobs as stepping stones. Yeah, the narrative 00:17:01.799 --> 00:17:04.319 presented is that he was a highly qualified administrator 00:17:04.319 --> 00:17:07.059 who almost from day one at Michigan seemed to 00:17:07.059 --> 00:17:09.480 be angling for a job somewhere warmer, specifically 00:17:09.480 --> 00:17:11.960 the University of Florida presidency. And took 00:17:11.960 --> 00:17:14.819 action seen as pandering to Florida's conservative 00:17:14.819 --> 00:17:17.029 political climate. That's the interpretation 00:17:17.029 --> 00:17:20.049 and the source. Things like posing with football 00:17:20.049 --> 00:17:22.150 coach Jim Harbaugh during that cheating scandal, 00:17:22.329 --> 00:17:24.349 shifting from supporting unions to working to 00:17:24.349 --> 00:17:27.130 break a grad student strike, using police aggressively 00:17:27.130 --> 00:17:30.029 against Gaza protesters, blocking student government 00:17:30.029 --> 00:17:33.450 votes on the conflict. And that big flip on DEI. 00:17:33.730 --> 00:17:36.089 Right. From being a supporter to overseeing the 00:17:36.089 --> 00:17:39.130 dismantling of DEI programs at Michigan, and 00:17:39.130 --> 00:17:42.170 then writing an op -ed arguing DEI had lost its 00:17:42.170 --> 00:17:44.519 way. We touched on this last week, didn't we, 00:17:44.920 --> 00:17:47.740 about DeSantis's power in Florida and how conservatives 00:17:47.740 --> 00:17:51.859 there view DEI? Exactly. The source reiterated 00:17:51.859 --> 00:17:54.220 that prospective people like DeSantis, Trump 00:17:54.220 --> 00:17:57.539 Jr., Marjorie Taylor Greene, they see any past 00:17:57.539 --> 00:18:00.819 association with DEI, even DEI for a day, as 00:18:00.819 --> 00:18:03.079 a permanent mark, comparing it to McCarthyism. 00:18:03.259 --> 00:18:06.059 So how did Ono's Florida did turn out? Didn't 00:18:06.059 --> 00:18:08.180 work out for him. The University of Florida Regents 00:18:08.180 --> 00:18:10.859 approved him, but then the State Board of Governors, 00:18:11.000 --> 00:18:13.079 appointed by DeSantis, overturned that decision. 00:18:13.559 --> 00:18:16.200 They voted 10 -6 to reject him, specifically 00:18:16.200 --> 00:18:18.799 citing his past DEI work at Michigan, despite 00:18:18.799 --> 00:18:21.519 his recent change of heart. So a win for DeSantis' 00:18:21.900 --> 00:18:24.920 anti -woke agenda and the source mentioned Schadenfreude. 00:18:25.119 --> 00:18:27.200 Yeah, a sense of satisfaction in seeing Ono's 00:18:27.200 --> 00:18:29.559 apparent maneuvering backfire, given how he handled 00:18:29.559 --> 00:18:32.200 things at Michigan. OK, from Schadenfreude to 00:18:32.200 --> 00:18:35.170 Freudenfreude, that's a new one. It is joy in 00:18:35.170 --> 00:18:38.589 someone else's success or positive impact. Your 00:18:38.589 --> 00:18:41.130 sources use this, prompted by the passing of 00:18:41.130 --> 00:18:43.789 actress Loretta Switt, to look back at the cultural 00:18:43.789 --> 00:18:46.339 impact of MA. A show that was definitely a product 00:18:46.339 --> 00:18:49.180 of its time, right, ran for 12 seasons, 1972 00:18:49.180 --> 00:18:52.259 to 83, a huge span. Absolutely, and it evolved 00:18:52.259 --> 00:18:54.700 a lot. Your source notes its portrayal of race, 00:18:54.740 --> 00:18:57.420 for instance. It was, you know, post -civil rights, 00:18:57.559 --> 00:19:00.599 but not exactly modern, limited black characters, 00:19:00.839 --> 00:19:03.319 some reliance on stereotypes for Korean characters, 00:19:03.460 --> 00:19:06.380 even casting non -Koreans in those roles sometimes. 00:19:06.759 --> 00:19:09.059 It reflected progress, but also the limitations 00:19:09.059 --> 00:19:11.279 of its era. And the show's focus changed, too. 00:19:11.400 --> 00:19:14.000 Yeah. From Vietnam commentary to... To broader 00:19:14.000 --> 00:19:16.740 themes later on. Once the Vietnam War ended, 00:19:16.779 --> 00:19:19.160 it shifted more towards commentary on bureaucracy, 00:19:19.420 --> 00:19:21.960 the absurdities of war in general, maybe corruption 00:19:21.960 --> 00:19:23.779 themes that resonated in the post -Watergate 00:19:23.779 --> 00:19:26.400 era. But the biggest change highlighted was its 00:19:26.400 --> 00:19:29.440 handling of women. Right. Moving away from sexism. 00:19:29.640 --> 00:19:32.000 That's called out as the most obvious and significant 00:19:32.000 --> 00:19:34.500 evolution, shedding the sexism and misogyny that 00:19:34.500 --> 00:19:36.259 was pretty baked into the original movie and 00:19:36.259 --> 00:19:39.000 the show's early seasons. And two characters 00:19:39.000 --> 00:19:42.569 embody that change. Hawkeye Pierce and Margaret 00:19:42.569 --> 00:19:45.730 Houlihan. Right. Hawkeye, played by Alan Alda, 00:19:45.910 --> 00:19:48.109 started out. Well, despite being the hero, he 00:19:48.109 --> 00:19:51.049 was pretty sexist. Leering. Dismissive of female 00:19:51.049 --> 00:19:53.970 colleagues. The source basically calls him a 00:19:53.970 --> 00:19:56.950 walking, talking, sexual harassment lawsuit by 00:19:56.950 --> 00:19:59.769 today's standards. But he changed. He did. The 00:19:59.769 --> 00:20:02.569 show had him stop the leering, learn from female 00:20:02.569 --> 00:20:05.049 colleagues like that visiting Swedish surgeon 00:20:05.049 --> 00:20:07.910 about professionalism. And Margaret Houlihan, 00:20:08.109 --> 00:20:10.480 played by Loretta Switt. the hot lips nickname 00:20:10.480 --> 00:20:12.859 problematic from the start yeah carried over 00:20:12.859 --> 00:20:15.700 from the movie initially she was often portrayed 00:20:15.700 --> 00:20:18.589 as rigid kind of desperate for marriage. But 00:20:18.589 --> 00:20:21.690 the show and her character moved leaps and bounds 00:20:21.690 --> 00:20:24.089 forward, as the source puts it. Definitely. She 00:20:24.089 --> 00:20:26.529 eventually dropped the nickname or insisted others 00:20:26.529 --> 00:20:29.329 stop using it. She stopped tolerating inadequate 00:20:29.329 --> 00:20:31.829 men, divorced Colonel Penobscot, and ultimately 00:20:31.829 --> 00:20:34.029 concluded marriage wasn't the be all and end 00:20:34.029 --> 00:20:36.670 all for her. Switt herself noted that characters 00:20:36.670 --> 00:20:39.029 have to grow in a long running series. Hers changed 00:20:39.029 --> 00:20:41.569 dramatically. What drove that change? The source 00:20:41.569 --> 00:20:44.130 points to the actors themselves. Primarily, yes. 00:20:44.440 --> 00:20:47.259 Alan Alda and Loretta Switt were both apparently 00:20:47.259 --> 00:20:50.299 very invested in the ongoing feminist movement 00:20:50.299 --> 00:20:53.519 of the 70s. Alda became a major creative force 00:20:53.519 --> 00:20:56.140 behind the scenes, pushing the show towards more 00:20:56.140 --> 00:20:59.539 progressive gender politics. Some found it preachy, 00:20:59.619 --> 00:21:02.200 maybe like people who dislike DEI today, the 00:21:02.200 --> 00:21:05.140 source muses. And Switt was ready to leave. Reportedly, 00:21:05.380 --> 00:21:07.930 yeah. She was frustrated enough with the early 00:21:07.930 --> 00:21:09.930 portrayal that she wanted out to join Cagney 00:21:09.930 --> 00:21:11.670 and Lacey. Producers wouldn't let her out of 00:21:11.670 --> 00:21:13.710 her contract, but agreed they needed to improve 00:21:13.710 --> 00:21:15.690 the character, which led to that significant 00:21:15.690 --> 00:21:18.690 evolution. So her work was important for portraying 00:21:18.690 --> 00:21:20.970 women on TV then? Very important, according to 00:21:20.970 --> 00:21:23.769 the source. Creating a forward -looking woman 00:21:23.769 --> 00:21:26.609 character at a time when jiggle television was 00:21:26.609 --> 00:21:29.509 also a trend. They compare her role, alongside 00:21:29.509 --> 00:21:32.190 Bea Arthur and Maude, to what shows like The 00:21:32.190 --> 00:21:35.089 Cosby Show or A Different World did later for 00:21:35.089 --> 00:21:37.109 representations of black people. And Loretta 00:21:37.109 --> 00:21:39.789 Switt passed away this week. Yes, at 87. Your 00:21:39.789 --> 00:21:41.970 source notes she had a long career or Bodhis 00:21:41.970 --> 00:21:44.970 felt MA was her best work. Alan Alda's tribute 00:21:44.970 --> 00:21:48.079 was quite moving. It was. Highlighting her talent, 00:21:48.400 --> 00:21:51.299 how she created the character beyond the stereotype, 00:21:51.779 --> 00:21:54.339 worked hard to turn hot lips into Margaret. A 00:21:54.339 --> 00:21:56.339 really nice acknowledgement. As the source signed 00:21:56.339 --> 00:22:00.259 off, Abyssinia Loretta Switt. Right. OK, shifting 00:22:00.259 --> 00:22:03.039 gears again, quite dramatically. Let's talk about 00:22:03.039 --> 00:22:06.259 what your sources call a show of force. Trump 00:22:06.259 --> 00:22:08.619 ordering the National Guard into Los Angeles. 00:22:08.960 --> 00:22:10.579 Federalizing the California National Guard, right? 00:22:10.970 --> 00:22:14.950 to deal with immigration protests. Yes. And crucially, 00:22:15.329 --> 00:22:18.190 your sources emphasize that neither L .A. Mayor 00:22:18.190 --> 00:22:21.730 Karen Bass nor California Governor Gavin Newsom 00:22:21.730 --> 00:22:24.690 asked for or wanted the guard there. They felt 00:22:24.690 --> 00:22:27.170 local police had it handled and that this would 00:22:27.170 --> 00:22:29.990 only escalate tensions. So the interpretation 00:22:29.990 --> 00:22:32.589 wasn't about actual law enforcement needs. Not 00:22:32.589 --> 00:22:34.470 according to your sources. They frame it as a 00:22:34.470 --> 00:22:36.990 raw power play, a PR stunt for Trump's base, 00:22:37.049 --> 00:22:39.410 showing state and local Democrats who is boss 00:22:39.410 --> 00:22:41.829 taking over streets. in a blue city, pushing 00:22:41.829 --> 00:22:44.069 aside elected leadership? Following a pattern 00:22:44.069 --> 00:22:46.690 the source suggests, asserting dominance over 00:22:46.690 --> 00:22:49.430 institutions. Yeah, the media, law firms, universities, 00:22:49.470 --> 00:22:52.190 seeing this as another step on the way to autocracy. 00:22:52.609 --> 00:22:55.069 And this kind of federalization against a governor's 00:22:55.069 --> 00:22:58.619 wishes in this context is unusual. Historically, 00:22:58.839 --> 00:23:01.660 yes. Your source contrasts it with past examples, 00:23:02.160 --> 00:23:04.980 like LBJ federalizing the Guard in Selma to protect 00:23:04.980 --> 00:23:06.960 protesters because he didn't trust local police, 00:23:07.740 --> 00:23:10.099 or deployments during the postal strike or after 00:23:10.099 --> 00:23:12.819 MLK's assassination, which usually had state 00:23:12.819 --> 00:23:15.279 consent or occurred amidst widespread breakdown 00:23:15.279 --> 00:23:18.279 of order. This LA situation seems different. 00:23:18.480 --> 00:23:21.500 What led up to it? ICE raids? Yes, ICE raids 00:23:21.500 --> 00:23:24.559 on Friday, arresting over 100 immigrants. Protests 00:23:24.559 --> 00:23:28.400 followed. ICE reportedly used tear gas, flashbangs, 00:23:28.519 --> 00:23:31.059 actions. Your source calls a pretty self -evident 00:23:31.059 --> 00:23:33.019 attempt to escalate. Trump spoke with Newsom, 00:23:33.099 --> 00:23:35.200 who argued against deploying the guard. But Trump 00:23:35.200 --> 00:23:37.779 did it anyway, and protests continued. They did. 00:23:38.000 --> 00:23:40.400 On Saturday in Paramount and Compton, a car was 00:23:40.400 --> 00:23:42.319 set on fire. Police used non -lethal rounds. 00:23:42.640 --> 00:23:44.740 Tensions clearly rose. Your source mentioned 00:23:44.740 --> 00:23:47.450 reactions from Newsom and Maxine Waters. Yeah, 00:23:47.730 --> 00:23:50.349 Nissan tweeted criticism Rep. Waters was apparently 00:23:50.349 --> 00:23:52.769 at the protests pleading with guardsmen don't 00:23:52.769 --> 00:23:56.029 shoot, calling it an unnecessary escalation and 00:23:56.029 --> 00:23:58.750 saying the president is working to impose martial 00:23:58.750 --> 00:24:01.349 law. She reportedly tried to speak with the guard 00:24:01.349 --> 00:24:04.170 command, but was turned away. And Republican 00:24:04.170 --> 00:24:07.039 officials supporting the move. Unsurprisingly, 00:24:07.519 --> 00:24:09.799 yes, taking the opposite tack. Trump, on his 00:24:09.799 --> 00:24:12.759 social media site, slammed Newsom and base, saying 00:24:12.759 --> 00:24:15.680 the feds would step in to solve riots and looters 00:24:15.680 --> 00:24:21.130 the way it should be solved. reference the 2020 00:24:21.130 --> 00:24:24.349 Minneapolis riots, criticized Minnesota's governor 00:24:24.349 --> 00:24:26.710 then and said, we are not going to let a repeat 00:24:26.710 --> 00:24:29.450 of 2020 happen, framing it as preventative. Any 00:24:29.450 --> 00:24:31.789 other reactions? Senator Markwayne Mullen on 00:24:31.789 --> 00:24:34.450 CNN criticized protesters for carrying a Mexican 00:24:34.450 --> 00:24:37.130 flag, calling it insane. CNN apparently pointed 00:24:37.130 --> 00:24:39.410 out carrying a flag is an illegal. And Speaker 00:24:39.410 --> 00:24:41.910 Mike Johnson saw nothing heavy handed about it. 00:24:42.089 --> 00:24:44.170 Even mentioned Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth 00:24:44.170 --> 00:24:46.329 threatening to deploy the Marines, which the 00:24:46.329 --> 00:24:49.009 source notes is illegal under the Posse Comitatus 00:24:49.009 --> 00:24:51.839 Act. Johnson invoked peace through strength. 00:24:52.440 --> 00:24:55.359 Okay, let's shift now to something maybe underlying 00:24:55.359 --> 00:24:58.440 a lot of this. News consumption and how it relates 00:24:58.440 --> 00:25:01.099 to voter behavior. Your sources dug into this. 00:25:01.359 --> 00:25:03.420 They did, raising a really interesting question. 00:25:03.599 --> 00:25:06.720 Is there a link between how much news people 00:25:06.720 --> 00:25:09.019 follow and whether they support Donald Trump? 00:25:09.400 --> 00:25:11.720 The data presented suggests, yeah, there's a 00:25:11.720 --> 00:25:14.279 correlation. Using that El Salvador detainee 00:25:14.279 --> 00:25:17.180 story, the Kilmar -Abrego -Garcia case as an 00:25:17.180 --> 00:25:19.380 example. Exactly. Among people who hadn't heard 00:25:19.380 --> 00:25:22.579 about that story, Trump's approval was 55%. Among 00:25:22.579 --> 00:25:25.119 those who had heard about it is 46%. That's a 00:25:25.119 --> 00:25:27.319 nine point gap. So what does that correlation 00:25:27.319 --> 00:25:30.480 mean? Two possible interpretations. Right. Option 00:25:30.480 --> 00:25:33.339 one, people learn about things Trump does and 00:25:33.339 --> 00:25:35.720 it causes them to stop supporting him. Option 00:25:35.720 --> 00:25:38.680 two, people who already like Trump just don't 00:25:38.680 --> 00:25:40.740 consume much news, while people who dislike him 00:25:40.740 --> 00:25:43.259 tend to follow the news more closely. The cause 00:25:43.259 --> 00:25:45.900 and effect isn't definitively proven, but the 00:25:45.900 --> 00:25:48.640 link is there. And data shows newer Trump supporters 00:25:48.640 --> 00:25:51.710 are lower news consumers. Yeah, catalyst data 00:25:51.710 --> 00:25:54.369 cited in your source indicates that recent additions 00:25:54.369 --> 00:25:57.630 to his 2024 coalition, especially among black 00:25:57.630 --> 00:26:00.509 voters, younger voters, Latinos tend to follow 00:26:00.509 --> 00:26:03.089 the news less closely than his longer term base 00:26:03.089 --> 00:26:05.670 or Democratic voters. How does this affect views 00:26:05.670 --> 00:26:09.299 on issues like the economy? Big difference. Informed 00:26:09.299 --> 00:26:12.200 voters, the data showed, preferred Republicans 00:26:12.200 --> 00:26:15.519 on the economy by only one point. But among uninformed 00:26:15.519 --> 00:26:18.980 voters, that preference jumped to 13 points for 00:26:18.980 --> 00:26:21.619 Republicans. What are the potential implications 00:26:21.619 --> 00:26:24.980 for, say, the 2026 midterms? This is where it 00:26:24.980 --> 00:26:27.240 gets really interesting. Historically, less informed 00:26:27.240 --> 00:26:29.180 voters, the ones who aren't following news closely, 00:26:29.500 --> 00:26:31.779 are much less likely to vote in midterm elections 00:26:31.779 --> 00:26:33.920 compared to presidential years. They might not 00:26:33.920 --> 00:26:35.680 even be aware an election is happening. Partly 00:26:35.680 --> 00:26:38.710 that, yeah. Less engaged. overall. So if a chunk 00:26:38.710 --> 00:26:41.329 of Trump's 2024 support comes from these low 00:26:41.329 --> 00:26:43.809 information voters who then stay home in 2026, 00:26:44.190 --> 00:26:46.509 it could potentially depress Republican turnout 00:26:46.509 --> 00:26:48.869 more significantly than Democratic turnout. That 00:26:48.869 --> 00:26:50.950 could be a real factor, given midterms always 00:26:50.950 --> 00:26:53.190 have lower turnout anyway. The source mentioned 00:26:53.190 --> 00:26:56.869 something like 108 million voting in 2022 versus 00:26:56.869 --> 00:27:01.240 maybe 152 million in 2024. Big drop off. Exactly. 00:27:01.700 --> 00:27:03.940 And your sources also shared some focus group 00:27:03.940 --> 00:27:06.099 data from Navigator Research about how people 00:27:06.099 --> 00:27:08.480 get their news, which is maybe just as important 00:27:08.480 --> 00:27:10.880 as how much. Passive versus active consumption. 00:27:11.180 --> 00:27:14.160 Right. Many people don't actively seek news out. 00:27:14.180 --> 00:27:16.519 They get it when friends or family bring it up, 00:27:16.779 --> 00:27:18.920 which means the information is already filtered 00:27:18.920 --> 00:27:21.220 through that person's viewpoint. Republicans 00:27:21.220 --> 00:27:23.559 hear about trade and tariffs. Democrats hear 00:27:23.559 --> 00:27:26.059 about Medicaid cuts. Why do people avoid the 00:27:26.059 --> 00:27:28.990 news? Different reasons. Yeah. Democratic women 00:27:28.990 --> 00:27:31.029 in the focus groups often said it was just too 00:27:31.029 --> 00:27:32.869 upsetting, like waiting for the world to end. 00:27:33.410 --> 00:27:35.109 Republicans didn't necessarily find it upsetting, 00:27:35.250 --> 00:27:37.630 but avoided it due to deep distrust of mainstream 00:27:37.630 --> 00:27:40.200 news sources. And social media's role. Huge. 00:27:40.539 --> 00:27:42.920 The clear trend is people getting information 00:27:42.920 --> 00:27:45.779 increasingly from indirect sources, podcasts, 00:27:45.940 --> 00:27:48.460 YouTube, TikTok, showing people clips from social 00:27:48.460 --> 00:27:50.759 media didn't fool the Democratic participants. 00:27:51.000 --> 00:27:53.240 They knew the source. But it highlights that 00:27:53.240 --> 00:27:56.259 traditional paid ads on TV news are losing punch. 00:27:56.720 --> 00:27:59.059 These alternative platforms are where campaigns 00:27:59.059 --> 00:28:01.859 increasingly need to be. So the takeaway is that 00:28:01.859 --> 00:28:05.480 how people get news is changing fast and campaigns 00:28:05.480 --> 00:28:07.920 have to adapt. Absolutely. The landscape is shifting 00:28:07.920 --> 00:28:09.789 under everyone's feet. You have to understand 00:28:09.789 --> 00:28:12.130 these new dynamics to reach voters effectively. 00:28:12.529 --> 00:28:14.829 OK, this idea of reaching different voters connects 00:28:14.829 --> 00:28:18.289 nicely to the next topic, that democratic strategy 00:28:18.289 --> 00:28:21.150 debate, specifically Senator Kirsten Gillibrand's 00:28:21.150 --> 00:28:23.410 suggestion. Yeah, she floated a pretty provocative 00:28:23.410 --> 00:28:26.210 idea. Maybe Democrats should time travel back 00:28:26.210 --> 00:28:28.529 about 20 years in their approach, specifically 00:28:28.529 --> 00:28:31.869 move away from focusing so much on woke and DEI 00:28:31.869 --> 00:28:34.250 issues. Why? What's her logic? She points back 00:28:34.250 --> 00:28:38.150 to 2005. Democrats held Senate seats in 13 states 00:28:38.150 --> 00:28:41.150 that are solid red. Now think North Dakota, South 00:28:41.150 --> 00:28:44.670 Dakota, Montana, Nebraska, Arkansas. Her argument 00:28:44.670 --> 00:28:47.789 is the party moved far to the left of voters 00:28:47.789 --> 00:28:50.650 in many states, losing touch with those prairie 00:28:50.650 --> 00:28:52.750 populists who used to win by focusing on bread 00:28:52.750 --> 00:28:55.130 and butter economic issues. She acknowledges 00:28:55.130 --> 00:28:57.740 Republican strategy played a role. like Karl 00:28:57.740 --> 00:29:00.000 Rove pushing culture wars. Yeah, that's mentioned. 00:29:00.099 --> 00:29:02.299 But her core point is people still fundamentally 00:29:02.299 --> 00:29:04.940 care about kitchen table issues, jobs, health 00:29:04.940 --> 00:29:07.339 care, retirement. And she looks back at the 2006 00:29:07.339 --> 00:29:10.680 midterms as a model. Right. Democrats took back 00:29:10.680 --> 00:29:12.680 Congress then, partly by recruiting candidates 00:29:12.680 --> 00:29:15.500 who were more culturally conservative, a sheriff, 00:29:15.640 --> 00:29:18.740 an NFL quarterback, a football coach. These candidates 00:29:18.740 --> 00:29:20.380 might have differed from the party line on some 00:29:20.380 --> 00:29:22.980 social issues, some even opposed abortion rights, 00:29:23.259 --> 00:29:25.599 but they aligned on economics. And they won. 00:29:25.869 --> 00:29:28.289 Those wins gave Democrats the power to block 00:29:28.289 --> 00:29:30.809 Bush and hold impeachment trials. So Jill LeBrand 00:29:30.809 --> 00:29:34.450 is posing a strategic choice. Purity versus power. 00:29:34.809 --> 00:29:37.890 Essentially, yeah. For lefty Democrats, as the 00:29:37.890 --> 00:29:41.190 source puts it, do you want a smaller, ideologically 00:29:41.190 --> 00:29:43.930 pure minority that can't stop Trump's agenda? 00:29:44.329 --> 00:29:47.309 Or a potentially larger mixed bag majority, including 00:29:47.309 --> 00:29:49.670 some more conservative Democrats, that can block 00:29:49.670 --> 00:29:52.250 appointments, budgets, laws, and hold investigations? 00:29:52.549 --> 00:29:55.519 So her proposal is... Drop the culture war stuff 00:29:55.519 --> 00:29:58.500 focus on focus on things like Trump's plans for 00:29:58.500 --> 00:30:01.460 entitlement cut Social Security Medicare focus 00:30:01.460 --> 00:30:04.470 on his corruption frame it as people versus the 00:30:04.470 --> 00:30:06.690 billionaires. She argues those are the issues 00:30:06.690 --> 00:30:09.450 that fly in red states, even if talking less 00:30:09.450 --> 00:30:11.750 about social issues annoys progressives. There's 00:30:11.750 --> 00:30:13.710 even talk of turning states like Mississippi 00:30:13.710 --> 00:30:16.730 blue. Ambitious. Yeah. But the idea is with the 00:30:16.730 --> 00:30:19.269 right candidate and a relentless focus on kitchen 00:30:19.269 --> 00:30:21.430 table issues, entitlement threats and corruption, 00:30:21.829 --> 00:30:23.910 maybe you could peel off that 20, 25 percent 00:30:23.910 --> 00:30:26.390 of white voters needed to make seemingly impossible 00:30:26.390 --> 00:30:28.609 states competitive. What states are targeted 00:30:28.609 --> 00:30:32.170 for 2026 under this kind of strategy? Ohio with 00:30:32.170 --> 00:30:35.410 Sherrod Brown, Montana with John Tester are mentioned 00:30:35.410 --> 00:30:38.190 as places where this model already works. Iowa, 00:30:38.490 --> 00:30:41.130 where Senator Ernst made that we will all die 00:30:41.130 --> 00:30:43.190 comment about Social Security, is seen as an 00:30:43.190 --> 00:30:46.430 opportunity. Texas with Ken Paxton's corruption, 00:30:46.910 --> 00:30:49.549 but needing a candidate who, you know, looks 00:30:49.549 --> 00:30:51.569 good in a cowboy hat and connects culturally. 00:30:52.210 --> 00:30:54.950 Interesting strategic debate, okay. From statewide 00:30:54.950 --> 00:30:59.180 strategy to a specific test case. the New Jersey 00:30:59.180 --> 00:31:02.160 gubernatorial primaries. Your source calls this 00:31:02.160 --> 00:31:05.539 the first statewide test of the Trump 2 .0 era. 00:31:05.700 --> 00:31:07.759 That's right. New Jersey is a blue state. Harris 00:31:07.759 --> 00:31:10.099 won by six, Biden by 16, so it's a good place 00:31:10.099 --> 00:31:12.980 to gauge things. Will the most anti -Trump Democrat 00:31:12.980 --> 00:31:15.359 win? How are blue state Republicans reacting 00:31:15.359 --> 00:31:17.119 to Trump now? And there's a new election rule 00:31:17.119 --> 00:31:18.759 making it more interesting. Yeah, they got rid 00:31:18.759 --> 00:31:21.380 of the county line ballot design. Used to be 00:31:21.380 --> 00:31:23.400 county bosses essentially picked winners. Now 00:31:23.400 --> 00:31:25.400 it's a more level playing field. All candidates 00:31:25.400 --> 00:31:27.119 treated equally on the ballot. So it's a real 00:31:27.119 --> 00:31:29.160 test of candidate appeal. OK, who's running on 00:31:29.160 --> 00:31:32.160 the Democratic side? It's crowded. Mikey Sherrill 00:31:32.160 --> 00:31:34.759 is seen as the moderate establishment choice. 00:31:35.440 --> 00:31:38.220 Ross Baraka is described as the leftiest, very 00:31:38.220 --> 00:31:41.990 anti -Trump I see, even sued Alina Jaffa. Steve 00:31:41.990 --> 00:31:44.109 Philip is running against the party machine. 00:31:44.670 --> 00:31:46.869 Josh Gottheimer is another moderate, focused 00:31:46.869 --> 00:31:49.730 on tax efficiency. Sean Speller has union backing, 00:31:49.849 --> 00:31:52.690 focused on education. Steve Sweeney, former state 00:31:52.690 --> 00:31:55.230 Senate boss, also union backed, focused on butch 00:31:55.230 --> 00:31:57.069 housing. Lots of candidates splitting the vote, 00:31:57.289 --> 00:32:00.289 union vote split. Yeah. And a big chunk of undecideds, 00:32:00.289 --> 00:32:02.950 23 % in the polling average reported. So it's 00:32:02.950 --> 00:32:05.049 pretty wide open on the Dem side. And Republicans. 00:32:05.529 --> 00:32:07.849 Jack Ciattarelli, who ran last time, is embracing 00:32:07.849 --> 00:32:11.660 Trump and leads big in the polls, 44%. Bill Spadea, 00:32:11.799 --> 00:32:13.599 a right -wing radio host, wants to replicate 00:32:13.599 --> 00:32:17.539 DOGE in NJ cut Planned Parenthood funding. John 00:32:17.539 --> 00:32:19.940 Bramnick is a never -Trump Republican focusing 00:32:19.940 --> 00:32:22.140 on waste. Then you have a couple of others polling 00:32:22.140 --> 00:32:24.579 very low. Justin Barbera, a developer talking 00:32:24.579 --> 00:32:27.519 about snow removal, and Mario Kranjak, a wealthy 00:32:27.519 --> 00:32:29.640 Trump supporter. So, Seattle rally looks like 00:32:29.640 --> 00:32:32.200 the likely GOP nominee. Yeah, based on the polling 00:32:32.200 --> 00:32:34.319 shared in your sources, he seems to be the clear 00:32:34.319 --> 00:32:37.519 favorite on that side. Okay, let's shift tone 00:32:37.519 --> 00:32:40.160 now to something more personal. from that Never 00:32:40.160 --> 00:32:43.259 Forget for the record series. Yes, this was a 00:32:43.259 --> 00:32:46.119 really moving submission from a reader, JD, about 00:32:46.119 --> 00:32:49.859 obtaining their father's WWII military records. 00:32:50.279 --> 00:32:52.890 What was the motivation? It was deeply personal. 00:32:53.349 --> 00:32:55.970 His father served, was injured, but rarely talked 00:32:55.970 --> 00:32:59.049 about the war. He died young, and JD always regretted 00:32:59.049 --> 00:33:02.470 not asking more. When his aunt, the last direct 00:33:02.470 --> 00:33:05.049 link, passed away, he felt a need to connect 00:33:05.049 --> 00:33:07.549 with and honor his father's memory somehow. So 00:33:07.549 --> 00:33:09.470 he went to the National Archives. He did, and 00:33:09.470 --> 00:33:11.849 he described the records he received as a treasure 00:33:11.849 --> 00:33:15.250 trove, even with gaps. It had incredible details, 00:33:15.430 --> 00:33:18.009 like exact shore leave times, but also allowed 00:33:18.009 --> 00:33:20.390 him to piece together a narrative, a first draft 00:33:20.390 --> 00:33:23.109 of his Dad's service. What did he learn? Specifics 00:33:23.109 --> 00:33:25.569 about the service? Yeah, some key things. His 00:33:25.569 --> 00:33:28.190 father served on an LCT, a landing craft for 00:33:28.190 --> 00:33:30.710 tanks during the invasion of Sicily. He ferried 00:33:30.710 --> 00:33:33.690 troops from Tunis to the beaches at Jela. The 00:33:33.690 --> 00:33:35.930 records even noted his ship took machine gunfire 00:33:35.930 --> 00:33:38.119 during the landing. And the injury. It happened 00:33:38.119 --> 00:33:40.240 later, about two weeks after the landings back 00:33:40.240 --> 00:33:43.039 in Tunis. A truck crashed into fuel canisters 00:33:43.039 --> 00:33:45.920 he was helping load. That's what caused the lifelong 00:33:45.920 --> 00:33:48.980 limp his father had. Wow. But the most memorable 00:33:48.980 --> 00:33:52.400 thing wasn't about combat. No. JD said the most 00:33:52.400 --> 00:33:55.119 memorable item was his father's original enrollment 00:33:55.119 --> 00:33:57.779 papers, seeing his father's handwriting still 00:33:57.779 --> 00:34:00.839 recognizable after 83 years. And the answer to 00:34:00.839 --> 00:34:03.519 the question, why do you want to enroll? Just 00:34:03.519 --> 00:34:06.220 simply, I want to serve my country. that really 00:34:06.220 --> 00:34:09.179 connects to that idea of the duty to remember 00:34:09.179 --> 00:34:11.820 from other submissions. Absolutely. It shows 00:34:11.820 --> 00:34:14.119 how these records can keep memories alive, not 00:34:14.119 --> 00:34:16.559 just for the person obtaining them, but for future 00:34:16.559 --> 00:34:19.880 generations. JD's kids and grandkids who never 00:34:19.880 --> 00:34:21.820 met their grandfather, great grandfather, but 00:34:21.820 --> 00:34:24.659 can now connect with his story. people can actually 00:34:24.659 --> 00:34:26.880 do this, get records from the National Archives. 00:34:27.119 --> 00:34:29.440 Yes. Your source provides that practical info. 00:34:29.699 --> 00:34:31.340 There are some restrictions depending on how 00:34:31.340 --> 00:34:32.940 old the records are in your relationship, but 00:34:32.940 --> 00:34:35.519 generally records over 62 years old are public. 00:34:35.659 --> 00:34:38.059 It's a resource available to people. A powerful 00:34:38.059 --> 00:34:41.260 way to connect with family history. And the source 00:34:41.260 --> 00:34:43.719 added a little coda connecting back to DOGE. 00:34:44.039 --> 00:34:46.179 Yeah. A hopeful note that hopefully the archives 00:34:46.179 --> 00:34:49.869 have withstood DOGE's sins enough to keep providing 00:34:49.869 --> 00:34:52.369 this important service, despite concerns about 00:34:52.369 --> 00:34:54.989 data integrity elsewhere. OK, and finally, just 00:34:54.989 --> 00:34:57.349 a quick update on Karine Jean -Pierre, the former 00:34:57.349 --> 00:34:59.250 White House press secretary. Right. The news 00:34:59.250 --> 00:35:01.869 being she left the Democratic Party, re -registered 00:35:01.869 --> 00:35:04.219 as an independent. And the reaction from former 00:35:04.219 --> 00:35:07.320 colleagues wasn't exactly warm. No, your source 00:35:07.320 --> 00:35:09.539 cited some pretty critical comments from other 00:35:09.539 --> 00:35:12.360 Biden White House insiders. Tim Wu reportedly 00:35:12.360 --> 00:35:15.940 calling her kind of dumb and incoherent on policy 00:35:15.940 --> 00:35:18.639 in a tweet he later deleted. Another unnamed 00:35:18.639 --> 00:35:21.280 person calling her one of the most ineffectual 00:35:21.280 --> 00:35:24.000 and unprepared people they'd worked with. Ouch. 00:35:24.519 --> 00:35:26.820 But what's the source's take on the actual significance 00:35:26.820 --> 00:35:29.320 of her switching parties? Pretty much a shrug 00:35:29.320 --> 00:35:32.500 summed up as who cares. Their reasoning is she 00:35:32.500 --> 00:35:35.139 was relatively low -level when she left. The 00:35:35.139 --> 00:35:36.800 difference between being registered independent 00:35:36.800 --> 00:35:39.239 versus Democrat is often minimal, especially 00:35:39.239 --> 00:35:41.400 in an open primary state like Virginia where 00:35:41.400 --> 00:35:43.900 she supposedly lives. And the timing was convenient. 00:35:44.059 --> 00:35:46.119 And crucially, yeah, she used the announcement 00:35:46.119 --> 00:35:49.460 to plug a book she has coming out. So the source 00:35:49.460 --> 00:35:52.880 frames it less as some profound come to Jesus 00:35:52.880 --> 00:35:55.719 moment about political identity and more as a 00:35:55.719 --> 00:35:58.039 calculated, how can I maximize my odds of getting 00:35:58.039 --> 00:36:01.480 on the NYT bus sellers list kind of move. So 00:36:01.480 --> 00:36:04.420 political news, but maybe more about book promotion 00:36:04.420 --> 00:36:06.360 than ideology, according to that. That seems 00:36:06.360 --> 00:36:08.510 to be the perspective offered. Yeah. Wow. Okay, 00:36:08.670 --> 00:36:10.650 that really was quite a deep dive, wasn't it? 00:36:10.769 --> 00:36:13.269 It really was. We covered a huge amount of ground. 00:36:14.380 --> 00:36:17.039 that Trump -Musk feud and the money involved, 00:36:17.340 --> 00:36:19.380 the complexities of Supreme Court rulings and 00:36:19.380 --> 00:36:22.039 those huge privacy questions around government 00:36:22.039 --> 00:36:24.519 data. Looking back at cultural history through 00:36:24.519 --> 00:36:27.719 MAH, seeing how things change, that power play 00:36:27.719 --> 00:36:30.119 with the National Guard in L .A. Local elections, 00:36:30.260 --> 00:36:32.579 how people actually get their news these days. 00:36:32.699 --> 00:36:34.480 It really shows how all these seemingly separate 00:36:34.480 --> 00:36:36.260 things connect and how much you can learn when 00:36:36.260 --> 00:36:38.360 you really dig into the sources you shared with 00:36:38.360 --> 00:36:41.380 us. Absolutely. So as you go about your day, 00:36:41.780 --> 00:36:43.900 maybe something to chew on. building on that 00:36:43.900 --> 00:36:46.400 news consumption discussion. Given everything 00:36:46.400 --> 00:36:48.639 we heard about social media, fragmented news, 00:36:48.940 --> 00:36:52.400 distrust, and the clear link between how and 00:36:52.400 --> 00:36:54.559 how much news people get and their political 00:36:54.559 --> 00:36:57.860 views, what does that really mean for the future 00:36:57.860 --> 00:37:00.139 of an informed public, for how campaigns even 00:37:00.139 --> 00:37:02.139 work? How do we make sure people get reliable 00:37:02.139 --> 00:37:05.099 information? How do campaigns reach people effectively 00:37:05.099 --> 00:37:07.860 when the old ways seem to be fading and these 00:37:07.860 --> 00:37:10.179 new platforms are so dominant yet often filled 00:37:10.179 --> 00:37:12.199 with noise? It's a huge question. Definitely 00:37:12.199 --> 00:37:14.000 something to think about. Thanks for taking this 00:37:14.000 --> 00:37:14.980 deep dive with us today.