WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:03.100 Welcome back to the Deep Dive. Today, we're wading 00:00:03.100 --> 00:00:05.459 into some really complex territory, looking at 00:00:05.459 --> 00:00:08.199 sources covering everything from, well, some 00:00:08.199 --> 00:00:11.939 pretty wild constitutional maneuvers to serious 00:00:11.939 --> 00:00:15.439 economic jitters, and even how local elections 00:00:15.439 --> 00:00:18.260 are being fundamentally reshaped. That's right. 00:00:18.339 --> 00:00:21.620 We've got legal analyses, economic reports, ground 00:00:21.620 --> 00:00:24.600 level strategy docs. And what really jumps out 00:00:24.600 --> 00:00:26.920 is how interconnected it all seems to be. Yeah, 00:00:26.920 --> 00:00:29.120 it feels like different fronts in the same battle 00:00:29.120 --> 00:00:31.219 almost. The sources suggest key institutions 00:00:31.120 --> 00:00:33.659 institutions, the courts, the civil service, 00:00:33.840 --> 00:00:36.740 the Fed, election laws, they're all facing these 00:00:36.740 --> 00:00:38.960 strategic pressures, these workarounds. Exactly. 00:00:40.240 --> 00:00:42.000 for you listening is to really connect those 00:00:42.000 --> 00:00:44.679 dots, show you the specific tactics being used 00:00:44.679 --> 00:00:46.859 across these different areas. OK, so we'll kick 00:00:46.859 --> 00:00:48.679 off with this whole third term question, the 00:00:48.679 --> 00:00:50.380 length some are apparently considering to get 00:00:50.380 --> 00:00:52.380 around the 22nd Amendment. Then we'll pivot to 00:00:52.380 --> 00:00:54.719 the economy. The Fed's making big calls, but 00:00:54.719 --> 00:00:57.840 the data situation is looking really shaky, flying 00:00:57.840 --> 00:01:00.320 blind, basically. And finally, we'll dig into 00:01:00.320 --> 00:01:02.859 how power is being contested right down to the 00:01:02.859 --> 00:01:05.439 state and local level, from gerrymandering pushes 00:01:05.439 --> 00:01:08.400 to, believe it or not, your local utility board. 00:01:08.599 --> 00:01:10.640 Sounds like a plan. Let's start with that constitutional 00:01:10.640 --> 00:01:14.079 big one. The third term idea. Right. So the 22nd 00:01:14.079 --> 00:01:16.280 Amendment seems pretty clear, doesn't it? Two 00:01:16.280 --> 00:01:19.959 terms, period. It does. And interestingly, the 00:01:19.959 --> 00:01:22.840 sources mentioned Donald Trump himself publicly 00:01:22.840 --> 00:01:24.879 saying something like, based on what I read, 00:01:25.040 --> 00:01:28.359 I guess I'm not allowed to run. But despite that 00:01:28.359 --> 00:01:31.140 acknowledgement, there's clearly this intense 00:01:31.140 --> 00:01:34.640 interest in finding a way around it. The motivation 00:01:34.640 --> 00:01:36.950 seems pretty straightforward. Staying in the 00:01:36.950 --> 00:01:39.670 White House is seen as the best shield against 00:01:39.670 --> 00:01:42.849 potential prosecutions later on. OK, so if running 00:01:42.849 --> 00:01:45.209 directly is off the table, what are these convoluted 00:01:45.209 --> 00:01:47.189 workarounds, the source's detail? Let's start 00:01:47.189 --> 00:01:50.069 with the VP one. Ah, yes, the VP resignation 00:01:50.069 --> 00:01:53.909 strategy. It sounds simple initially, but it's 00:01:53.909 --> 00:01:56.409 legally fraught and politically risky. How's 00:01:56.409 --> 00:01:58.489 it supposed to work? Exactly. The idea is this. 00:01:59.030 --> 00:02:01.689 You run on a ticket, say, Vance Trump. They win. 00:02:02.150 --> 00:02:03.969 Then almost immediately, Vice President Vance 00:02:03.969 --> 00:02:06.849 resigns. And under the 25th Amendment, Trump 00:02:06.849 --> 00:02:10.330 as VP would then become president. Step three, 00:02:10.629 --> 00:02:12.710 President Trump nominates Vance to be his vice 00:02:12.710 --> 00:02:16.650 president again. Wow. That's intricate and cynical, 00:02:16.689 --> 00:02:20.349 maybe. What's the legal argument that even allows 00:02:20.349 --> 00:02:22.909 for considering this? It all hangs on a very 00:02:22.909 --> 00:02:24.789 specific reading of the 12th Amendment combined 00:02:24.789 --> 00:02:28.270 with the 22nd. The core question is, does the 00:02:28.270 --> 00:02:30.909 22nd Amendment make someone ineligible to the 00:02:30.909 --> 00:02:33.449 office of president, meaning they can't be elected 00:02:33.449 --> 00:02:37.020 president again? Or does it ban them from serving 00:02:37.020 --> 00:02:39.719 as president beyond two terms, no matter how 00:02:39.719 --> 00:02:42.500 they get there? If, and it's a big yes, five 00:02:42.500 --> 00:02:45.360 Supreme Court justices decided it only bans election. 00:02:46.159 --> 00:02:48.939 Well, then this VP resignation route potentially 00:02:48.939 --> 00:02:50.840 opens the door to serving multiple future terms. 00:02:51.020 --> 00:02:53.360 But the risks seem enormous. What if the VP just 00:02:53.360 --> 00:02:55.620 doesn't resign? That's the huge gamble. The sources 00:02:55.620 --> 00:02:58.039 point this out directly. Trust. You'd be relying 00:02:58.039 --> 00:03:00.500 entirely on someone like Vance in this hypothetical 00:03:00.500 --> 00:03:02.990 to actually step down. History isn't exactly 00:03:02.990 --> 00:03:04.610 reassuring there, I think, to Aaron Burr back 00:03:04.610 --> 00:03:06.949 in 1800. He could just say, nope, changed my 00:03:06.949 --> 00:03:08.909 mind, I'm president now. And the other key thing 00:03:08.909 --> 00:03:11.550 from the sources, apparently Trump himself dismissed 00:03:11.550 --> 00:03:15.189 this whole idea as too cute. Too cute. Interesting. 00:03:15.310 --> 00:03:19.030 So even he sees the potential backlash or, well, 00:03:19.229 --> 00:03:22.210 the sheer awkwardness of it. It suggests a recognition 00:03:22.210 --> 00:03:25.409 that making such an obvious kind of gamey maneuver 00:03:25.409 --> 00:03:28.750 the core of your path back to power might be 00:03:28.750 --> 00:03:31.009 politically toxic, regardless of the legal theory. 00:03:31.099 --> 00:03:33.120 OK, so that brings us to the other path mentioned, 00:03:33.439 --> 00:03:35.699 the Speaker of the House route. This one sounds 00:03:35.699 --> 00:03:38.300 even more complicated. Oh, it is. This is pure 00:03:38.300 --> 00:03:40.919 political theater meets constitutional arcana. 00:03:41.259 --> 00:03:44.699 Step one. Get elected Speaker of the House on 00:03:44.699 --> 00:03:48.419 January 3rd, 2029. Constitutionally, there's 00:03:48.419 --> 00:03:50.740 nothing stopping a former president or really 00:03:50.740 --> 00:03:53.599 almost anyone from becoming speaker. OK, so they're 00:03:53.599 --> 00:03:57.139 speaker. Then what? Then on Inauguration Day, 00:03:57.300 --> 00:03:59.699 January 20th, both the newly elected president 00:03:59.849 --> 00:04:02.310 and the newly elected vice president would have 00:04:02.310 --> 00:04:04.969 to resign simultaneously. Both of them. Both. 00:04:05.469 --> 00:04:07.710 That clears the decks. And under the presidential 00:04:07.710 --> 00:04:09.530 line of succession, the speaker of the House 00:04:09.530 --> 00:04:11.469 becomes president. But wait, isn't the speaker 00:04:11.469 --> 00:04:14.370 only acting president in that scenario? Exactly. 00:04:14.509 --> 00:04:16.750 That's the massive vulnerability. They serve 00:04:16.750 --> 00:04:19.269 only as acting president until a new vice president 00:04:19.269 --> 00:04:21.870 is nominated and confirmed by Congress. So it's 00:04:21.870 --> 00:04:25.089 incredibly precarious. Extremely. Your hold on 00:04:25.089 --> 00:04:27.470 power literally depends on your own heartbeat. 00:04:27.629 --> 00:04:29.750 If something happens to the acting president 00:04:29.750 --> 00:04:32.769 before a VP is confirmed, the presidency passes 00:04:32.769 --> 00:04:35.490 to the next person in line, the speaker pro tempore, 00:04:35.790 --> 00:04:38.370 or the Senate president pro tempore. And if Congress 00:04:38.370 --> 00:04:41.670 has flipped or is divided? You could inadvertently 00:04:41.670 --> 00:04:43.709 hand power right back to the opposition party. 00:04:44.050 --> 00:04:46.629 It requires a Republican House majority to even 00:04:46.629 --> 00:04:49.569 attempt, and it's fragile every step of the way. 00:04:49.689 --> 00:04:52.769 All right. Let's shift from these sort of grand 00:04:52.769 --> 00:04:55.870 constitutional schemes to something maybe less 00:04:55.870 --> 00:04:59.250 dramatic, but just as impactful. The rules around 00:04:59.250 --> 00:05:01.829 government administration, specifically appointments. 00:05:02.110 --> 00:05:04.370 Yes. The sources highlight real tension around 00:05:04.370 --> 00:05:07.050 the Vacancies Act, particularly that 120 -day 00:05:07.050 --> 00:05:09.230 limit for temporary appointments. It's meant 00:05:09.230 --> 00:05:11.670 to ensure Senate oversight, right, to stop presidents 00:05:11.670 --> 00:05:14.250 from just installing unconfirmed people indefinitely. 00:05:14.350 --> 00:05:16.550 But the claim is that this limit is being deliberately 00:05:16.550 --> 00:05:20.370 ignored. Repeatedly. The pattern described is 00:05:20.370 --> 00:05:22.610 using temporary appointments to install people. 00:05:23.790 --> 00:05:26.290 The Senate likely wouldn't confirm. The sources 00:05:26.290 --> 00:05:29.689 used terms like totally unqualified toadies. 00:05:30.310 --> 00:05:32.870 They mentioned specific examples like Alina Habba 00:05:32.870 --> 00:05:36.389 in New Jersey, Seagal Chadda in Nevada. And this 00:05:36.389 --> 00:05:39.290 recently came to a head in that Los Angeles case, 00:05:39.410 --> 00:05:42.069 the Assali ruling. Tell us about that clumsy 00:05:42.069 --> 00:05:45.050 ruse. Right. So the background is Bill Assali 00:05:45.050 --> 00:05:47.819 was serving as an acting U .S. attorney. Just 00:05:47.819 --> 00:05:51.060 before his 120 days were up, AG Pam Bondi's office 00:05:51.060 --> 00:05:53.860 fired him. Fired him. Yes. Only to immediately 00:05:53.860 --> 00:05:56.040 reappoint him as the first assistant U .S. attorney 00:05:56.040 --> 00:05:58.680 with the clear expectation he'd then step back 00:05:58.680 --> 00:06:00.660 into the acting U .S. attorney role through that 00:06:00.660 --> 00:06:02.680 position. Trying to reset the clock, essentially. 00:06:02.800 --> 00:06:05.060 Pretty much. But Judge Michael Seabright wasn't 00:06:05.060 --> 00:06:07.720 having it. He called it a clumsy ruse and ruled 00:06:07.720 --> 00:06:10.040 that Assali had unlawfully assumed the role the 00:06:10.040 --> 00:06:12.339 second time around. He disqualified him from 00:06:12.339 --> 00:06:14.220 being acting U .S. attorney, though he could 00:06:14.220 --> 00:06:17.079 stay as first assistant. OK, one judge, one district. 00:06:17.399 --> 00:06:20.459 Why does this ripple outwards? Because it potentially 00:06:20.459 --> 00:06:23.600 sets a precedent. The argument being made now 00:06:23.600 --> 00:06:26.379 is that other high -profile officials, like Lindsay 00:06:26.379 --> 00:06:28.480 Halligan, who signed indictments against Letitia 00:06:28.480 --> 00:06:32.000 James and James Comey in Virginia, were also 00:06:32.000 --> 00:06:35.220 put in place using similar maneuvers after their 00:06:35.220 --> 00:06:39.750 120 -day limits arguably expired. If the assailee 00:06:39.750 --> 00:06:42.689 logic holds, those indictments could be challenged, 00:06:42.970 --> 00:06:45.709 maybe even invalidated. And for Comey specifically? 00:06:45.889 --> 00:06:48.290 That's the critical part. The statute limitations 00:06:48.290 --> 00:06:50.569 on the potential charges against Comey has apparently 00:06:50.569 --> 00:06:53.689 run out. So if the indictment is invalid due 00:06:53.689 --> 00:06:56.069 to Halligan's appointment being improper, they 00:06:56.069 --> 00:06:58.189 likely can't just issue a new one. The case could 00:06:58.189 --> 00:07:01.220 just... Evacuate. Wow. Based on an administrative 00:07:01.220 --> 00:07:03.500 appointment rule. Something. Okay, let's look 00:07:03.500 --> 00:07:06.100 at the Pentagon now. Secretary Pete Hegseth and 00:07:06.100 --> 00:07:08.579 this push to remove civilian workers. Yeah, this 00:07:08.579 --> 00:07:11.259 is another angle on administrative power. The 00:07:11.259 --> 00:07:13.560 sources describe a move to significantly speed 00:07:13.560 --> 00:07:15.699 up firing civilian defense employees. How are 00:07:15.699 --> 00:07:17.399 they doing that? Aren't they usually protections 00:07:17.399 --> 00:07:21.100 appeals processes? There are. But this new internal 00:07:21.100 --> 00:07:24.220 memo apparently focuses on streamlining terminations 00:07:24.220 --> 00:07:27.509 for poor performance. Crucially, it seems to 00:07:27.509 --> 00:07:30.009 cut out prior steps like mandated improvement 00:07:30.009 --> 00:07:32.889 plans or multiple warnings. So it makes it faster, 00:07:33.149 --> 00:07:35.649 easier to fire individuals one by one. Exactly. 00:07:35.889 --> 00:07:38.069 Which might be a way to avoid the legal challenges 00:07:38.069 --> 00:07:40.769 that could block a large -scale sudden layoff 00:07:40.769 --> 00:07:43.670 or purge. It's firing by a thousand cuts, perhaps. 00:07:43.850 --> 00:07:46.089 But the sources suggest the real target isn't 00:07:46.089 --> 00:07:48.149 just poor performers in the traditional sense. 00:07:48.350 --> 00:07:50.329 That seems to be the core issue highlighted. 00:07:50.670 --> 00:07:53.769 The claim is that poor performance is being redefined 00:07:53.769 --> 00:07:57.569 or at least reinterpreted to mean disloyal. Disloyal 00:07:57.569 --> 00:08:00.529 to whom or what? Disloyal, according to the sources, 00:08:00.569 --> 00:08:03.230 means not subscribing to Donald Trump's agenda. 00:08:04.009 --> 00:08:06.269 So political alignment is effectively being equated 00:08:06.269 --> 00:08:09.490 with job competence. It's framed as an ideological 00:08:09.490 --> 00:08:12.750 purge masked as performance management. And the 00:08:12.750 --> 00:08:15.139 scale of this is significant. Apparently so. 00:08:15.540 --> 00:08:17.579 The material mentions the Pentagon having already 00:08:17.579 --> 00:08:20.560 shed about 60 ,000 civilian positions. That's 00:08:20.560 --> 00:08:23.939 around 8 % of that workforce. This memo looks 00:08:23.939 --> 00:08:26.459 designed to accelerate removing those deemed 00:08:26.459 --> 00:08:29.319 politically unreliable, or just not with the 00:08:29.319 --> 00:08:32.240 program. Okay, let's pivot to the economy. Things 00:08:32.240 --> 00:08:35.500 feel unstable, costs are high, but the sources 00:08:35.500 --> 00:08:38.700 suggest there's another layer here. A problem 00:08:38.700 --> 00:08:41.360 with the data itself. The Fed just cut rates 00:08:41.360 --> 00:08:44.740 by 0 .25%. Right. But the context provided is 00:08:44.740 --> 00:08:47.639 that they made that call while basically flying 00:08:47.639 --> 00:08:49.820 blind. Flying blind. Why? What's wrong with the 00:08:49.820 --> 00:08:52.159 economic data? Two big problems outlined. First, 00:08:52.659 --> 00:08:54.379 leadership instability at the Bureau of Labor 00:08:54.379 --> 00:08:57.500 Statistics, the BLS. Remember, Donald Trump fired 00:08:57.500 --> 00:09:00.340 the nonpartisan head, Erica McTarfer, reportedly 00:09:00.340 --> 00:09:02.179 over disagreements about the numbers. Right. 00:09:02.279 --> 00:09:04.059 And her replacement? Was nominated, but then 00:09:04.059 --> 00:09:06.580 withdrawn. So the BLS, which collects critical 00:09:06.580 --> 00:09:08.980 data on jobs and inflation, has been operating 00:09:08.980 --> 00:09:11.240 without confirmed nonpartisan leadership for 00:09:11.240 --> 00:09:14.139 a while. That raises questions about data collection 00:09:14.139 --> 00:09:16.919 and interpretation. OK, so that's one issue. 00:09:17.120 --> 00:09:19.100 What's the other factor making the Fed fly blind? 00:09:19.460 --> 00:09:23.259 The government shutdown. It directly halted or 00:09:23.259 --> 00:09:26.539 delayed the collection of a lot of the raw economic 00:09:26.539 --> 00:09:29.639 data the Fed relies on. Things like retail sales, 00:09:30.159 --> 00:09:32.139 construction spending, you name it. So they cut 00:09:32.139 --> 00:09:34.700 rates even though inflation was reportedly rising 00:09:34.700 --> 00:09:37.179 and unemployment too. Exactly. It was a gamble. 00:09:37.639 --> 00:09:39.519 If underlying inflation is actually the bigger 00:09:39.519 --> 00:09:42.120 long -term threat, cutting rates was the wrong 00:09:42.120 --> 00:09:44.919 move. They could pour fuel on the fire. But if 00:09:44.919 --> 00:09:47.379 recession was the immediate danger, maybe it 00:09:47.379 --> 00:09:50.529 was necessary. The point is, The decision seems 00:09:50.529 --> 00:09:52.710 to have been made with much less reliable information 00:09:52.710 --> 00:09:55.730 than usual, possibly driven more by political 00:09:55.730 --> 00:09:58.570 pressure to do something than by solid economics. 00:09:58.769 --> 00:10:00.330 And meanwhile, families are feeling the pinch 00:10:00.330 --> 00:10:02.870 directly. That rate cut isn't going to fix everything, 00:10:03.129 --> 00:10:04.769 especially these redoing race spikes like in 00:10:04.769 --> 00:10:07.320 Pennsylvania. No, it won't. Pennsylvania's situation 00:10:07.320 --> 00:10:09.759 is stark. The sources state it has the highest 00:10:09.759 --> 00:10:11.620 grocery price inflation in the country right 00:10:11.620 --> 00:10:15.179 now. 8 .2 percent year over year as of July 2025. 00:10:15.440 --> 00:10:18.139 That's huge. And nearby states too? Yeah. West 00:10:18.139 --> 00:10:21.059 Virginia at 6 .9 percent. New Jersey at 6 .8 00:10:21.059 --> 00:10:23.159 percent. Also very high. What's driving those 00:10:23.159 --> 00:10:25.559 numbers? Is it just general inflation or specific 00:10:25.559 --> 00:10:28.659 things? It seems to be a mix, but with some specific 00:10:28.659 --> 00:10:32.019 drivers really hitting hard. The report mentions 00:10:32.019 --> 00:10:35.440 rapid increases in basics, grains, beans, pasta 00:10:35.440 --> 00:10:38.860 up over 5 % just in a short period, much faster 00:10:38.860 --> 00:10:41.019 than the national average for those items. Plus 00:10:41.019 --> 00:10:43.659 you've got persistently high diesel fuel costs 00:10:43.659 --> 00:10:46.700 hitting transportation, overall regional inflation 00:10:46.700 --> 00:10:49.419 being higher in the Northeast for food and energy 00:10:49.419 --> 00:10:52.000 anyway, and maybe even issues with low market 00:10:52.000 --> 00:10:54.299 competition among grocers in some areas. So these 00:10:54.299 --> 00:10:56.879 are supply side problems, mostly. Things a Fed 00:10:56.879 --> 00:10:59.429 rate cut doesn't really address. Precisely. Rate 00:10:59.429 --> 00:11:01.509 cuts work on the demand side, trying to stimulate 00:11:01.509 --> 00:11:03.690 borrowing and spending. They don't make wheat 00:11:03.690 --> 00:11:05.929 cheaper or lower the cost of trucking food across 00:11:05.929 --> 00:11:08.889 the country. Global commodity issues, transport 00:11:08.889 --> 00:11:11.529 costs, those are outside the Fed's direct control. 00:11:12.029 --> 00:11:14.429 And there's another potential cost shock looming 00:11:14.429 --> 00:11:17.269 health care. The ACA preview for 2026 sounds 00:11:17.269 --> 00:11:19.909 alarming. It really does. The headline number 00:11:19.909 --> 00:11:22.769 is a projected average nationwide premium increase 00:11:22.769 --> 00:11:25.809 of around 26 percent, which is substantial in 00:11:25.809 --> 00:11:28.009 itself. But the bigger hit comes from the subsidies, 00:11:28.049 --> 00:11:31.360 right? That's the potential catastrophe. The 00:11:31.360 --> 00:11:34.139 enhanced federal subsidies, the premium tax credits 00:11:34.139 --> 00:11:36.500 that have made ACA plans affordable for millions, 00:11:36.860 --> 00:11:39.740 are set to expire if Congress doesn't act to 00:11:39.740 --> 00:11:42.019 extend them. What happens? Out -of -pocket costs 00:11:42.019 --> 00:11:44.539 for people getting those subsidies could, on 00:11:44.539 --> 00:11:48.039 average, more than double. The figure cited is 00:11:48.039 --> 00:11:50.799 a potential 114 percent increase in what people 00:11:50.799 --> 00:11:53.740 actually pay. 114 percent jump. Why would Congress 00:11:53.740 --> 00:11:55.980 let that happen? It seems politically dangerous. 00:11:56.100 --> 00:11:57.980 Well, it creates massive leverage, doesn't it? 00:11:58.029 --> 00:12:01.049 but the impact on people is severe. The sources 00:12:01.049 --> 00:12:03.629 use a specific example. A 60 -year -old couple 00:12:03.629 --> 00:12:06.570 in York County, Pennsylvania, their current annual 00:12:06.570 --> 00:12:09.710 premium with subsidies might be around $7 ,000 00:12:09.710 --> 00:12:12.830 if those subsidies expire. Their bill could shoot 00:12:12.830 --> 00:12:15.730 up to over $35 ,000 a year for the same coverage. 00:12:16.639 --> 00:12:18.840 unaffordable for most people. It's a cliff edge 00:12:18.840 --> 00:12:21.379 tied directly to congressional action or inaction. 00:12:21.600 --> 00:12:23.460 Okay, final segment. Let's look at the electoral 00:12:23.460 --> 00:12:25.539 map itself and how the rules governing it are 00:12:25.539 --> 00:12:28.039 being challenged. The sources point to the Supreme 00:12:28.039 --> 00:12:30.360 Court and the Voting Rights Act. What's at stake 00:12:30.360 --> 00:12:32.960 there? The expectation discussed is that the 00:12:32.960 --> 00:12:36.159 court might significantly weaken or gut, the 00:12:36.159 --> 00:12:39.279 last major operative piece of the VRA. And that 00:12:39.279 --> 00:12:41.980 piece is? What does it do? It's basically the 00:12:41.980 --> 00:12:45.279 main legal tool left to challenge racially discriminatory 00:12:45.279 --> 00:12:48.639 gerrymandering, states drawing electoral maps 00:12:48.639 --> 00:12:51.360 that dilute the voting power of minority groups. 00:12:52.159 --> 00:12:54.179 Section two is the key part remaining. So if 00:12:54.179 --> 00:12:56.139 that's weakened, what's the expected outcome? 00:12:56.440 --> 00:12:58.600 The sources suggest, particularly in southern 00:12:58.600 --> 00:13:01.259 states, there's a real eagerness champing at 00:13:01.259 --> 00:13:04.100 the bit. It is the phrase used to redraw congressional 00:13:04.100 --> 00:13:06.600 and state legislative maps to maximize partisan 00:13:06.600 --> 00:13:09.519 advantage, often by packing minority voters into 00:13:09.519 --> 00:13:12.059 fewer districts or spreading them out thinly 00:13:12.059 --> 00:13:14.159 to make nearly every district majority white, 00:13:14.740 --> 00:13:16.860 aiming for districts that are maybe 70 % white, 00:13:16.980 --> 00:13:19.820 30 % minority, for example. And there are specific 00:13:19.820 --> 00:13:22.220 examples of this ambition. Yes, South Carolina's 00:13:22.220 --> 00:13:24.860 LT Governor Pamela Vett is quoted wanting a clean 00:13:24.860 --> 00:13:27.940 sweep, explicitly aiming to eliminate the congressional 00:13:27.940 --> 00:13:31.019 district currently held by Jim Clyburn, a long 00:13:31.019 --> 00:13:33.500 serving black Democrat. So the goal is purely 00:13:33.500 --> 00:13:36.779 partisan gain using race as the tool once the 00:13:36.779 --> 00:13:39.529 VRA constraints are lifted. That appears to be 00:13:39.529 --> 00:13:42.330 the strategy described. Now, there are some potential 00:13:42.330 --> 00:13:44.830 roadblocks. Florida, for instance, actually has 00:13:44.830 --> 00:13:47.289 language in its state constitution banning maps 00:13:47.289 --> 00:13:50.649 drawn primarily for partisan gain. But Governor 00:13:50.649 --> 00:13:52.809 DeSantis has appointed five of the seven justices 00:13:52.809 --> 00:13:55.250 on the Florida Supreme Court. So how that state 00:13:55.250 --> 00:13:57.090 constitutional provision would be interpreted 00:13:57.090 --> 00:14:01.379 is an open question. Also, timing is tight. The 00:14:01.379 --> 00:14:03.200 Supreme Court would need to rule pretty quickly 00:14:03.200 --> 00:14:05.720 for states to draw and implement radically new 00:14:05.720 --> 00:14:08.460 maps before the 2026 election. OK, so that's 00:14:08.460 --> 00:14:10.980 the high level state and federal map manipulation. 00:14:11.500 --> 00:14:14.279 But the sources also talk about a push much further 00:14:14.279 --> 00:14:17.080 down the ballot into races that are usually, 00:14:17.080 --> 00:14:19.700 well, nonpartisan. This is a really significant 00:14:19.700 --> 00:14:22.960 trend highlighted. The idea that local elections, 00:14:23.220 --> 00:14:25.159 city councils, school boards, even things like 00:14:25.159 --> 00:14:27.139 water boards or utility commission should be 00:14:27.139 --> 00:14:30.039 nonpartisan is being actively challenged. How 00:14:30.039 --> 00:14:32.000 so? Who's doing it? Groups like Turning Point 00:14:32.000 --> 00:14:34.799 USA, now led by Erica Kirk, according to the 00:14:34.799 --> 00:14:37.519 sources, are reportedly making a concerted effort 00:14:37.519 --> 00:14:40.340 to inject partisanship into these low -profile 00:14:40.340 --> 00:14:43.179 races, to turn them into explicit Republican 00:14:43.179 --> 00:14:45.840 versus Democrat contests, even if the ballot 00:14:45.840 --> 00:14:48.220 doesn't list party labels. Can you give an example? 00:14:48.299 --> 00:14:50.500 The recall election mentioned in Mesa City, Arizona, 00:14:50.820 --> 00:14:52.720 they're targeting a Republican council member, 00:14:52.960 --> 00:14:55.340 Julie Spillsbury, not because she's a Democrat, 00:14:55.340 --> 00:14:58.259 she's not, but because she's seen as not aligned 00:14:58.259 --> 00:15:00.590 enough with the mangy wing of the party. She 00:15:00.590 --> 00:15:02.490 apparently supported Kamala Harris at some point. 00:15:02.850 --> 00:15:05.470 So it's about ideological purity within the party 00:15:05.470 --> 00:15:08.289 being enforced even in nonpartisan roles. Exactly. 00:15:08.350 --> 00:15:11.809 And it extends beyond just city councils. TPUSA 00:15:11.809 --> 00:15:14.149 is reportedly targeting positions like the Salt 00:15:14.149 --> 00:15:16.889 River Project Board. That's a major water and 00:15:16.889 --> 00:15:19.529 power provider in Arizona. The stated goal is 00:15:19.529 --> 00:15:22.289 to oust people. They label radical environmentalists 00:15:22.289 --> 00:15:25.389 and influence energy and climate policy at that 00:15:25.389 --> 00:15:28.429 very local but impactful level. The sources observe 00:15:28.429 --> 00:15:30.620 that this makes the whole idea of nonpartisan 00:15:30.620 --> 00:15:33.019 elections feel like a fairy tale? Yeah, because 00:15:33.019 --> 00:15:36.120 the strategy is asymmetric. One side is heavily 00:15:36.120 --> 00:15:38.080 investing resources, identifying candidates, 00:15:38.399 --> 00:15:40.500 mobilizing voters based on party affiliation 00:15:40.500 --> 00:15:42.879 for these races. They're aiming to out register 00:15:42.879 --> 00:15:45.940 opponents, sometimes 10 to 1, in specific local 00:15:45.940 --> 00:15:48.539 contexts. While the other side might still be 00:15:48.539 --> 00:15:50.360 operating under the old assumption that these 00:15:50.360 --> 00:15:52.879 races should be neutral. That seems to be the 00:15:52.879 --> 00:15:55.779 dynamic. So you get this gradual capture of local 00:15:55.779 --> 00:15:58.559 institutions, not through direct election changes, 00:15:59.139 --> 00:16:01.200 but by fundamentally changing the nature of the 00:16:01.200 --> 00:16:04.600 contest themselves, often under the radar. Hashtag 00:16:04.600 --> 00:16:07.240 tag outro. So, wrapping this all up, when you 00:16:07.240 --> 00:16:09.460 look across these different areas, the constitutional 00:16:09.460 --> 00:16:12.080 questions, the administrative power plays, the 00:16:12.080 --> 00:16:14.899 economic data issues, the electoral map fights 00:16:14.899 --> 00:16:16.759 there really is a common thread, isn't there? 00:16:16.919 --> 00:16:19.259 There is. It's a consistent challenge to establish 00:16:19.259 --> 00:16:21.899 rules, norms, and institutions, whether it's 00:16:21.899 --> 00:16:24.519 the 22nd Amendment's term limits, the 120D rule 00:16:24.519 --> 00:16:26.879 for appointments, the Voting Rights Act's protections, 00:16:27.200 --> 00:16:29.759 or even just the basic reliance on objective 00:16:29.759 --> 00:16:32.039 nonpartisan government data. Right. It feels 00:16:32.039 --> 00:16:34.840 like a multi -pronged pressure test on the system. 00:16:34.830 --> 00:16:38.090 designed for, well, stability and neutrality. 00:16:38.409 --> 00:16:41.110 Constitutional succession, bureaucratic impartiality, 00:16:41.309 --> 00:16:43.610 data integrity, they all seem to be in the crosshairs. 00:16:43.850 --> 00:16:46.230 And ultimately, when rules are bent or broken, 00:16:46.610 --> 00:16:48.750 you look to the legal system for accountability. 00:16:49.990 --> 00:16:52.190 Which brings us to one final point from the sources. 00:16:53.090 --> 00:16:56.230 The status of those fake elector cases. Yes. 00:16:56.509 --> 00:16:59.610 Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Wisconsin. 00:16:59.690 --> 00:17:02.269 What's the update there? The truly startling 00:17:02.269 --> 00:17:05.380 thing is this. It's now four years since the 00:17:05.380 --> 00:17:08.519 events of 2020. Indictments were filed. But as 00:17:08.519 --> 00:17:11.279 of the time of these sources, not a single one 00:17:11.279 --> 00:17:13.359 of these fake electric cases has actually gone 00:17:13.359 --> 00:17:16.559 to trial. Four years. Why the delay? That seems 00:17:16.559 --> 00:17:19.079 extraordinary for something so central to the 00:17:19.079 --> 00:17:21.680 election process. The sources point to a cascade 00:17:21.680 --> 00:17:24.259 of procedural issues and failures. You have the 00:17:24.259 --> 00:17:26.160 controversy surrounding D .A. Fonney -Wilson's 00:17:26.160 --> 00:17:28.579 conduct in Georgia, potentially delaying things 00:17:28.579 --> 00:17:30.900 there. In Michigan, a judge actually dismissed 00:17:30.900 --> 00:17:33.240 charges against some electors, bizarrely stating 00:17:33.240 --> 00:17:35.640 they weren't savvy or sophisticated enough to 00:17:35.640 --> 00:17:38.299 understand what they were doing. Seriously. And 00:17:38.299 --> 00:17:42.119 in Nevada... there were legal battles just over 00:17:42.119 --> 00:17:44.039 whether the case was filed in the correct venue, 00:17:44.160 --> 00:17:47.500 the right county. So procedural roadblocks, questionable 00:17:47.500 --> 00:17:50.579 judicial rulings, venue disputes, all contributing 00:17:50.579 --> 00:17:53.960 to massive delays. So the old saying, justice 00:17:53.960 --> 00:17:56.500 delayed is justice denied seems relevant here. 00:17:56.579 --> 00:17:58.740 Very much so. And it leads to the final question 00:17:58.740 --> 00:18:00.700 we wanted to leave you with, something to really 00:18:00.700 --> 00:18:02.559 think about based on everything we've discussed 00:18:02.559 --> 00:18:06.099 today. OK. If serious attempts to interfere with 00:18:06.099 --> 00:18:09.640 or subvert an election occur, and our legal system 00:18:09.640 --> 00:18:12.500 through procedural snags, venue arguments, maybe 00:18:12.500 --> 00:18:15.480 even defenses, claiming political naivete proves 00:18:15.480 --> 00:18:17.920 unable to even bring those cases to trial within 00:18:17.920 --> 00:18:20.759 four years. What does that delay signal? What 00:18:20.759 --> 00:18:22.539 does it tell us about the rule of law's ability 00:18:22.539 --> 00:18:24.680 or handle politically charged time -sensitive 00:18:24.680 --> 00:18:27.259 offenses? And perhaps more importantly, what 00:18:27.259 --> 00:18:29.619 message does it send about the potential consequences 00:18:29.619 --> 00:18:32.420 or lack thereof for trying similar things in 00:18:32.420 --> 00:18:35.500 the future? A sobering thought to end on. That's 00:18:35.500 --> 00:18:37.019 definitely something for all of us to chew on.