Speaker 1: So, people are backing away from the mic. They're backing
Speaker 1: away from 2020. They're backing away from their progressive politics.
Speaker 1: It's so weird to me. On the one hand, you've
Speaker 1: got these democratic socialists who are winning, right? And then
Speaker 1: you have the corporate wing of the democratic party, the
Speaker 1: James Carvels and such who say, oh, well, we have to,
Speaker 1: we have to pivot back to Joe Biden politics, something
Speaker 1: unthreatening and moderate so that we can win. Although I
Speaker 1: don't know where the proof is that that causes you
Speaker 1: to win.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: You But it's confusing to me because at the same
Speaker 1: time that you see people, what I call progressive posers,
Speaker 1: folks pretending to be democratic socialists when their voting record
Speaker 1: doesn't show that, the sort of Timu Mamdani phenomena, everybody
Speaker 1: wants to be the mayor of New York, but nobody's
Speaker 1: willing to take the real positions of the mayor of
Speaker 1: New York. At the same time, you have In Florida,
Speaker 1: which would seem the most unlikely of places to elect
Speaker 1: an Angie Nixon, or at least get her through in
Speaker 1: the primary, a black woman who is a democratic socialist,
Speaker 1: at the same time, you have this backing away from
Speaker 1: the issues. And I'm thinking of our governor, Gavin Newsom,
Speaker 1: who of course, are broadcasting from California, from the Crenshaw District, California,
Speaker 1: South LA, Leimert Park. Our governor, who was touted as
Speaker 1: a progressive and actually had taken some progressive positions and
Speaker 1: supported some very positive kinds of legislations earlier in his career,
Speaker 1: now is pivoted. And reparations is the perfect example, right?
Speaker 1: He He signed the legislation to bring Dr. Shirley Weber's
Speaker 1: bill to fruition, creating the first task force on reparations
Speaker 1: for black people, black Americans in the nation, and bringing
Speaker 1: it across the finish line with a powerful 1,200-page report.
Speaker 1: Then we see the governor vetoing everything and sort of
Speaker 1: backing away from those positions in support of reparations. and
Speaker 1: tempering his image, we could say. And presidential ambitions seem
Speaker 1: to be the reason, I would say, for that. The U.S. Congresswoman,
Speaker 1: Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, who came, burst onto the scene, overturning a
Speaker 1: moderate Democrat, an incumbent, a longtime incumbent there in New York,
Speaker 1: with the label of democratic socialist and an ally of
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders. In fact, they did that tour together last year.
Speaker 1: Now she's saying that woke was crazy. Now she's backing
Speaker 1: away from the progressive or radical progressive politics that that
Speaker 1: she came into office on. What is that? And I,
Speaker 1: you know, I think it's problematic. I know she's thinking
Speaker 1: of running for president. I get that. And I'm a
Speaker 1: fan of AOC. Don't get me wrong. I think she's
Speaker 1: done a great job as a like her politics, not everything,
Speaker 1: but a lot of her political positions and policies. But
Speaker 1: the fact that she's now saying backing away from woke,
Speaker 1: that means, number one, either your principles are shaky, they
Speaker 1: were never really solid in the first place, or you're
Speaker 1: an opportunist. Number two, it means that the conservatives, the
Speaker 1: anti-justice wing of the American body politic, has done such
Speaker 1: a good job in demonizing woke that you feel you
Speaker 1: have to distance yourself from woke. What does that mean? Really,
Speaker 1: it means pronouns. What does that mean? It means calling
Speaker 1: people what they want to be called. If you want
Speaker 1: to be called Carl, I call you Carl. If you
Speaker 1: want to be called Jenny, I call you Jenny. That's
Speaker 1: basic respect. Now they want to call it wokeness. Treating
Speaker 1: other people with respect is now wokeness. If you're a he,
Speaker 1: I call you a he. If you're a she, I
Speaker 1: call you a she. Who decides that? You, not me.
Speaker 1: Is that crazy? No, that's just respect. Um, In a
Speaker 1: recent interview, the congresswoman said, walked back her support of
Speaker 1: the idea of defunding the police. Well, again, this is
Speaker 1: a victory for the right and their ability to take
Speaker 1: things and twist them. Defund the police means taking money
Speaker 1: out of police budgets and putting it into other things
Speaker 1: that can keep us safe. Mental health, anti-homelessness programs, Public
Speaker 1: safety measures like lighting, like community councils, like intervention and
Speaker 1: prevention efforts. But now she's walking it back. And she says,
Speaker 1: her explanation is that because during 2020 and COVID, we
Speaker 1: were willing to entertain a lot more things in the
Speaker 1: public space. That we were more open to a range
Speaker 1: of policies. But that those policies are no longer acceptable.
Speaker 1: Why not? Why not? So she's getting a pat on
Speaker 1: the back from conservative political strategists like James Carville. like
Speaker 1: this guy Brent Buchanan, who's quoted in the LA Times,
Speaker 1: calling her a good politician. And James Carville, who says
Speaker 1: she can simply say, I'm grown. And people understand that.
Speaker 1: As if being a democratic socialist or being a progressive
Speaker 1: or putting forth ideas that some consider radical, like health
Speaker 1: care for all, is immature or a sign that someone
Speaker 1: is not fully developed politically. or chronologically, which is just
Speaker 1: not the case. They're simply different philosophical approaches to solving
Speaker 1: the same problems. But what you're telling me is that
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders hasn't quite grown up yet? Is that your argument?
Speaker 1: That Angela Davis just needs a few more years to mature,
Speaker 1: and then she'll stop being an abolitionist? I have to
Speaker 1: disagree with that. And I don't think, I think we
Speaker 1: lean into such moderate apologist pablum at the peril of
Speaker 1: our party. That is not the path to victory. It's
Speaker 1: the path to being another middle-of-the-road, nothing-burger of a politician.
Speaker 2: 809-20-1580.
Speaker 1: Agree, disagree, or you got another conversation. I'd love to
Speaker 1: hear from you. 809-20-1580. I'm Dominique DiPrima for KBLA Talk 1580. Absolutely.
Speaker 1: I do appreciate you on that. I say this and
Speaker 1: I've been saying it for years, even before these democratic
Speaker 1: socialists started doing better at the polling that we, the
Speaker 1: people of We, the people, are where the energy is
Speaker 1: in this party. We, the progressives, we, the black women, we,
Speaker 1: the Latino people, we, the progressive people, the young people
Speaker 1: in the party. Why are we listening? I know, James Carville, legendary, blah, blah, blah.
Speaker 1: Why are we listening to all these folks that we've
Speaker 1: already tried their way? If you always do what you've
Speaker 1: always done, then you always get what you've always got. Yeah, okay,
Speaker 1: thank you. Thank you for Bill Clinton, LOL, and welfare
Speaker 1: reform that made more people poor. Thank you for Joe Biden.
Speaker 1: Thank you for Barack Obama. I mean, I voted for
Speaker 1: Biden and Obama, but my point is, would I rather
Speaker 1: have had a more progressive option? Yes. And now we
Speaker 1: have that possibility, and I'm so tired of it. of
Speaker 1: hearing these Dems cry about how they can't win in
Speaker 1: a general election. And then mainstream media piling on with
Speaker 1: that same dumb narrative. Prove it. Let's prove they can't
Speaker 1: win in a general election. Let's let Bernie go through
Speaker 1: the convention. and get the nomination that he deserved. Let's
Speaker 1: stop kneecapping our own progressives or convincing our progressives like
Speaker 1: AOC that they need to kneecap or nerf themselves into
Speaker 1: these sort of, you know, declawed versions of themselves. And
Speaker 1: I also think that leads to disillusionment on the part
Speaker 1: of our base, right? Because our base, like I'm a politician,
Speaker 1: the base, because When you come into office on these lofty,
Speaker 1: progressive ideas, and then you pivot to being a middle-of-the-road
Speaker 1: corporate dem, and that happens over and over again, we
Speaker 1: start to think that we lose faith, we lose hope,
Speaker 1: we lose the impetus to even move. And to be fair,
Speaker 1: people that think that Barack Obama pivoted are wrong. He
Speaker 1: was always a moderate. He ran as a moderate. And
Speaker 1: we knew what we were getting. We, you know, would
Speaker 1: I take them over the resident every single day of
Speaker 1: the week? But what I'm saying is right now we
Speaker 1: have the opportunity for real progressive change and we need
Speaker 1: to push the envelope, not back down. All right, let's
Speaker 1: go to Alegria calling us from Los Angeles. Good morning.
Speaker 3: Good morning, Dominique. Thank you so much for taking my call.
Speaker 1: Absolutely. What's on your mind?
Speaker 3: Honestly, I am mostly just calling to thank you because
Speaker 3: I appreciate you in this space so much. It's so
Speaker 3: great to have reason and brilliant thinking on these topics.
Speaker 3: And it's so refreshing and it's so appreciated. I didn't
Speaker 3: realize how close we were in our Bernie, in our
Speaker 3: Bernie love and dedication back in the day. I was
Speaker 3: definitely a diehard Bernie Sanders, 2016, 2020, like, We should
Speaker 3: have pushed that omelet long ago, and it's like you
Speaker 3: just want to shake people. And, you know, it's like
Speaker 3: the Democratic Party, which I've been a Democrat in forever,
Speaker 3: really it seems like primarily and intentionally, like they'll do
Speaker 3: whatever they can to lose. They're like intentional losers because
Speaker 3: they won't listen to the actual people, the progressive people
Speaker 3: of their party and beyond who are saying we want
Speaker 3: something different and we expect something different. And it's difficult
Speaker 3: and it's sad. So I just appreciate your voice here.
Speaker 1: I mean, and the thing about it is, so what
Speaker 1: your takeaway is from Angie Nixon winning or your takeaway
Speaker 1: is from Mamdani winning is that we all need to be, no,
Speaker 1: we should all be, you know, East Indian or we
Speaker 1: should all, you know, have locks. It's not, oh, look.
Speaker 1: Medicare for all is really popular. People need health care. Oh, wow,
Speaker 1: a public option for grocery stores is super popular because
Speaker 1: people can't afford stuff. Like, instead of looking at the policies,
Speaker 1: they want to keep the person and declaw them, take
Speaker 1: away what people responded to in the first place. We
Speaker 1: don't love AOC because she's got great lipstick and she's
Speaker 1: an attractive Latina. We like her because of her policy positions.
Speaker 1: And that is what I'm objecting to about the party here.
Speaker 3: Yes, agreed, agreed. The focus is always off. We are
Speaker 3: saying we don't want our money to bomb children in Palestine.
Speaker 3: We want health care. We want a humane society, and
Speaker 3: we deserve that our money and taxes and politicians fight
Speaker 3: for it. and they're unable to hear the things they
Speaker 3: are so dedicated to their corporate donors and status quo that,
Speaker 3: you know, they might as well not have ears.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, it's well said, but then to your
Speaker 1: point about Democrats being dedicated to losing, the ones that
Speaker 1: are winning are the ones that are bucking the party.
Speaker 1: They are the Mamdani's. They are the Angie Nixon's. And
Speaker 1: that's why I'm saying how can you, You want to
Speaker 1: co-opt that, but once you co-opt it, it doesn't win anymore.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: All right, Alegria. I absolutely appreciate the call. She called
Speaker 1: me at 800-920-1580. I invite you to do the same.
Speaker 1: We've got Fred from L.A. on the phone. Good morning, Fred. Fred,
Speaker 1: you with me? Microphone check.
Speaker 2: Okay.
Speaker 1: Okay, I guess we have lost Fred, or perhaps he'll
Speaker 1: call me back. He called at 809-20-1580, 809-20-1580. It seems
Speaker 1: more dire to me because we do have our midterm elections,
Speaker 1: and the U.S. Extreme Court has now backed up the
Speaker 1: resident in limiting mail-in voting. That may seem like a
Speaker 1: little thing or not a thing to you, But it
Speaker 1: is a big deal. This is part of a larger
Speaker 1: plan by the Trump administration to limit voting. And it's
Speaker 1: not voting for everyone that they want to limit. It's
Speaker 1: limit voting for you. You, the progressive. You, the woman. You,
Speaker 1: the black person. You, the Latino that's not, you know,
Speaker 1: Team FAFO. It's trying to limit progressive voters. It's trying
Speaker 1: to limit democratic voters. It's trying to limit low income voters.
Speaker 1: And that is because they want to win. And if
Speaker 1: you look at, this is the thing that really blew
Speaker 1: my mind. When I started looking at the way that
Speaker 1: Republicans are outnumbered all over the country in terms of
Speaker 1: the number of humans that vote and how they've been
Speaker 1: able to maintain control of these state houses, the White House,
Speaker 1: the extreme court and the Congress, even though they don't
Speaker 1: have the numbers, is really the story of the problems
Speaker 1: with our democracy, right? It's the manipulation of the maps
Speaker 1: through gerrymandering. It's the pimping of the electoral college. It's
Speaker 1: the fact that DC and Puerto Rico do not have
Speaker 1: statehood when in fact they should. Or if Puerto Rico
Speaker 1: wants to be independent, be independent, but have a truly
Speaker 1: representative democracy It's term limits on our Supreme Court. These
Speaker 1: are the things that have allowed a group of people
Speaker 1: that do not represent the majority of Americans or the
Speaker 1: majority of American voters to continue to control so much
Speaker 1: of the politics of this country. It's a masterclass in
Speaker 1: undermining democracy. Let's go to Fred. We got him now.
Speaker 1: Fred from L.A., you're on.
Speaker 4: Okay. Can you hear me now?
Speaker 2: I do.
Speaker 4: Okay. Now, I want to respond to Adam from the
Speaker 4: last hour. He's looking for something racist under every rock
Speaker 4: on the poles that are knocked down on the storm
Speaker 4: back east. I was a district driver by choice from
Speaker 4: 1979 to 86 of Palms Overhead. And you only can
Speaker 4: set one pole. It takes six hours to set a pole.
Speaker 4: Let me give you, I'm fast. If I came in
Speaker 4: this morning and some drunk knocked over a pole last
Speaker 4: night and looked like a toothpick snap, I would put
Speaker 4: the hardware on the truck, a five-ton stake, go to
Speaker 4: the pole. The lineman would change everything out, set a
Speaker 4: new pole, change everything out, put the old stuff back
Speaker 4: on me. It takes six hours. And then maybe in
Speaker 4: this emergency situation, they might be able to get to
Speaker 4: a second poll and do that. But that's a total
Speaker 4: of a 12, 14 hour day. It takes six hours
Speaker 4: to set a poll, Dominique.
Speaker 1: Okay, Fred, I'm going to suggest that you go back
Speaker 1: and listen to that hour again, because Adam is very
Speaker 1: much a by the book journalist and he actually was
Speaker 1: only stating facts. He didn't say anything. Any conjecture about
Speaker 1: race would have been coming from me. What Adam stated
Speaker 1: were facts that, that, In black areas, it does take
Speaker 1: longer to get the power back on. That black areas
Speaker 1: are more likely to have power outages. Those are not opinions.
Speaker 1: Those were actually facts. And so if you don't like them,
Speaker 1: you know, that's your prerogative. But they're not coming from
Speaker 1: Adam Mahoney's opinion. Those are actually supported by data and
Speaker 1: you can go to capital B news.org and actually read
Speaker 1: the article or go back. All of my podcasts are
Speaker 1: available for free wherever you get your podcasts. They're also,
Speaker 1: they live on YouTube so you can see them any,
Speaker 1: anytime you want. I don't think he was looking for race.
Speaker 1: He was just telling us the facts as, as they
Speaker 1: are reported. And so, yeah, We're fact-based. That's how we
Speaker 1: do it, Fred. Appreciate the call. We've got news, traffic,
Speaker 1: and sports. Speaking of facts, then. only right here. And man,
Speaker 1: as I said, the news cycle is spinning wildly. So
Speaker 1: I think all of these conversations are important because With
Speaker 1: the resident of the White House now moving to restrict
Speaker 1: mail-in voting, and the Supreme Court is backing him on
Speaker 1: that so far, even though there's another case that still
Speaker 1: has to move through that may impact it. But basically,
Speaker 1: they're already signaling they might as well just crown the
Speaker 1: guy king. But in any case, if we are not
Speaker 1: motivated to vote because we're all disillusioned by the these
Speaker 1: sort of, you know, moderate, middle-of-the-road, defanged, not-about-nothing Democrats, then
Speaker 1: we will continue to lose, even with the president, the
Speaker 1: residents' approval ratings in the toilet. As those of you
Speaker 1: who listen to me closely know, I clearly pivoted because
Speaker 1: our guest for today did not arrive. And so I
Speaker 1: have one of my homies who is joining me In
Speaker 1: the clutch here, he's an award-winning journalist, a host, a
Speaker 1: multidisciplinary artist, and a Harvard-trained scholar in faith, justice, and
Speaker 1: public life. He's been in the New York Times, NPR,
Speaker 1: CNN variety, and of course, first things first, Jared Hill.
Speaker 1: Good morning. Good morning.
Speaker 2: Can I just say that I am honored to be
Speaker 2: one of the people that you would call in a pinch.
Speaker 2: So I'm just grateful to be here. So thank you
Speaker 2: for having me. Oh, yeah.
Speaker 1: Well, I'm honored to have you in the phone to
Speaker 1: call in a pinch. Okay, so there's a lot of
Speaker 1: things going on. And I was talking about, you know,
Speaker 1: this whole everyone sort of backing away from woke and
Speaker 1: AOC renouncing defund the police and, you know, and at
Speaker 1: the same time, you've got these democratic socialists energizing the
Speaker 1: party and people winning and bucking the democratic establishment very successfully.
Speaker 1: And we were talking off the air, at least via text,
Speaker 1: about the alleged meeting, collaboration, whatever it is, between Hakeem
Speaker 1: Jeffries and Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law. I'm not quite
Speaker 1: sure what his title is beyond that. Special envoy of BS.
Speaker 1: And again, you know, with Hakeem Jeffries, you have someone
Speaker 1: who who's never been a progressive. He's always been a moderate.
Speaker 1: He studied at the feet of Nancy Pelosi. But I
Speaker 1: think it's becoming more pronounced now because of the loud
Speaker 1: conversation about Gaza.
Speaker 2: So I'm very torn when it comes to the talking
Speaker 2: Jeffries moment and meeting with Jared Kushner. I think of
Speaker 2: myself as pretty left. And I come from like a
Speaker 2: conflict resolution background. You mentioned that I went to Harvard
Speaker 2: Divinity School. My degree is a master's of religion and
Speaker 2: public life. And we look at the ways in which
Speaker 2: a religion kind of operates as a power structure and
Speaker 2: the ways that we can approach that from our different,
Speaker 2: if you will. And it's been interesting to me because
Speaker 2: a lot of that work has been rooted in peace
Speaker 2: building and conflict resolution research. And so the ways in
Speaker 2: which we are ever going to resolve these conflicts is
Speaker 2: going to have to deal with some kind of engagement.
Speaker 2: And also, I don't like the idea of Jared Kushner
Speaker 2: sitting down with Joaquin Jeffries for anything.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 2: And so I'm wrestling with both of those things at
Speaker 2: the same time, because the things that we want, the
Speaker 2: things that we want to achieve, the things that we're
Speaker 2: aiming towards, they're going to require some kind of engagement, right?
Speaker 2: And one of the books that we focused on in
Speaker 2: my program was The Moral Imagination, written by John Lederach.
Speaker 2: And within it, he talks about how peace is not
Speaker 2: something that happens when you put guns down. Like, peace
Speaker 2: also requires, like, building. and engagement and working together and
Speaker 2: having conversations about what each other need, et cetera. And
Speaker 2: so when I see this moment, and I hear you, right?
Speaker 2: When I see this moment and these kinds of moments
Speaker 2: where two people are having a meeting that you wouldn't
Speaker 2: ordinarily want to see have a meeting, I also have
Speaker 2: to consider what Hakeem Jeffries' job is and what things
Speaker 2: are presented to him to say yes or no to
Speaker 2: and the opportunities that can come from those yeses or nos.
Speaker 2: And so I don't like how this looks or feels.
Speaker 2: And I don't even know that I trust that it
Speaker 2: was really useful. And I have to say, like, if
Speaker 2: I want to believe in this guy to be able
Speaker 2: to do his job, even if he's not as, as,
Speaker 2: as far left as I would like him to be,
Speaker 2: but I'm, he's the one that I, that I have
Speaker 2: to work with or support. I have to kind of
Speaker 2: want to give him a little bit of the benefit
Speaker 2: of the doubt here. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Well, I mean the, um, Talk show host Risi Colbert
Speaker 1: made an interesting point, I think, yesterday on Instagram. She
Speaker 1: was saying, why are we spending so much time criticizing
Speaker 1: Hakeem Jeffries when we have to beat Republicans in the midterms?
Speaker 1: We're so busy criticizing, and I'm guilty of this, not
Speaker 1: that I focus so much on Hakeem Jeffries, but I'm
Speaker 1: so tired of these corporate, moderate, Democratic, mainstream establishment types
Speaker 1: telling us that we need to be electable. that I
Speaker 1: probably spend more time critiquing them than I do critiquing
Speaker 1: the folks we got to beat in November. So I
Speaker 1: may be guilty as charged. And she was pointing out
Speaker 1: that there are thousands of posts about people criticizing Hakeem
Speaker 1: Jeffries and very few posts criticizing Republicans that we'll be
Speaker 1: running against in November. What are your thoughts on that, Jarrett?
Speaker 5: Well, I..
Speaker 4: We..
Speaker 2: I've been a journalist for 25 years as of next month.
Speaker 2: And so our job, thank you. I always say I
Speaker 2: counted 11th and 12th grade on the newspaper because those
Speaker 2: years counted.
Speaker 1: I was wondering that, but okay, I'll count those.
Speaker 2: I thought you were doing math in your head.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2: But I say that because the role of this job
Speaker 2: is to check power, right? Is to raise the flag
Speaker 2: and say, hey, this is not right. Or, hey, this
Speaker 2: is something that's going on. And so I think there
Speaker 2: is an importance in the critique. that you bring to
Speaker 2: this moment or to these kinds of situations, that is
Speaker 2: the job that you have, right? As a journalist, as
Speaker 2: a progressive, as a liberal, as a leftist, as a
Speaker 2: person with a voice, with a platform, as a person
Speaker 2: who is out here doing this every day, right? That
Speaker 2: is the job. And it's somebody else's job sometimes to
Speaker 2: be the person who comes in and brings all of
Speaker 2: these different pieces together to be able to make them useful.
Speaker 2: And so I don't think it's wrong for you to
Speaker 2: be checking... King Jeffries in this kind of moment or
Speaker 2: any of the other Democrats, because as people further to
Speaker 2: the left, it is our job to continue to pull
Speaker 2: this coalition left, right? And so like when we had
Speaker 2: this conversation about the mayor's race or even with the
Speaker 2: governor's races, right? Ideally, we get two Democrats in each
Speaker 2: of these roles so that we can pull whoever to
Speaker 2: the left, that moderate person to the left. And that
Speaker 2: was the conversation we had going into the midterms here.
Speaker 2: And so I think it's important I think we just
Speaker 2: have to figure out, like, what are the things that
Speaker 2: we want and how do we get them? Because I
Speaker 2: think that when we look at the Republicans, we see
Speaker 2: people who are purely after power. They only want power.
Speaker 2: And whatever it's going to take to get that power,
Speaker 2: they will do. They will change the rules at a
Speaker 2: moment's notice. The laws and rules are subject to change
Speaker 2: without notice.
Speaker 4: Right. Yeah.
Speaker 2: And so, but we are here talking about people. We
Speaker 2: want to, we want a lot of things more than
Speaker 2: power and that is more difficult to achieve. And so
Speaker 2: it's important for all of us to be in this,
Speaker 2: in this back.
Speaker 4: And forth together.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: That's well said. Let's, let's go to Barbara calling us
Speaker 1: from Orange County. Hi, Barbara. You're on with Jared Hill
Speaker 1: and Dominique DiPrima. Welcome.
Speaker 5: Good morning, Dominique. I have three things right quick. Number one,
Speaker 5: I voted for Bernie in the primary that time too.
Speaker 5: I wish he'd have won. Number two, When would Dr.
Speaker 5: Julia Malvo come on? Because there's some really things happening.
Speaker 5: And number three, can we get Stacey Abrams and hire
Speaker 5: her to work with a couple of the states to
Speaker 5: help organize us like she did in Atlanta and flip
Speaker 5: some stuff and maybe we can get where we need
Speaker 5: to be?
Speaker 1: I love the way you're thinking, Barbara. Jarrett, you have
Speaker 1: thoughts for Barbara?
Speaker 2: I'm looking up Stacey Abrams right now. I'm like, I
Speaker 2: know that Stacey Abrams is doing a lot of work.
Speaker 1: Right, she's busy, right, right, right.
Speaker 2: Yeah, she's not doing anything.
Speaker 4: Dr.
Speaker 1: Malveaux, yes, you know, I have her on speed dial, Barbara,
Speaker 1: every time I'm confused about economic issues. Like right now,
Speaker 1: I'm so confused about these tariffs. I thought the court
Speaker 1: said he had to pay back the tariffs, but now
Speaker 1: we're imposing tariffs on Canada. So, yes, I can't tell
Speaker 1: you the exact day, Barbara, but Dr. Malveaux will be
Speaker 1: back any minute.
Speaker 5: Well, here's the reason why I ask. It's because, I
Speaker 5: don't know if you know this, but Aliko Dengote in
Speaker 5: Nigeria just built the largest oil processing plant, which is
Speaker 5: more than triple what two of the other major plants
Speaker 5: are doing. And they are going public or they just
Speaker 5: went public?
Speaker 1: Not tracking it. I will look it up. And when Dr.
Speaker 1: M comes on, you know, she used to be my professor,
Speaker 1: the youngest, flyest professor ever. When Dr. M comes up,
Speaker 1: I will definitely ask her about that oil plant. Thank you, Barbara.
Speaker 1: I appreciate you. Did you find anything, Jarrett?
Speaker 2: Well, I want to know that she has a show
Speaker 2: that she's already been doing for quite a while, Stacey Abrams,
Speaker 2: over on the Cricket Network. And she's really been doing
Speaker 2: a lot of work of kind of breaking down the
Speaker 2: ways in which fascism has been rolling out. And so
Speaker 2: she's The most recent time that I saw her, she
Speaker 2: was talking about the 10 different points of change that
Speaker 2: have to be affected to demarcate fascism. I believe that's
Speaker 2: how it was positioned.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: I mean, Barbara's talking about the on-the-ground organizing that she
Speaker 1: did when she pulled all those voters, you know, and
Speaker 1: gave them a run for their money for governor and,
Speaker 1: you know, mobilizing black voters, mobilizing progressive voters, women. This
Speaker 1: mail-in voting decision by the U.S. Extreme Court, I don't
Speaker 1: know how exactly it's going to manifest. I know that
Speaker 1: for me, as soon as I heard it, I said, okay,
Speaker 1: I won't be voting by mail because it literally means
Speaker 1: you're putting your ballot into federal custody. And the Supreme
Speaker 1: Court has said that they can restrict the use of
Speaker 1: mail ballots. So I don't know how that's going to
Speaker 1: land exactly. But there are people that don't have any
Speaker 1: other option. You know what I mean? They're not near
Speaker 1: a polling place. They're not mobile. It's really worrisome. So
Speaker 1: I think that's where that's coming from is how do
Speaker 1: we mobilize people so that no matter how much Republicans cheat,
Speaker 1: because we can see that they're gearing up to cheat
Speaker 1: in the midterms, that they lose anyway because the margins
Speaker 1: are so overwhelming.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the mail-in ballot piece of this upcoming election is
Speaker 2: a really frustrating space because it's a place where we
Speaker 2: can very clearly see that they have created a problem
Speaker 2: that didn't exist, right? They've also created a narrative around
Speaker 2: a problem.
Speaker 5: As if it existed, but it didn't.
Speaker 2: We've known that mail-in ballots have been a safe way
Speaker 2: to vote across the country for, I believe, generations at
Speaker 2: this point. And so when I think about this story,
Speaker 2: it frustrates me in that kind of way. And I
Speaker 2: think that for myself, I always take my ballot that
Speaker 2: comes in the mail and I go drop it off
Speaker 2: at the ballot. at the polling place on election day.
Speaker 2: That's how I've been kind of always worrying through my
Speaker 2: voting plan, if you will. And right now, we keep
Speaker 2: saying to people, like, it's very important to, like, have
Speaker 2: a plan for how you vote. Because as we are
Speaker 2: approaching this, we can see Los Angeles, you might not
Speaker 2: be as concerned, but who knows what could be happening.
Speaker 2: But we know that people are listening to this around
Speaker 2: the country and around the world. And for those of
Speaker 2: you that are in other places that are not going
Speaker 2: to be as we would see it here in Los Angeles,
Speaker 2: it might be a great idea to start thinking about, like,
Speaker 2: how do you want to vote? Because as Dominique has
Speaker 2: put it, we are putting your vote into federal custody
Speaker 2: and we know what federal custody looks like. We know
Speaker 2: what that looks like in various different kinds of ways.
Speaker 1: Justice Katandji Brown-Jackson said that this decision, quote, needlessly injects
Speaker 1: chaos and uncertainty into the upcoming midterm elections. And clearly
Speaker 1: that's exactly what it's meant to do. So this is,
Speaker 1: you know, this is a concern. And I think it is,
Speaker 1: I think Barbara's correct that one of the antidotes to
Speaker 1: that concern is to mobilize such a tsunami of voters
Speaker 1: that the cheating doesn't win. I think that's got to
Speaker 1: be part of it, whether it's Stacey Abrams or Latoya
Speaker 1: Brown or me or you, the get out the vote
Speaker 1: effort is going to have to be Herculean. Jared Hill
Speaker 1: is here with me, filling in in the clutch, pinch
Speaker 1: hitting today on First Things First. I'm Dominique DiPrima for
Speaker 1: KBLA Talk 1580. Okay, Republicans, Jared Hill says, their main
Speaker 1: goal is power. no matter what it takes, uh, Jared
Speaker 1: Hill and award-winning journalists is joining me for the second
Speaker 1: part of the hour. Um, does that include writing in
Speaker 1: the trunks of SUVs and, uh, and you know, yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, is, is that, is that what this, of
Speaker 1: course I'm, I'm referring to the, the, the woman known
Speaker 1: as the president's binky. Um, Is she, you know, is
Speaker 1: she after power? Is it a love connection? What is
Speaker 1: happening with Natalie Harp and the resident of the White House?
Speaker 2: So I've not heard the president's binky. That's a personal memory.
Speaker 2: But I have heard different kinds of things similar to that.
Speaker 2: I think the word that the White House has tried
Speaker 2: to use is like ballet or something like that. Her
Speaker 2: position is like ballet. very unclear in another way that
Speaker 2: she kind of spoke about Jared Kushner and the way
Speaker 2: that this administration and the crime family works. But like,
Speaker 2: it's interesting to kind of hear Natalie Harp's story. Natalie
Speaker 2: Harp is someone who is always at the side of
Speaker 2: the president. She originally was a personality over on one
Speaker 2: of the conservative networks. And she has really just fawned
Speaker 2: over the president in ways that don't make any logical
Speaker 2: sense to me. She's like she has written letters to
Speaker 2: the president saying that he's the only thing that matters
Speaker 2: to her. She's now been working in this administration now
Speaker 2: over the course of two years, and she's the person
Speaker 2: who kind of gets information to the president, but also
Speaker 2: spends a lot of time with the president and with
Speaker 2: him at all times, seemingly. You're talking about her being
Speaker 2: in the trunk of an SUV because of the way that...
Speaker 2: I don't remember even how that started to happen, but
Speaker 2: that was one of the first things I heard about her.
Speaker 1: Because there was no room for her in the car. Right, right, right.
Speaker 2: They've got her running behind golf carts. They've got her
Speaker 2: doing all kinds of like unreasonable things because she's so
Speaker 2: devoted to the president. And the more and more I
Speaker 2: hear about this, I have a lot of questions about
Speaker 2: like where she's actually came from or what the actual
Speaker 2: goal is or like giving her information or who she
Speaker 2: might be giving information to. She's participating in a lot
Speaker 2: of meetings that the president is a part of, all
Speaker 2: of his appearances. You think I'm, you think I'm wild?
Speaker 1: No, I think you're right. I mean, She could be
Speaker 1: a handler. Who knows? She might be, you know, she
Speaker 1: could be sent by Kim Jong-un. Like, we don't really know.
Speaker 1: Her brother says she's written letters to more than one president,
Speaker 1: including Bush, which makes her sound like a groupie. But
Speaker 1: who the heck knows?
Speaker 2: Well, I think about a few different things. Like, I
Speaker 2: don't have any information that says, like, you know, she's
Speaker 2: been planted by any of these countries or whatever, any
Speaker 2: of these adversaries. But I do know that this is
Speaker 2: an administration that does not run background checks on folks
Speaker 2: and gives security clearance away a lot more freely than
Speaker 2: any other administration would. We do know that this is
Speaker 2: a family that has relationships all over the world because
Speaker 2: of their holdings and their businesses. And we've seen those
Speaker 2: kinds of relationships kind of played out in the first
Speaker 2: administration and then in the years subsequent. And so when
Speaker 2: we think about a person who made her way up
Speaker 2: to the president just by being a blonde white woman
Speaker 2: who admired him and is always fawning over him, that's
Speaker 2: a pretty.
Speaker 4: Low bar, right?
Speaker 2: We don't really have, we don't have a.
Speaker 4: Lot of, a.
Speaker 2: Lot of reason to have faith that like she is
Speaker 2: someone who has a high moral standard or is even
Speaker 2: like really devoted to the values of this country. We
Speaker 2: don't know those kinds of things, right? We don't know
Speaker 2: how she could be getting information. We don't know what
Speaker 2: she's doing with that information. We don't know what she
Speaker 2: has on her. They call her the human printer. She
Speaker 2: carries around a small printer to be able to print
Speaker 2: out information. to the president to give him information that
Speaker 2: he tends to like. We tend to see a lot
Speaker 2: of that information end up in his social posts. We
Speaker 2: tend to see him take a lot of the information
Speaker 2: that comes from her as being fact. And that has
Speaker 2: a major implication when you're giving information to the president
Speaker 2: of the United States. There are other jobs that she
Speaker 2: supposedly has that are related to his health, related to
Speaker 2: various different ways that I don't see people talking about
Speaker 2: in media, about things that he needs and services that
Speaker 2: are necessary for his day-to-day ongoings. But I think that
Speaker 2: Natalie Harp is someone who could stand to be a
Speaker 2: really interesting figure as America continues to watch her sit
Speaker 2: next to its president.
Speaker 1: I mean, real talk, if my husband has a valet
Speaker 1: that's traveling in a trunk to be with him, she's
Speaker 1: fired immediately. I don't know how Melania is cool with
Speaker 1: that either.
Speaker 2: Well, Dominique, to this point, the days after John Ossoff
Speaker 2: made the comments about flying around with Natalie, we saw
Speaker 2: Melania Trump for the first time up here at the
Speaker 2: White House, right? She stepped out into the Rose Garden
Speaker 2: for an event that was going on, and the first
Speaker 2: thing she said was, I heard you guys miss me, right?
Speaker 2: So it has been addressed, right? It is a present conversation.
Speaker 1: Yeah, no doubt. No doubt, Jarrett. Thank you so much
Speaker 1: for hopping on at the last minute. Remind folks how
Speaker 1: to follow you and find your writings and artworks.
Speaker 2: Yes, you can find all my work. I'm at Jarrett
Speaker 2: Hill on all the different platforms. You can check out
Speaker 2: my book, Historically Black Phrases, from my one of your
Speaker 2: little friends to who all going to be there at historicallyblackphrases.com.
Speaker 4: We have a new.
Speaker 2: Game that comes out in September called Watch Your Mouth,
Speaker 2: which is a game that you can play with your
Speaker 2: friends or family at the cookout, the reunion, whatever it is.
Speaker 2: So all of those different things you can check out. And, yeah,
Speaker 2: thank you for having me, Domino.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much. Tavis Smiley's on deck. He's got
Speaker 1: a great lineup for you today. As per usual, you
Speaker 1: do not want to miss that. Tap in with me
Speaker 1: on social media at Deprima Radio, D-I-P-R-I-M-A, and then radio
Speaker 1: or at KBLA 1580 everywhere. Like my father, the late,
Speaker 1: great poet Laura. of New Jersey, Amiri Baraka, used to
Speaker 1: say a person is either free or they are not free.
Speaker 1: There can be no apprenticeship for freedom. Until tomorrow, my
Speaker 1: beloved KBLA delegation, one love.