Speaker 1: You're listening to Bill Handle on Demand from KFI AM
Speaker 1: six forty.
Speaker 2: It is a Monday morning, April fourteenth, and we started
Speaker 2: another week.
Speaker 1: A big story we're.
Speaker 2: Looking at is on Friday, President Trump once again changed
Speaker 2: his mind about the tariffs. If you remember, one hundred
Speaker 2: and forty five percent tariffs on all Chinese goods coming
Speaker 2: into the country, and then he went, wait a minute,
Speaker 2: I'm gonna give you some exceptions, and that is some
Speaker 2: electronic products for example, iPhones, iPads, certain chips for example.
Speaker 2: The backlash was such that people were saying, we're we're
Speaker 2: being told that iPhones were going to cost three times
Speaker 2: as much and it is. So he's okay, we won't
Speaker 2: do that, and he goes, but the tariff is still
Speaker 2: in place. It's just in a different bucket, which means
Speaker 2: all I'm doing is stop it or withholding it for
Speaker 2: a bit. The markets are just no one knows what
Speaker 2: to do with this stuff. It changes not day to day,
Speaker 2: sometimes hour by hour.
Speaker 1: Okay, let me tell you what's going on. In California.
Speaker 2: We think of illegal aliens, illegal migrants coming over the
Speaker 2: border as Hispanic Latinos Mexican primarily, but still you have
Speaker 2: Central America and they make that long trek and it's
Speaker 2: so difficult. Now it becomes impossible for them to cross
Speaker 2: the border. I mean, the one of the things about
Speaker 2: Trump is he has succeeded in effectively shutting down the border,
Speaker 2: not only physically, but making it almost impossible for anybody
Speaker 2: to claim asylum. There was an app that used to
Speaker 2: be available for migrants asking for asylum, a program that's gone.
Speaker 2: People coming over and making it across the border and
Speaker 2: then immediately being arrested, wanting to get arrested asking for
Speaker 2: asylum gone, and so this huge number of migrants coming over.
Speaker 1: Not so much anymore. Here's the demographic change Asians.
Speaker 2: For the last twenty years, more Asians have immigrated to
Speaker 2: California than Latin Americanos. And we're just starting to understand
Speaker 2: it and deal with it because it takes a long time.
Speaker 1: There are some reasons.
Speaker 2: Why we have a hard time counting. Is because the
Speaker 2: Asians come over and they are here on H one
Speaker 2: B visas, here on student visas, so everybody knows, the
Speaker 2: government knows who they are. Latinos who come in over
Speaker 2: the border fly under the radar. They don't want the
Speaker 2: government to know that they are here. You know, for example,
Speaker 2: Silicon Valley, two percent of the residents are now immigrants,
Speaker 2: where most coming from China and India.
Speaker 1: La County we still have.
Speaker 2: More immigrants from south of the border. So why Well,
Speaker 2: one of the big reasons is the technology revolution. That
Speaker 2: you have these companies who hire Indians from India dot Indians,
Speaker 2: not feather Indians. And they are highly skilled people in
Speaker 2: the technical world. And there aren't enough of those highly
Speaker 2: skilled people out there.
Speaker 1: And so what do you do. You bring in feurners.
Speaker 2: You bring in people who have the skill level who
Speaker 2: have a hard time getting jobs. Read China, read India, Taiwan,
Speaker 2: various other countries coming in and particularly Asian countries.
Speaker 1: And they're here.
Speaker 2: And Trump is saying no stopping student visas. By the way,
Speaker 2: most of the student visas that come over Latinos don't
Speaker 2: come over and go to college from south of the border.
Speaker 1: Asians coming over go to college.
Speaker 2: The UC system has forty two thousand Asians in it.
Speaker 2: And by the way, the UC system loves foreign students
Speaker 2: because they pay foreign student tuition, which is astronomical keeping
Speaker 2: the school alive. So you've got student visas, you've got
Speaker 2: h one b visus highly technical, technically skilled people that
Speaker 2: the tech companies want.
Speaker 1: And this is where you've got companies.
Speaker 2: Like Google and Apple and Meta are at odds with
Speaker 2: the president because they want to keep Elon Musk is
Speaker 2: very much at odds with the President when it comes
Speaker 2: to these kinds of visas and student visas. Why because
Speaker 2: these companies need highly skilled people and there aren't enough
Speaker 2: of them. On the other side of the coin is
Speaker 2: you have agricultural workers who are primarily Latino and let's
Speaker 2: not let them in, making it impossible for them to
Speaker 2: come over. Which understand, we've got to protect our borders,
Speaker 2: but what do you do with the great pickers and
Speaker 2: people that pick strawberries? Americans just don't do that work.
Speaker 2: And maybe it's to the point where they're going to
Speaker 2: have to pay strawberry pickers thirty five dollars an hour
Speaker 2: because that's the only way you're going to get enough people. Well,
Speaker 2: what is the cost of strawberries? What is the cost
Speaker 2: of anything? I mean, it's going to totally change everything.
Speaker 2: When we talk about President Trump changing what we know
Speaker 2: as modern America, I don't think any of the president
Speaker 2: is going to come close to making these kinds of changes.
Speaker 2: You talk about a revolution the way this country goes. Boy,
Speaker 2: that is certainly President Trump. And a lot of it
Speaker 2: has to do with a secondary issue, and that is
Speaker 2: the immigration and what jobs are going to be filled.
Speaker 2: Keep in mind, the whole point of all of this
Speaker 2: is to bring back manufacturing jobs. By the way, manufacturing
Speaker 2: jobs are not the greatest jobs either. I mean think
Speaker 2: about that. You know, you're in an assembly line. You're
Speaker 2: doing the same thing over and over and over again
Speaker 2: every day. I mean, that's fultifying. And why did anybody
Speaker 2: bitch and moan when robotics came in? You still kept
Speaker 2: American jobs at American assembly plants, but robotics just took
Speaker 2: over eliminated what ninety percent of the jobs in car
Speaker 2: assembly plants and other assembly manufacturing is going by way
Speaker 2: of technology and you can't say no to that. So
Speaker 2: it's a lot more complicated. But the bottom line is
Speaker 2: Asians okay, And you're gonna see Asians going and getting
Speaker 2: those high tech jobs. Matter of fact, if you look
Speaker 2: at the ads for jobs, look at the classified and
Speaker 2: you'll you'll see right under for example engineering, Uh, you
Speaker 2: have corporate administrators, then you have mo goo guide jobs,
Speaker 2: which is right there on the classified Okay, coming up
Speaker 2: the border patrol. Lame, pardon lame, of course, it's lame, lame,
Speaker 2: but thank you.
Speaker 1: What was my was my mi cod? Now have you
Speaker 1: been to home depot lately?
Speaker 2: And it used to be you go to home depot
Speaker 2: and there were dozens of, let you know, men who
Speaker 2: were looking for work and they would stand around. It
Speaker 2: was casual labor and the vast majority, if not all
Speaker 2: of them were illegal, and they people used to hire them.
Speaker 2: They don't now why, because there aren't any The Border
Speaker 2: Patrol in Kern County just swept a home depot. Cal
Speaker 2: Matters investigated this, and the ACLU sued, saying that the
Speaker 2: ones that were picked up, the only reason they were
Speaker 2: picked up is because they are brown.
Speaker 1: And so the lawsuit goes on and it sued.
Speaker 2: The ACLU sues saying that there was violation Fourth Amendment
Speaker 2: protection against arbitrary arrests because agents targeted people solely for
Speaker 2: looking Latino or like farm workers. And how does the
Speaker 2: government respond, Well, the government came back and said, didn't
Speaker 2: deny that it happened. By the way, didn't deny it's
Speaker 2: coming in the Border Patrol swept these police these places
Speaker 2: and arrested dozens of people, and the Department of Homeland
Speaker 2: Security said, okay, we're going to retrain. We're retrained more
Speaker 2: than nine hundred California based border patrol agents. Now they
Speaker 2: know it did not have been anything wrongdoing. They didn't
Speaker 2: do anything wrong. However, they're retraining agents, and the leader
Speaker 2: of Border Patrols Centro sector said that the agents targeted
Speaker 2: specific people with criminal and deportation histories. Now that's kind
Speaker 2: of interesting. How do they know someone that at home
Speaker 2: depot that is a criminal. Well, it turns out that
Speaker 2: calum Matters went ahead and investigated. Seventy eight people were
Speaker 2: arrested in what was called Operation Returned to Sender.
Speaker 1: I mean the great name. I mean, it's just I
Speaker 1: love the names the government. Oh my god, isn't that
Speaker 1: like an Elvis song?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I know, it's hilarious. So seventy eight people were arrested.
Speaker 2: Seventy seven of the seventy eight had no criminal no
Speaker 2: immigration issues at all, and the lawsuit says they were
Speaker 2: picked up simply because they were brown, that is illegal.
Speaker 2: So at the same time that the government said, no,
Speaker 2: that's not true, we picked up legitimately because we're looking
Speaker 2: for criminals. The DHS is arguing in court against this
Speaker 2: lawsuit that the court doesn't have jurisdiction to review border
Speaker 2: patrolled attentions, and that seems to be what's going on
Speaker 2: with the Trump administration, and that is any lawsuit that
Speaker 2: is filed. In addition to fighting the lawsuit, the argument
Speaker 2: is and the court doesn't have jurisdiction. The court has
Speaker 2: no jurisdiction over the executive branch on any matter.
Speaker 1: And that's what it is here.
Speaker 2: So in addition to saying we didn't do anything wrong
Speaker 2: and the court doesn't have jurisdiction, Senior Border Patrol official
Speaker 2: Sergio Guzman said, agents were issued updated legal guidance. The
Speaker 2: lawyers for the FED said, accordingly to the lawsuit, remember
Speaker 2: nothing wrong, We did everything right, and the courts don't
Speaker 2: have jurisdiction. So also in the statement or in the response,
Speaker 2: Border patrols prompt responsive and demonstrated commitment to forestalling similar
Speaker 2: alleged violations in the future. Renders an injunction because the
Speaker 2: ASLU asked for an injunction. An injunction right there until
Speaker 2: this thing is heard. So the renders an injunction inappropriate
Speaker 2: either as a matter of mootness, which means no one's
Speaker 2: being arrested. That's you know, it's done. So that's one thing.
Speaker 2: When you bring something in front of the court, there
Speaker 2: has to be an active case. If there is no case,
Speaker 2: if there's no one being damaged, then there is no case.
Speaker 2: And so it's a matter of mootness or lack of
Speaker 2: cognizable continued and future irrepara irrepairable injury. In other words,
Speaker 2: if nothing is happening, you can't argue injury because it's
Speaker 2: never going to happen.
Speaker 1: It's really bizarre.
Speaker 2: And they're training El Centro sector agents to make sure
Speaker 2: they don't arrest people just because they are brown. But
Speaker 2: wait a minute, we're not arresting people just because they're brown.
Speaker 2: We're arresting people because they're violating the law and they're criminals. Well,
Speaker 2: seventy seven out of seventy eight we're not criminals. Well,
Speaker 2: we're doing everything right, We've done nothing. But we will
Speaker 2: retrain our agents. Oh, by the way, you don't have
Speaker 2: the authority to tell us what to do, because the
Speaker 2: courts don't have authority over this. I gotta tell you,
Speaker 2: remember when I first said and I'm going to repeat it.
Speaker 1: Over and over again.
Speaker 2: President Trump gets re elected and we're in for a
Speaker 2: roller coaster ride.
Speaker 1: There are no guard rails now. First term, there were.
Speaker 2: He sort of paid attention to what the norms and
Speaker 2: the guard rails and the law was about. In terms
Speaker 2: of presidential actions. This time around, not even close, not
Speaker 2: even close. He has put his followers, He has put
Speaker 2: to people that are one loyal to him above anything else,
Speaker 2: and those are the people that are running the government now.
Speaker 1: I mean, that's what's happening. Okay. Now, marketing.
Speaker 2: I always find marketing fascinating, particularly in the world of food.
Speaker 1: And Twinkies is well, it's not as big as it
Speaker 1: used to be. JM.
Speaker 2: Smucker owns Twinkies, by the way, also ding Dongs and Doughnuts,
Speaker 2: and it's trying to figure out how do we get
Speaker 2: Twinkies back on the front burner. And so there's a
Speaker 2: group of people out there. There's a demographic that they're
Speaker 2: now reaching with the Munchi Mobile. The motors Mobile launches
Speaker 2: April twentieth, oh Marijuana Day to promote to promote hostess
Speaker 2: brands like the Twinkies and ding Dongs, and so clearly
Speaker 2: who are they going after. They're going after the stoners,
Speaker 2: that's who they're going after.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 2: A few weeks ago, I took a gummy thinking that
Speaker 2: it was candy.
Speaker 1: Lindsay eats gummies because she suffers her pain.
Speaker 2: Yeah, she's married to me and takes so I grabbed
Speaker 2: one thinking it was candy.
Speaker 1: I got just stoned out of my mind. So what
Speaker 1: did I do? Well?
Speaker 2: I went to the cupboard and I picked up a
Speaker 2: pack of Twinkies that I had, well, I originally bought
Speaker 2: as a teenager, and for some reason, it was packed
Speaker 2: over and over and over again. And uh, anyways, we
Speaker 2: pulled that out of a box and I dived into it,
Speaker 2: and you know what, you know what the munchies are like.
Speaker 2: But this is the first time I ever heard of a
Speaker 2: company going directly after the munchie crowd.
Speaker 3: Wait wait, wait, don't you remember that Jack in the box?
Speaker 3: I think it was Jack and Bucks did Fourth Meal.
Speaker 1: Did too?
Speaker 3: Way that it was like, wasn't talk about I can't remember,
Speaker 3: but someone did Fourth Meal late night, like basically saying, hey,
Speaker 3: when you're up late and you're smoking pot.
Speaker 2: Well they didn't say when you're smoking pot, no, but
Speaker 2: it was it was inferred. This is a straight out
Speaker 2: munchie mo deal mobile. When do you get tell me
Speaker 2: when you get the munchies? And it isn't directly connected
Speaker 2: to smoking pot.
Speaker 1: It's the munchies and they're recognizing it.
Speaker 2: And it's a big enough market that they're saying, we're
Speaker 2: going for it. And so it's not gonna be in California,
Speaker 2: it's going to be in some of the eastern seaboard
Speaker 2: states and it has to Smuckers bought this company and
Speaker 2: paid four point six billion dollars for it, and all
Speaker 2: of a sudden, maybe maybe not such a good deal.
Speaker 2: So they're scrambling and the company's Smuckers chief marketing officers said,
Speaker 2: consumers don't do three meals.
Speaker 1: A day anymore.
Speaker 2: To your point, Neil and Amy, they're actually doing mini
Speaker 2: meals throughout the day. So snacking has become something as
Speaker 2: critically important for them that is pot smokers.
Speaker 1: And so it's.
Speaker 2: Creating new products, mini version of Hostess snacks. It's going
Speaker 2: to bring back Susie cues, the steaks, I mean the cakes.
Speaker 1: Not the steaks. I feel like you know Linda McMahon here,
Speaker 1: do you?
Speaker 3: But you know, Bill, Once they get purchased and bought
Speaker 3: out and all that.
Speaker 1: The cakes have been getting smaller.
Speaker 3: Anyways, how much smaller can they make them for snack
Speaker 3: size at this point.
Speaker 1: That's a good point.
Speaker 2: And they're costing a whole lot more well, like everything else.
Speaker 2: And the company is also scheduling digital ads to pop
Speaker 2: up around snack times, around munchie times, like after lunch,
Speaker 2: after dinner, that's straight out snack time, that's not particularly
Speaker 2: stoner time, and using geo targeting technology, the ads to
Speaker 2: consumers you might be passing, driving close to a grocery store,
Speaker 2: walking near a convenience store, up comes the the.
Speaker 1: The ad up at pops.
Speaker 2: Smucker is also given hostess packaging, a sleeker designed and
Speaker 2: there's now an advertising campaign called Speaky Snacky. Oh that's
Speaker 2: going to do well, isn't it? Who came up with that?
Speaker 2: You fire someone who comes up with that.
Speaker 1: I mean, that's kind of stupid. Now here's what they're
Speaker 1: gonna do.
Speaker 2: The Munchimobile is going to drive around and this is
Speaker 2: a it goes back to the Wienermobile, going back to
Speaker 2: when I was a.
Speaker 1: Kid, still out there were little Oscar.
Speaker 2: This is for Oscar Mayer Wieners little Oscar, who was
Speaker 2: a dwarf little guy, a fat dwarf, a fat little guy,
Speaker 2: would go around and he would give out these whistles,
Speaker 2: you know, and you would go, I wish I were
Speaker 2: an Oscar Mayer Wiener and you could play that little
Speaker 2: tune on your little whistle in the shape of a
Speaker 2: hot dog, and that became iconic. Now they still have wienermobiles,
Speaker 2: and they hire college kids to spend a year driving
Speaker 2: around the country and hanging out these whistles. What the
Speaker 2: Munchimobile is gonna do is you get a free hostess
Speaker 2: snack if you recite designated phrases love I bet you
Speaker 2: dollars to donuts, I have the munchiesh again, I would
Speaker 2: fire whoever says that, But it's a phrase that pops
Speaker 2: up on social media, and it is something that if
Speaker 2: you repeat that phrase to someone in the Munchy Mobile,
Speaker 2: you get a free ding dong or you get a cupcake.
Speaker 2: All right, I can't wait to see that one.
Speaker 3: Used to be easier, Bill, when you could just you know,
Speaker 3: objectify and humiliate a little person.
Speaker 2: Do you remember that twinkies were second most to What's
Speaker 2: gonna or Who's Gonna survive? After a nuclear blast. Cockroaches
Speaker 2: were number one, Twinkies were number two.
Speaker 3: No Share was number two, and then tweekis do you
Speaker 3: remember what the original Twinkie flavor was?
Speaker 1: Well, custard was a banana, wasn't it nana?
Speaker 2: Yes?
Speaker 3: It was banana.
Speaker 1: Yep, Amy, you are gagging at this point. All right.
Speaker 2: Trial starts today and it is a big one. It's
Speaker 2: against Meta. The US government is going to trial against Meda.
Speaker 2: It's a blockbuster, a blockbuster and I trust case alleging
Speaker 2: that Meta illegally built a social networking monopoly through years
Speaker 2: of anti competitive conduct. And what happens if this If
Speaker 2: the judge rules against Meta, why not could be forced
Speaker 2: to break itself up by selling Instagram and WhatsApp? And
Speaker 2: all the other tech giants are looking and going, oh so,
Speaker 2: who is pursuing this case? The Federal Trade Commission, which
Speaker 2: has operated with historically remarkable independence. Well, those norms have
Speaker 2: blown up. Of course, while this was being put into place,
Speaker 2: While this trial was basically being put together, Zuckerberg has
Speaker 2: bent over backwards to get close to Trump, private dinners,
Speaker 2: public appearances, changes to metas platform. Zuckerberg was recently spotted
Speaker 2: at the White House April two, and New York Times
Speaker 2: and Wall Street Journal reported he was pressing Trump to
Speaker 2: resolve the FTC case. Meta donated a million dollars to
Speaker 2: Trump's inauguration. Now here's the interesting part. The case against
Speaker 2: Meta was actually started during Trump's first term, and the
Speaker 2: FTC commissioners appointed by Trump, Trump with nearly every state
Speaker 2: attorney general's office, investigated Meta's past acquisitions of Instagram and
Speaker 2: WhatsApp and filed the lawsuit in December of twenty twenty.
Speaker 1: The suit was thrown six months.
Speaker 2: Later Meta one, but the FTC, by then under Biden's appointees,
Speaker 2: came back with an even stronger complaint, and the judge
Speaker 2: assigned to the case rejected metasbids to dismiss the lawsuit.
Speaker 2: He is also presiding over the trial because there's no jury.
Speaker 1: So where does Trump come in personally?
Speaker 2: Well, he has attacked the judge as a radical left
Speaker 2: lunatic and called for his impeachment. Now, under normal circumstances,
Speaker 2: a president's personal relationships and opinions would have no bearing
Speaker 2: on a federal trial. But these are not normal times, right,
Speaker 2: He fired two Democrats on the FTC even though a
Speaker 2: nineteen thirty five Supreme Court ruling ruled that a president
Speaker 2: cannot fire any FTC commissioner without cause.
Speaker 1: They went ahead and did it. There was a sixty
Speaker 1: minute piece a few weeks ago in.
Speaker 2: Which Inspectors, General, Oversight, Committee on oversighte people on virtually
Speaker 2: every single cabinet, every single agency. They are getting fired.
Speaker 1: And these are the.
Speaker 2: People that root out the fraud. They're the ones that
Speaker 2: are there overseeing. They're independent, they oversee gone. And the
Speaker 2: law is real clearer they cannot be fired without cause.
Speaker 2: And a memo was shown, you are terminated, period, no cause.
Speaker 2: Oh there was a thank you for your service line
Speaker 2: and that was it.
Speaker 1: And so last.
Speaker 2: Year Trump acues Zuckerberg of plotting against him in twenty
Speaker 2: twenty and said if he does anything illegal this time,
Speaker 2: he's going to spend the rest of his life in prison,
Speaker 2: as well as others who cheat in the twenty twenty
Speaker 2: four presidential election.
Speaker 1: This is in anticipation of the election.
Speaker 2: So we're going to see what happens against While Trump
Speaker 2: is sort of kind of befriending Zuckerberg, Zuckerberg has been
Speaker 2: at the White House, has been at mar A Lago.
Speaker 2: Trump is still sitting back and at this point, the
Speaker 2: FTC is going balls to the wall against Meta, and
Speaker 2: we'll see what happens.
Speaker 1: Because you never know what the president is going to do.
Speaker 1: No one has any idea.
Speaker 2: I don't know if he has any idea what he's
Speaker 2: going to do tomorrow when he goes to bed tonight.
Speaker 1: Okay, coming up the next election.
Speaker 2: The next election is now being attacked, and I'll explain
Speaker 2: why that is going on.
Speaker 1: These are such strange days. It's like impossible to keep
Speaker 1: up with him.
Speaker 2: I'll talk about that, and then a story about grandparents
Speaker 2: and a personal issue.
Speaker 1: I'm sort of, you know.
Speaker 2: Dealing with it with my daughter Barbara, who wants to
Speaker 2: be a mom. Oh god, seriously, I know parents like
Speaker 2: having grandparents, you know, with their kids.
Speaker 1: I don't get it. I don't get it.
Speaker 2: I'm offering her a lot of money not to be
Speaker 2: a mother, and that is going up and up and up.
Speaker 2: She's negotiating and doing a great job. We'll be back
Speaker 2: KFI am six. You've been listening to The Bill Handle Show.
Speaker 2: Catch my show Monday through Friday, six am to nine am,
Speaker 2: and anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app.