Native Lamb Pod is the production of iHeartRadio in partnership with Reezing Choice Media.

Welcome Home, y'all, Episode one O two of Native Lamb pot where we break down things that are all political and dip into the culture and boy ol boy, did we set off a discussion this week?

We are going to get into all of that on this episode.

I am your co host Tiffany Cross here with Angela Rye, Andrew Gillum and Bacari Sellers.

Bakari, we are told is having some technical difficulties.

You guys know, he's a very hard working trial attorney.

He's in trial at the moment, so he joins us on this podcast from his office and he is having some technical difficulties.

So we have seen him, we've heard from him, and he rumor has it he'll be making an appearance on the show eventually once he gets his dial up fixed.

I think that's his dialupe.

Beyonce would never have done.

Okay, Well, while we wait on Bakari, what are we getting into on the show today?

Angel what you got?

Well?

If we move beyond to beef, I think that we really need to talk about another beef that I have and the beef that I have is with the way that Donald Trump continues to use this government as a bank account, rolling bank account while everybody else is frozen out.

So he's asking the Department of Justice for restitution for crimes he says he doesn't he didn't commit.

Wow, Okay, I have thoughts on that, Andrew, what do you got?

I hear that Mayor Brandon Johnson of the Great City of Chicago issued a different kind of challenge during this No Kings set of protests over the weekend, and I actually wonder if we have as a community the stomach for it.

We're here about that and hopefully get into a little conversation.

All right, Well, Butcari wanted to talk about something with the Congressional Black Caucus, So if we have time for that, we might have to do that on a mini pod next week.

But I know he did reference that, and I want to get into this what's going on with snap benefits.

I think that'll probably come up in your conversation.

And I know, Angela, you did a whole on the government shut down.

I just want to tell people what's happening there, and I want to stress that we this week have certainly heard from a lot of you.

We looked at all your comments, and so we're going to be joined by Charlemagne the God Lenara McKelvey, host of the Breakfast Club, who had his own thoughts about what we shared and quite frankly disagreed with the discussion and wants to come on and join and share his thoughts on what anti intellectualism is to him.

And so I think that will be a very spirited discussion.

So stay tuned for that conversation.

But for now, let's kick off the show.

I oh, I think Beyonce is in the building.

AOL, AOL dial.

Up, get fixed, Bacary, Like, what's going on?

Man?

Look, this is called this is called Orangeburg, South Carolina.

We welcome to the.

Technological Okay, Well, we just went through our rundown on what we want to talk about.

And I know that you had mentioned that you wanted to talk about something with the Congressional Black Caucus.

I wasn't clear, So you should tell the viewers.

Yeah, No, I mean I think that people need to understand that the Congressional Black Caucus is at risk.

I think that you know what's going on with the rulings in the Supreme Court and what you're seeing throughout the South.

Many of your CBC members are at risk of having their seats either squashed, cut in half, or disappeared.

So it's something we need to raise awareness about, you know what.

And that reminds me.

We did get a really great viewer question on section two of the Voting Rights Act, so I'd love for you and Andrew to weigh in on those.

For now, I have to.

Tell you, I'm really concerned with Donald Trump asking for restitution from the Department of Justice.

Can you explain to people exactly what that is.

Explain it to me like a five year old, because I'm still.

Following well for those who had forgotten, because there it feels like we've lived a decade in the last ten months.

Donald Trump, before he was elected president in twenty twenty four, was charged with ninety one different counts, different felony counts.

They ended up dropping three.

It was reduced down to eighty eight and he was convicted.

I think it was it was it thirty two felonies on the state level.

Now he's saying because all of the cases that were that were mounted against him, brought by the federal government, brought by the Department of Justice.

They were thrown out.

He now wants restitution.

But see here here, here's how it goes.

Friend, Just because the case was thrown out doesn't mean that it was a malicious or selective prosecution.

It was thrown out because you're lawyers, not you, Tiff.

I'm just looking at you, Tiff.

But his lawyers said, you know what we're gonna challenge forget civil immunity.

We're gonna go for criminal immunity for anyone who served as president.

That means that you cannot be liable, convicted, charged for any criminal rondoing if you did it under the auspices of be being president of these United States.

So the charges that he no longer faced federally were because they could no longer bring those cases because he's now criminally immune.

That's what the Supreme Court decided.

So he said, let me take it a step further with my white privilege.

Let me see if since I was never tried, or since the cases were thrown out, can I get you to run me my money that's not mine?

So he said, tif, you pay it to this taxpayer bucket.

I want your money to come to my pockets now and pay two hundred and thirty million dollars of restitution for these charges that I wasn't convicted of.

Again, not because he didn't do it, just but just because he's immune.

He's trying to see.

How far he the judges to the Supreme Court that decided imune.

Yes, that's true as well what he did, that's true as well.

But the thing that is yes, no, but it's but it's true as well.

And I think the other thing that's important to understand is the Florida judge who he did appoint also Andrew not just the Supreme Court justices, but Eileen Cannon said they that they've made two separate claims.

No, they've I'm sorry, I'm so sorry.

I'm looking at the wrong thing.

They that they've made.

In the case of mar A Lago Judge Eileen Cannon, who ruled in favor of Donald Trump on some very controversial issues.

The one thing that Judge Cannon, who he appointed, did not rule on was that the search of his mar A Lago compound was improper or violated his rights.

So let's say that there was some wrongdoing which would be the reason for restitution.

There was none, and so he just says, let.

Me just see if because there's a gray area or a place where it's silent, I can now recover something.

He claims that what he would do with the money is that for that east wing that he's now torn down, he's over there destroying the White House and Kseyawn missed it.

For that east wing, I'm going to use that money to build out this grand ballroom that the country so desperately needs in the middle of a shutdown.

This sounds like, man, he's not planning on leaving the White House with maccari.

Let me ask you, how likely is this to happen?

Like, do we think that he will actually get two hundred and thirty million dollars of taxpayer money and restitution based on what Angela just said?

He should not.

Angela highlighted something that was very important about the reasoning, the legal reasonings why he should not and the indictment to regurgitate a little bit wasn't tossed out because of some finding of malicious prosecution.

The timeline goes the indictments were actually just and prudent based upon what the prosecutor believed.

However, subsequently, the challenges to presidential immunity were made to the Supreme Court and that expanded, and I think that timeline is very important.

And so you know, it becomes a weird question.

So does he pardon himself?

Is that necessary to happen?

The conflict is inherent, But as we know, the conflict of interest is now or bothered this White House because ultimately, and this is why I'm hesitant about saying no to the question that you asked Tiffany, Ultimately, the decision made about who's going to pay out that Tort Claim Act is going to come from the Department of Justice, where we see there is no separation.

There is some unique case law over who can bring a tort claims a case which is what this falls under, is called the Federal FTCA Federal Tort Claims at case.

And you know there are intentional acts that you can file a case against the federal government for you can just actually file a notice and those cases can be resolved on the basis of that notice.

And so I really don't know this is this like many other things we deal with, this unprecedented novel ground.

But if there was some level of ethics, the answer would be no.

And this would be something that you probably wouldn't even bring up right now if you're a president of the United States.

But I wouldn't be surprised if you got a check written on the backs of tax pack.

Everyone's seen Andrew.

Yes, he's gonna get the money, just as he achieved the prosecution of the people he told the US Attorney General to prosecute.

She turned around and she prosecuted them.

I don't think there's any with the respect to all the legal leaf.

I don't think that there is any respect towards the law whatsoever.

And I don't even believe that there's any respect towards the process.

If the president tweets that he ought to get his money back from his appointed attorney general for cases that, in his words, should have never been bought and that he was never found guilty of, and of course you've heard the reasoning as to why those things didn't need to play themselves out.

I think he's going to get exactly what he asked for, period.

And he's telling the American people that he's going to achieve these things, and he's so gratuitous with his winnings that he's going to put it right back in the American government on an expense the American people didn't ask for, were not budget through the budgeting process, but that we're decided by the president.

And I think he's going to get him and I think he'll get his money back to and if you should choose to redivert that two hundred and forty million back to his own pocket at some point, I'm sure he'll figure way to make that happen as well.

I think this is a White House unconstrained, the president, unconstrained, the Attorney General unconstrained.

I just hope, and I hope, and I hope, and I say this with the beliefs that it will happen, that there'll be a day after Donald Trump, and if the people who then have executed and excavated and worked around and buried underneath the laws will know that those laws will be back to haunt them one day too.

I just want to say one other thing that I think is if we're in b I see you, and I will yield in just a second.

Donald Trump is maintaining that any decision about whether or not he gets restitution or not will be based upon or This means that the decision will absolutely come across his desk, so he thinks that Pam BONDI will decide is the decider, and then he will sign off on it.

The one flag that I have is that DJ is saying that they will defer to the career prosecutors at DJ.

The problem is they're firing those, so he just will hire new you know, a career folks.

And now I think that's the other problem.

Yeah, I know you're about to say something, you know, Yeah.

I mean, I have a really unique relationship with Merrick Garland.

But this is when the criticism of Merrick Garland comes into play full front of.

You should have him come on the show.

I think, I mean, I think I will.

Merrick Garland is a unique figure because I've actually seen him work.

I worked diligently and closely with Merrick Garland and the biggest civil rights case that I had, Merrick Garland had to literally go over to the FBI building and meet with Christopher Ray at the time so that they would settle the Mother Emanuel case.

It was eighty eight million dollars paid out to one of the most violent civil rights cases we've ever seen in the history of this country.

I saw him spend time with those families.

I saw him move mountains to make justice work.

But then, you know, the flip side is you see what happens when justice moves too slowly and when justice has what is somewhat of a level of cowardice when it comes to taking on those who need to be prosecuted.

Because if Marion Garland prosecuted Donald Trump the way we see other dignitaries and other countries prosecuted, we wouldn't be here, Which brings me to my second point, which is Democrats are going to have to have the courage in twenty twenty eight to run on the fact that they are going to prosecute those individuals who profoundly flaunted the law and not do what democrats do, which is just to say America wants to turn the page, let's wash our hands at this and not mention it.

And so I think they looking back at history is that great is a great metric for looking forward at what we should expect from our especially people running for president of the United States.

It's just frightening to me.

I you know, America introduced that the ridiculous term banana Republic because it was really you know, making fun of Latin countries for corruption, but when you look at how they've handled their corrupt leaders.

Argentina prosecuted their former president.

We saw the same thing in Brazil at Bolsonaro.

And to look at this happening here in America.

For us as black folks, I think we've always viewed it as a very corrupt country.

We've never looked at this government.

It's something that was on the up and up.

But to see it so brazenly and blatantly taking place before our eyes, I just I still question every single day, six months from now, what will I regret not doing today.

You know, we are seeing a country that arrests his political enemies.

We are seeing a country that calls for the killing of people who host ai videos of him literally taking a shit on protesters while wearing a queen tat, not a king, not a king's crown, a queen crown.

So I you know, I don't know.

I'm just very distraught seeing these things take place before our eyes every single day.

It's incredibly frightening.

Andrew, I mean, the only surprise here is that he waited this long for the grift.

You would have thought, being Donald Trump, being Donald Trump, that he would have went for the money first.

To be quite honest with you, I never thought that him trying to make himself whole from the legal cases that he well earned in this country was going to be so delayed.

I really thought that it'd be in the front door.

He would excuse himself the charges and get his money, rather get his money and maybe then excuse himself for the charges.

But one thing that I think the American people know to be clear about this man is he is very clear on the grift.

He is always coming for the money.

Always follow the money with the man.

He's coming for it.

This is not an afterthought for Donald Trump.

This was probably a before thought that somebody convinced him to integrate a little later into the game.

But he was always coming for the pocket.

Oh well, we have we have a lot to get to on the show today, and we still have our conversation coming up with Charlemagne and God.

So I want to close us out on this.

But I have to say I've been looking at some of the archives of interviews I did five or six years ago, and it's amazing what we knew about Donald Trump then.

And it feels like America has failed an open book test.

We knew then that he was corrupt.

We knew then that in the first few months of the administration his family made over eighty billion dollars off a grift on the government.

So it's frightening to see this.

But I always like to make sure that we include our viewers.

You for watching and listening, so thank you for sending in your videos.

And we have one question now on section two of the Voting Rights Act, so let's get to that.

Hi, Native Lamb, my husband and I just said us watching the episode, the latest episode one oh one, and we're trying to figure out his voters at voters Section two.

He broke it down for me, gave me a better understanding vot he thinks.

But we just want to.

Make sure that we understand correctly why the Supreme Court is hearing this case and how will it affect the black community.

So you can break it down for us and lamor lamess terms, that would be amazing.

I don't know if it's a good guest or not, but it looks like she and her husband in the middle of a workout and they're discussing our show.

As I want to appreciate them for working us into that and this is not different, Bacardi, than what you were mentioning at the at the earlier part of the show.

You know, Section two is the part of the Voting Rights Act where essentially it allows for communities of sort of shared interests to be able to make the choice of their choosing.

And to put that another way, it's one of the few ways in which the the Constitution and its subjugate amendments along the way allows for people's race to really be considered in there and in its representation.

We know already through the weakening of Section two that the that the Court, at least as it's made up right now, is permitting gerrymandering or at least lines to be drawn, congressional lines to be drawn based off of how a party can gain political advantage.

But it has come short of allowing lines to be drawn that basically allow for uh communities of color and communities of shared interest to be chopped up, to be reduced, to be manipulated in such a way that they lose representation or access to representation and its seats in Congress.

And I'm getting why this is actually so difficult for a lot of people to understand.

And I didn't have to look any further than thinking about the state of Florida, wherever the last several years, Ronda Santis has basically gotten rid of black access seats all around the state of Florida and Central Florida and North Florida, made attempts in South Florida where previously these were seats were unambiguously held by black elected officials who won them through a court's consent decree, a court's instruction that these seas be created.

Donald Trump Junior or Ronda Santis has decided summarily to go through and redraw these lines, splitting black people out of the district, creating districts that are more super white with shreds or shards of black people represented in them, where the end result is that you cannot elect a black person to Congress based off of who gets to vote in those elections.

So where we now find ourselves is that because this has happened in so many places, think about the states of Mississippi, of Alabama in some cases, the attempts that are being made in Georgia, but all over the South where you have black folks who are I don't know, a third of the population that come close to forty or fifty percent of the population of a place, but somehow, when it comes to their congressional representation, of six seats that are available to that state, only one of them has a Black representative in them, even though black people are more than forty percent of a state's population.

You understand, the point that we're trying to make is that you can have enough black people in a state to create a significant minority, but those votes are never enough to create I don't know, out of a state of six seats, two or three of those seats being Black access seats.

So this is not a crisis for a lot of people in America anymore, because they have had to live through instances where our seats have been slowly but surely taken down, and, to Begardi's point earlier in the show, eventually going to be taken out such to the point that we may not even have a representative congressional Black caucus in the US Congress anymore.

That's what I wanted to ask Andrew, So sorry for interrupting, but you're kicking it right over to Bikari Bakari.

I mean, was that the point that you were making is that what you mean that we could literally be looking at no more Congressional Black Caucus, which I would imagine potentially means no more tricoccus, no more k pak, no more cecio.

I mean, I mean, I use some some sensationalistic language.

I mean, but the number of black members will go down exponentially.

I mean you'll be talking about districts like I think the sixth Congressional district in South Carolina, where I say it is probably the best example.

After Jim Cliburn leaves.

You can maneuver that district in places that you know that district is now twenty five percent black, and there there's an argument that you know, it makes other districts more competitive, but what we do know is that that would be one less CBC member, and you'll see that happen throughout the South in particular.

And then you know, just to add a little cruelty, which sometimes that is the point, you just put two black people in one district and make them negroes fight it out.

And that is happening, if I'm not mistaken.

In South Florida, it's actually w Washman shows and a black Yeah debut Watchman shows and what's my other member's name, But it's certainly.

What's happening in Texas.

It's definitely worth what's happening in Texas right now?

Yeah, yeah, exactly exactly.

So you're seeing those things, and yes, I shout out to watching the show, I appreciate you.

But those are those are the results of the actions that are taking place right now, I could.

Say, quickly, very quickly, I just want to emphasize the difference between Section two and Section five, which we no longer have.

Section two was preclearance, states that had a pattern in practice of discrimination had to submit their plans, their voter plans ahead of time to get approval, and Section two now rest on the burden rest on the voter to prove that they were deprived of this of being able to exercise their franchise and being able to elect a representative of their choice.

There was a three part test in the Gingles case that Janey Nelson shout out to Jenney, we already talked to her last week, referenced in her oral arguments last week.

I won't go through that three part test, but that is also available for people to understand.

So now all of the.

Burdens for black folks, brown folks who want to see themselves protected, voting rights protected, they have to rely on Section two if the Supreme Court doesn't also gut that, which is it is looking like?

And Jennae Nelson, of course runs the NAACPLDF and as a black woman who argued before the Supreme Court, antiplated a great interview with her.

If you haven't seen it, you should check it out.

Only one it out, okay?

I haply saying that the government right now would be the agency that has the grounds for legitimacy to bring these cases to the court on behalf of the voters.

That is the piece that the US Supreme Court delayed taking additional action on the supp If the course should come to the conclusion that the government is the only entity that can argue that a state is out of line with any with any how do you say failty to the law, then if we were relying on Donald Trump's judiciary to bring that case, those cases would never come Why Because Pambondy in this case has decided against the standard government position.

She's now on the other side of the government's.

Arguments state governments.

Andrew, just for clarity, is the state governments.

They're bringing it, and we're also up a crete there.

All I'm saying is that the federal government's previous position, all the way up until Pambondi's administration here was always on this was the government's position, wasn't upholding these respective standards of the law.

If their position now is to collapse those to say, the state government is right to have no argument on the other side, and then the states and then the West Supreme Court says that these cases cannot be bought by interest groups anymore, like the like Janey and what she's doing at the Legal Defense Fund.

If they no longer are a party to this, who is going to bring the legal cases on our behalf?

Yeah, exactly, that is a question, right, Okay, Andrew was always profound.

So I hate to cut you off because I wanted to hear what you had to say, But because our show is so so packed, I do want to shift us along because I'm coming right back to you, Andrew, because on the other side of this break, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson has quite the charge for society.

We're going to get into that right after this.

Stay tuned.

My ancestors as slaves can lead the bravest general strait in the history of this country.

Operations we can, Gooby said, today people people well people to people people relations.

We are makeupations to boss to live on because of this generation.

Are you letting to take it to a book to the snake?

He ain't net a lampid.

My name is Andrea.

I am originally from Cleveland, Ohio, but I've been living in Fort Worth, Texas for the past almost ten years, and I wanted to pick y'all brains about Mayor Brandon Johnson's call for a general strike during the No King's protests this past Saturday on October eighteenth.

I think that that was a very bold move by an elected official, especially during the times of like this administration.

And I also think that him calling for the general strike on a national stage, even though a general strike is nothing new, it's not a new concept, but I think he's probably one of the few elected officials who has called for a general strike to meet this moment.

Also, I think that in this moment, as Bakari and Tiffany had the conversation that during the one hundredth episode about the relationship between black men and black women and how Bakari stated that, you know, black men don't really get a chance to breathe and lead.

I feel like think this is a perfect opportunity.

I feel like Mayor Brendan Johnson has put the call to action out and I think it is a perfect opportunity for black men to meet the moment.

I think that's you, Andrew.

Oh, well, there's the resident black man not meeting moments.

Now what that meant?

I take her at her words, and I appreciate everything she had to say and the question the framing.

I appreciate also the seriousness by which she interpreted the mayor's comments.

I don't think it got covered in real broad swaths of American media that a general strike had been called for by the mayor of Chicago.

It's one of the largest municipalities in the country.

He sits at one of the most powerful purchases of political power, and he did admonish us to hold corporations accountable for their complicity in the moment.

I thought it was powerful.

I honestly, I wish that it was accompanied by more fanfare, that more people said what a thing was similar to what this viewer did.

I question if the American people are prepared to demonstrate the kind of appetite for resistance that we say not just in a weekend's protest, but in a day in and a day out, weekend, week out, month and month out, resistance toward putting our financial dollars behind a system and behind a set of systems and corporations who have fallen fidal to this autocratic form of government, who basically saying we're okay with this so long as we keep making money, or we're okay with it so long as our deals toward consolidation of company X and Y still go forward.

Or you saw with Salesforce, one of the most impactful companies in this country, the chairman of their foundation board back up, and basically, I don't recognize Benioff, don't recognize the person who I thought I was in good company with accomplishing good things for the American people when you agree with the President sending the National Guard into the excuse me, into the city of San Francisco.

So I'll just double down on compliments for Mayor Johnson on his call, and I would just hope similar to how we've seen our brother in Atlanta helped to to to that's Jamal Bryant.

That is to create a framework around what protests out to look like, what impact ought to look like.

That there's some people who are part of that movement who are willing to put pen to paper to sketch a to sketch a resistance and what that resistance looks like.

That might help to build the appetite amongst American people to say, you know what, I am willing to put my money where my mouth is, where my where my street shoes are, and say I can protest not just for days resistance, but I can protest for the next foreseeable future so that we can still have the democracy if we can keep it.

Angela, what do you?

What do you?

I have so many questions I want to hear you.

At thoughts fars Well, just a few things.

The first thing is, you know, since we.

Talk about black intellectualism at least over the last couple podcasts, I've been thinking a lot about the approach.

We've talked before about Congressman Rangel saying whether or not we took the right path and in our liberation from economic roots versus social roots.

We think about the beefs that is, like we didn't create beefs y'all believe that, believe it or not, between Booker T.

Washington and w E b DU Boys or w E b DU Boys and Marcus Garvey and all of the others Jay Z and oas right, all the others that have existed.

And I think that what comes to mind is that ultimately most of us, I say, ninety five percent of us agree that black people need to be free in this country.

We often disagree on the means.

And I was looking at.

Stuff on the General Strike and like, why wb DU Boys says that it was enslaved people and their general strike that really resulted in our emancipation, and so have we since.

And I had thought about it because of what Brandon said at the top of his remarks, which was like, it was our ancestors and the general strike that led to our freedom.

So I was like, I know that from somewhere, and then I was like, Oh, it's w B DU Boys, who I just so I happen to talk about.

But the thing is in Black Reconstruction in America, he has an entire chapter on the General Strike.

And I wonder, if we don't take this moment you keep saying to if we need to go back and read books, but read the book for how it applies in this moment.

What is the lesson that we can learn the call to action from the various scholarly pieces that exist, and if it's quotes from people who didn't necessarily write books, but they were an essential part of different movements and movement building.

What is the role of the black person in labor, you know, not just the person in black labor leadership, but the actual dues paying labor union members.

Educator, Yeah, what's the role of all of us?

The commentator, you know, the influencer, who's the creative content producer, whatever it is.

What is the role that we must play in this moment?

And if we are to strive towards a general strike, do we have commonality around understanding for what that means at that point?

That's not just a boycott of a business and withholding your dollar for Black Friday or Christmas Eve.

Now we're talking about workers saying if you don't respect my labor, I don't respect your business and I'm not going to go.

Do we feel that our people are willing to sacrifice their paycheck they're going to work?

Is a strike?

Right like it is saying I'm withholding my labor.

I'm not just withholding my dollar and supporting your business.

I'm saying that since you don't respect my personhood, you also are not going to be a benef You're not gonna be gonna be a beneficiary of my labor.

I'm going to deprive you of that because now we're at a crossroads where, you know, it's not just about democracy anymore, it's literally about my ability to survive in this space.

It is dangerous, it's as risky.

Well it sounds even privileged that that would even be a question.

Well, but you know, but I think that W.

E.

B.

Du Bois at the time would argue it was not privileged for enslaved people to withhold their labor.

It was a matter of survival.

And so then the question becomes, are we at that type of crossroads where now our labor and are withholding that labor as risky and as sacrificial as it is, is that the only way that we'll truly see liberation in this country?

Well?

WB.

De Boys was also criticized at the time.

I mean, he you know, and this is of course post slavery, where he, you know, was leading a cause and always thought that there would be a path in this country where black folks could be accepted.

You know, he was saying, like, no black people.

He wasn't saying withhold your labor.

He was saying, go participate in this system, go fight in this war, because then if you do that, you will they cannot deny you.

They cannot deny your citizenship, they cannot deny your equal rights.

Of course, he later changed that changes, right, Yeah, he changed his attitude.

But I'm just saying at the time when he was saying that there they had be for real, and Marcus Garvey said of w E B du boys, this is the white man's nigga.

Y'all listening to you.

And so I just think at this time I would have a hard time telling somebody, yeah, withhold your labor and don't get that paycheck, you.

Know, because that's the very thing Brandon is coming for.

I agree, this is why I have questions about it.

And so I'm just trying to think realistically, what does it look like for us to not only withhold our labor, because now we're talking about with hold our participation in this white constructed society, and so any and anytime I think about that, I think, Okay, we build our own communities, we live off the grid, you know, we grow our own food.

And when that has happened, they've come and destroyed our communities.

They've literally burned them down.

At me, just Tulsa, I mean, we can go over more than fifty.

You can look up the Red Summer of nineteen nineteen, which predated Tulsa, of course, and look at all the cities, all the white violence, all the despotism that we've survived.

So again I would ask us, is this a time to flee?

That doesn't to me that is perhaps an act of violence, or not an act of violence, an act of resistance.

But I really stay well, I was to teeing that up to get Andrew's perspective on this, only because for me, I only have me, you know, like I do have family, but what I don't have is a spouse and children, school systems to worry about.

I guess health care.

Health care isn't an issue for me, but like healthcare systems, not just for myself, but because other people.

I will you say that what does that really look like?

And that is a real last question, and how and Andrew you're in Florida, You're in the belly of the beast, Like, at what point or I don't know, just your thoughts on all of it.

I was gonna say, at what point, Well.

Rebirth the beast.

Yeah, the parents of the beast.

We are the beast.

Some people say he is a dick of the country, but that's another Well, you know, there's that.

So, first of all, I do think the amount of racial consolidation around this idea, in order for success to be had in all, you know, points across this land would be significant.

White people would have to find themselves as at risk as many of us find ourselves at risk, I think to participate.

I wonder whether or not the appetite for that exists, and I mean for a general strike.

Right, So we're talking about at all levels of society, largely against the owners, right, the same owners who helped us develop these narratives of these very meaningless, bifurcated meritives, narratives on the workplace that put black and white people and black and white bodies at strife toward each other.

Anyway, Right, I'm gonna give you a title and a promotion without any financial increase, just so that we can keep the turbulence between blacks and white so that we can be sure that you'll never find the same side with each other.

You'll never end up fighting on the same side, because we've now created a level of difference between you, and that difference now will always exists.

So are folks who are who were susceptible to that kind of divide before?

Are they going to be equally as succeptable to it?

Are they willingly?

Are they going to be willingly able to walk away from their jobs, their workplaces, and the places that they patronize frankly out of solidarity with the kind But they don't see it as the country right now because they only you know, because but for their favorite late night comedian, they hadn't seen themselves in the crosshairs of its.

Impacts talk about it.

So are they now willing to see themselves truly in the crosshairs of the impact and are now willing to lay their bodies on the line?

And I mean their physical bodies.

I don't know how we get a general strike that is successful if once again it relies on black and brown bodies to lay themselves at the sacrifice of everything horrible that happens in society and whatever little good that they are able to extract from society so that everybody else gets to be the benefactor of their of their sacrifice.

I do well really quick.

I just want to say, Andrew, we're not making you the sole black man here.

As you guys know, Bakari joins this podcast while he's in trial, so he had to run to court, but he will be joining us for our interview with Charlemagne and the God, which is coming up right after this segment, So don't go anywhere.

I just wanted to let folks know why Bakari wasn't weighing in.

He had to run, but he's coming right back for that important conversation.

I think the other thing that we might need to consider is, like you know, just like anything else, is just focusing on not leaving the country, but on this general strike concept.

There is something to be said about the privilege piece that you mentioned.

And one thing that I would love to see My dad has been saying this for years and every time something goes down, particularly in athletics, my dad is like, I wish the players would do X, Y or Z.

And one thing that comes to mind here is It would be incredible, Like the NBA.

Just opened up.

It's a preseason over game opener, you know, just a couple of days ago.

It would be dope to see entire teams say, until my personhood is respected, until my community's respected, until democracy is no longer compromised.

I don't have anything for you.

And what would it take to organize players around that, Whether it's the NBA, the MLB, or the NFL, what would it take for them to say, like at a pivotal moment, whether it's a season opener, it is right before playoffs start, like until we get some things done.

And I wonder really if they know their power or if they could if they're willing, like we keep saying, you know, it would be a sacrifice for maybe these hourly wage workers.

I know it would be sacrificial as well for players who support their whole families.

But I don't know where the buck stops.

No pun intended, right, It's like it has to stop somewhere.

So if the Miszoo athletes could come together, the football players and say we're organizing with other students on campus and administration at Maszoo until you hear what they're saying we can't play for y'all.

It turned immediately.

I think there's so much of what we're fighting against and protesting and people are carrying signs and banners and bullhorns for that.

If a few of the elites, yeah, and by that I.

Mean people who actually made it's a professional leagues said we're not going to do this with you until you respect us in this way.

I think that could be well a general strike that that could at least kick it off.

Can I ask you then, because we've had this conversation, how do you square that with Because somebody could argue Jay Z's partnership with the NFL, he's providing entertainment for.

This, like does like how do you square that with?

Like?

Does he have a role to play in saying because he said we're beyond protesting.

You know, that was part of the discord I think was he and Colin Kaepernick.

A small clip of what he said.

He said beyond kneeling, and I think he was talking about I think he said right after that that it's time to stand up and take us right.

But his intention was we were beyond what Colin Kaepernick was doing.

He was trying to take the next step.

In conversation with Colin Kaepernick, he has had pushback on that, of course, But I wonder as we talk about that, the people who are in a position like that, should they be leading an effort to get athletes to stop playing or leading an effort to provide aner tayment for the Super Bowl delivering a political political message.

And it's not either one and again or both in I agree, and I think that what I'm saying is what we keep doing.

And I really think this is where we shoot ourselves in the proverbial foot.

We keep trying to get one entity, one person of influence, one person of power, to be all things to all of us, and I don't think that's their role.

There.

The people who would most likely be the most influential with athletes to get them to sit down are the veterans in the league.

Are the people who they like, the people who are the old heads in the league, like they're yeah, they're they're veterans.

So, but I'm not talking about I see what you think they're They're not.

They're no longer out of the military.

I'm talking about people who are old.

And then also the people who have tried it.

It's been so long, but it would have been like a Muhammad Ali.

There are a lot of folks who went back to learn from Muhammad Ali.

It would have been a Jim Brown before he changed.

I said, before he changed, what would have been those folks.

It's the it's the the John Carlos Is and the Times Smith.

Why did you take this approach?

And what did you sacrifice in doing that?

And can I stomach that?

Am I brave enough to do?

Yeah?

I've seen by the top one percent ever, and certainly not one towards the success.

This is This is why coon tycoons tycoons of industry, is why Henry Ford decided that his best tactic was going to be to separate the proletariat, to put one man who feels equal next to this the other man that feels equal.

Because in my experience, having you know, watched these things, I don't know that there's a lot of common cause between me and the top one percent of athletes in this country or the top earners who are largely who largely constitute the who largely make up the players of the National Basketball League.

But I'm actually also not looking for enemies here.

I think we want friends on all sides.

Andrew, can't you see where.

It could drive?

Just let me just let me just ask you this really quick.

Can you see where the.

People who are the players are more like the laborers and the owners are more like the heads of corporations?

Well, they are, they are they literally they literally have unions, not at all.

Because regular people are usually unionizing over the ability to put food on the table from one check to the next.

And I think when you sit at this is why you know what folks are like?

Well, what about athletes such and such and such, And why wouldn't he be against a ross holding a fund raiser for Trump because he would be a guest and invited guests at such a dinner.

Because that's the that is the strata in which people roll.

And I just don't think that our shared race can can, can can can any longer be a topical connection between uh us as a group of people.

We we are not we are not advocating for the same things in the tax bracket because we're not in acted by the same things in the tax bracket.

The reason why I can see that fifty cent comes down differently on his politics toward a bush or toward a Trump and then where I could ever come down, it's because we don't.

Our pocketbooks don't look the same, our checks don't look the same.

And I think power corrupts absolutely, and in this day and age, power is in so many ways interpreted by your money, not by who you can call them the cell phone necessarily, but by how much money you have.

That that's the trading card, that's the currency.

I think we have better if we could get over this big issue of race.

I think our better cause is going to be toward the man or the woman I'm standing next to earning similar amount to being separated by superficial differences that are no differences at all, and for them to wake up and realize that the same enemy we're trying to withhold our services from are the same ones who have their foot on your neck too.

And I just think it's harder for wealthy people to see that with other wealthy people.

I think it's an easier, easier, common, a common reframe that working folks see in other working people.

But you know what, can I failed at this Booker T.

Washington failed that all of those who tried to move this argument to be one of economics have almost always failed at this, largely funded by the big pooh bahs who have made the issue about race right.

Every time we talk about money, they want to talk about race.

Every time we have a share ground, they want to change the narrative to one that's more superficial in nature to keep us from grasping at the thing we know we share.

The most that can.

I just say, this is why I love our conversations because we all have very different perspectives.

I don't know that I have a perspective here, but I'm curious about you all's perspective because I'm looking for guidance here.

This is not an area where I can lead.

You know, I'm not either.

I'm trying to figure out out.

But you say that, but you do.

I think you do have like charging orders like you do say like here's what I think we should do when people ask me.

I try because the things haven't worked.

But even even having an idea like here's what we should try, I think that is something that's needed.

Andrew, you have like very clear positions on this.

So I just love when I get to listen on this podcast and learn something.

So I really learned from you guys, I'm sorry, but Cary has to run the court.

But he's literally running back right now because it is time for us to move along and finally get to that conversation that we've talked about all show.

Charlemagne the God is going to join us for this conversation to talk about anti black intellectualism and get his take.

I define an intellectual not based on how much a person knows, but I define an intellectual as someone who has a tremendous desire to know, someone who's incredibly curious, someone who loves the question.

And there are these curious people with tremendous desires to know, who are incarcerated, who are houseless, who are in c suites, who are in universities, who are dropouts, they're everywhere.

And these people who are everywhere I define as intellectuals.

And I define a black intellectual as not only a black person with a tremendous desire to know, but a black person who is seeking to acquire knowledge for power.

Not knowledge for knowledge's sake, but knowledge for power's sake.

Man, that was powerful.

I mean I think that I think we all agree he is the definition of an intellectual.

And none other than Ebram Candy.

Shout out to my brother for always speaking truth to power.

Speaking of someone who I love and a door speaks truth to power.

Always very very curious.

We have none other than Charlemagne, the god I think Angela.

You call him by his full government, but I call him Charlemagne.

That's what we call him down in Monk's Quarter, That's what we call him up and down twenty six.

So Charlemagne, welcome to the show, my brother.

How you feel, Cary, what's up, my brother?

How are you?

I just heard your name.

I was with us ce Sue Williams earlier.

He said your name.

Cecil Williams for y'all who don't know, is one of the greatest civil rights photographers that we've ever seen.

I challenge everybody to google see Sir Williams and then check out his museum.

He had the legendary picture he just walked New York Fashion Week and he has the picture of him drinking out of a whites only water fountain.

And since we're doing something right here, make sure y'all go and contribute to Cecil Williams Museum in Orangeburg, South Carolina.

It's those type of artifacts of relics of our community that we need to make sure we support.

So can I Saycary, that's all that, Michael, Harriet's uncle, all related to everybody and probably cousin.

But oh man, lucky to have you brother.

Well, so we had that much time.

So we we love you.

You know that we're nice to you.

We're gonna keep going.

So you are here because we had a very interesting exchange on our show last week and also over the weekend, true to normal sibling chatter, we had conversations about you know, where you thought we were right, where you thought we were wrong.

And I think really what it gives us the opportunity to do is to back into uh, you know device that exists across our community, from gender to class to degree attainment to you know, who gets to speak for who and what why you get to speak for that person.

And so I just thought it would be a good thing to have you come on talk about some of what you're hearing, some of what you felt listening to our show, listening to the response on Joe Budden's podcast on the other side of what was a disagreement with Mark and Flip, and would love to hear your thoughts on that and in broadening the conversation.

Wait wait, wait, wait, wait, are we not going to let the record reflect that we were just a peaceful place for people to talk before Bakar joined this show, Yeah, started fighting with everybody on every block.

I just think, you know, for historical record, we should put a pin in it.

I agree that is not misinformation.

We got more fights everywhere, and we fight each other.

B way to go.

Now you want to talk time out.

I just I just have to clarify the record as we are doing this.

I don't talk trash about people individually, except even A because I go out too much in these streets and I don't want to bump into people in one of the dark corners in one of these bars.

I'd be able to get hit in the back of everybody.

I love everybody.

Go ahead, No, I mean, you know, sometimes I don't even like to have a private conversations publicly.

But you know, when I first saw you know what y'all talked about last week, I hit Angela and I was like, I want to talk about what y'all was just speaking about, not saying I want to talk about it on the show, I said, I just want to talk to you personally.

And then you know, when I when I saw what you know, Joe Budden said about it, I agreed with Joe, you know, I felt like, you know, it came off, you know, very elitists, you know, very Jack and Jill, you know, very you know, I got my nose up.

At these these negroes over here.

And I don't think that, you know, you make any you don't make any scribes and connecting community by by by doing, by doing that conversation and the way the way that it was done.

You know, I feel like, you know, whenever there's UH, instead of.

Calling people out, sometimes you should, you should call people in and and you know, the whole conversation around who's an intellectual and who's not intellectual.

My biggest issue with it was, well, damn, you know, a person who's an intellectual should look at the whole context of a situation before they have a conversation about it.

I feel like, you know, Andrew said one of the strongest points last week when Andrew was like, I don't watch the show enough to have an opinion about it, you know, and then he said, and then he said, but I trust Mark, you know, being marked not to be in spaces where you know, he knows he needs to be in.

And as I'm listening to the combent, I told Angela that even when she told me that y'all wanted to talk about it, it came up as a topic of discussion.

I said, well, make sure you watch the whole thing in context before you just watch a clip of it and then you know, speak on it for the next twenty or thirty minutes, because to me, that's what an intellectual should do, right, Like, that's what an intelligent person should do.

An intelligent person should get the whole context of something before they comment on it, instead of watching like two or three minutes or something and then actually taking to clip out of context.

Because if you watch the clip in context, Mark was actually wrong.

You know, if there's a right or wrong in this situation, Mark was actually the one who was who was wrong in that situation, so much so that he even came back and apologized, you know, the next week, and I just, yeah, I just did the conversation just really just it just kind of made me feel a way, like, damn, like that's how we look at each other as black can.

I tif I want you to go here because this, this is TIFF's conversation.

But I do want to oh no, but this was Tiffs's idea.

Tiff is ready to claim that.

And we're fine.

We all weighed in, we all said what we said.

But I have a quick question for you, and this is a focus group for this podcast.

How many of you all were in Jack and Jail?

Raise your hands?

How many of you all or have any sorority or fraternity affiliation?

Raise your hands?

How many of you all are in the Links?

I quit, I was in the links.

How many of you all are in the Bulet?

Raise your hands.

I'm doing that because Andrew was the most relatable person to them, per their own commentary.

And Andrew's the only one who was into Bulet.

We are not even into Bulet, so we get label for stuff that we're not even in.

But tipy, I didn't.

I didn't hear Charlemagne say that.

He didn't.

He said Jack and Jail of y'all?

Yeah, I I I yeah.

But I want to say, uh, just to set the record straight, because I hear what Charlemagne is saying, and I think a lot of comments echoed that my personal background aside, I want to say that as a journalist, before I bring up anything on this show, I want our viewers to know I have indeed done my due diligence.

So I didn't just watch the clip.

How I prepared for that segment.

I didn't pay for Patreon, but I did read the transcript of what happened.

I even understood the word in question that was tricky was a lude.

I understood that the conversation was about payment discrepancy.

I spoke to Mark before I did the segment.

I looked at literacy rates before I.

Did this segment.

I watched a few clips or not clips with segments, different segments from Joe Budden's podcasts before I did this segment.

And I will say I stand by what I said.

My perspectives and opinions don't sway in the winds of public opinion.

Sometimes the cheese will stand alone.

I do think there is very much a toxic landscape that is fueled by a lot of podcasts, Bros.

But I definitely agree with you, Charlemagne.

Before you have an interview with anybody, before you sit down and speak on something, I would advise anyone to be well informed.

Rather it's politics, sports, anything like that, and so I don't think.

That the issue was that.

The collective was not well informed.

I don't think that was my perspective.

I think the issue that a lot of people felt is they felt attacked.

And so I want to be clear that I wasn't saying who wasn't intellectual and who was not.

My perspective was there is an anti intellectual movement ravaging the black community.

I also want to be clear that I was not saying that no one should talk to Flip or Joe Budden.

Certainly somebody should, someone should be reaching out to them.

That's not my ministry.

Things I care about are the incarcerated and puppies, most importantly pitbulls.

I don't like that tens of thousands of them get euthanized every month.

It breaks my heart.

I think about the incarcerated all the time.

I don't want our Black men and women in prison thinking they're forgotten about.

I think it's a bit arrogant to me to say Angela Bakari Andrew y'all should be talking to the incarcerated.

That's not their ministry.

But if Angela feels like no, those are the people, or U Sharman, if you feel like, no, those are the very people I want to be speaking to.

Then, by all means, go do that.

I'm saying, it's hard to fill a cup that's already full.

So if I'm telling you something and you're insulting me from my intelligence, I don't need to be where fools gather.

So I stand on what I say said.

I'm not disrespecting any of them, but I just want to be clear our viewers know.

I never come on this podcast ever without being very well informed and researched and fact checked, and FactCheck is not a thirty second Google search before I come on this show.

It takes a lot of work to prepare for anything I introduce, and I would hope that we all do that.

Well.

If it's interesting you say you like talking to the incarcerated, Like who do you think they incarcerated or are listening to?

Like they incarcerated are listening to things like the Joe Budden podcast, Like they're listening to, you know, places like the Breakfast Club, Like that's who they're actually tuning into.

I know because I go speak at the jails.

I was at right gu Island a couple of weeks ago with Shaka Sin Koor.

You know, I know when you know these brothers from Rikers Island are writing into the breakfast club and telling me, like you know, what they like to listen to, what they like to read.

So if you are trying to reach the incarcerated, you got to go where the incarcerated is that.

I go directly into the prisons as well through a teaching program and also through a journalism program I've talked about here.

Prison journalism is a project that I support.

So I'm not necessarily trying to talk to Joe Budden to talk to the incarcerated.

I'm trying to talk directly to the incarcerated.

I don't want to air.

Out anybody's business, but I got people in my immediate family who are the incarcerated, which is another thing I think it's important for people to understand.

I am not.

I don't think that intellect has anything to do with degrees, pedigree, how much money you make, because I saw a lot of comps they all make more money than you.

I know a lot of rich fools, and I know a lot of degreed idiots.

I've sat across from tables of CEOs who I did not find terribly intelligent.

I went to school with a lot of debutantes that I don't find terribly intelligent.

It's not ass to them, but I wouldn't necessarily put them in that category either.

I think it's important.

I just want people to know I don't come from I wasn't born with a silver spoon in my mouth.

I am my family right now.

I just I'm not of that world.

And I don't think you know what we called like elitism.

I don't necessarily think being of that world is a bad thing.

I don't also don't believe in putting people down because you did grow up privileged, or because you did have parents who have multiple degrees or money, that none of these things.

Makes you a bad person.

To me.

What I find frustrating is when you are not receptive or curious.

I don't need to talk to people wherever you are, whatever your background is.

If you're not receptive or curious, then you are likely not my audience and I'm likely not yours.

I am curious about things.

I can learn from anybody, but I don't necessarily respect everybody's opinion, and I don't think all the people say I respect everybody's opinion.

You'se a lie, I don't believe that.

Go ahead, can you?

Can you be intellectually curious without respecting everybody's opinion.

Yes, you're looking at somebody who's intellectually curious without respecting everybody.

Because I consider myself intellectually and curious.

So I'm the type of person that I'm gonna hear you out.

You know, I may not want to hear you again, but I'm at least take the opportunity to live listen to you at least one time.

No, there's a gentleman by the name of Corey.

He is a lovely person.

He happens to be schizophrenic and homeless, and he's in the front of my building, and he has an opinion on everything.

And I sit there and chat with Corey sometimes just because he's so nice and so sweet, and I give him bread because he lightly feed the birds.

I don't respect Corey's opinion on anything.

He got opinion on the financial systems and the banks and all the things that he wants to tell me about.

I'm nice to him, I'm kind to him, I give him bread.

I would be lying to you to say I respect Corey's opinion when I have interest you had to.

Speak to him, you had to speak to him at least one time to understand him.

Yes, I can speak to anybody.

I'm never saying I don't speak to anybody.

But once I ascertain, oh, you are not a curious person, once you are saying things to me like you're using tricky words, and this isn't just a center flipping that conversation, because I'm really trying to broaden this out into anybody who's incurious.

Once you are clear to me that you are not curious about what I have to say.

And I would inter myself when I would interview different like men on the street interviews during the Obama race, and people would say the most ignorant things to me, or when you would hear lazy reporters go out to Trump rallies and they would say, well, you know Obama gave Iran millions of dollars.

You know he's in cahoots with Iran and he's a Muslim.

I don't respect your opinion anymore now, like you sound like a fool, And I'm giving you reason right there in real time, challenging you.

But I can't fill a cup that's already for so now, No, I don't respect your opinion.

And Bacari said, this is South Carolina saying, but I think all black folks say this.

If I'm arguing with a fool from a distance, you can't tell the difference.

I don't need to be where fools gather.

If somebody else feels called to say no, it is my ministry to go inform, to go educate this.

Particular group of people.

I would never shit on that, Like, that's just not even my way.

I'm like, live and let live go do it.

That's just not what I choose to do.

I understand.

I guess the issue comes in.

I can't believe I'm on here defending the Joe Budden podcast us, right, But but I guess the issue is I don't think fools go together at the Joe Budden Podcast, Like, I don't think anybody I never say that for the record, Yeah, I don't think anybody in that room.

Is a fool.

And I also feel like, you know, we should be happy that people like Mark Lamont Hill want to be on big black platforms.

I think that's the biggest problem I have right now, is that you know, we tend to knock, you know, certain platforms when what we should be doing is infiltrating those platforms.

Like you know, I know everybody likes to you know, go as Steven A.

Smith.

I want to see more black elected officials, more black politicians, you know, uh, more black spiritual leaders, more black activists, more black people with something to say about black issues, go on platforms like Steven A.

Smith, because all the white elected officials are taking advantage of it.

They're taking advantage of it.

They're laughing at a fool that when people like about because I think that's such an important point.

White politicians are going on there because they are elevating him to a position and they only do this specifically in the black community.

They are elevating him into a position that he did not earn.

He is an expert in sports, and so you will have white people all the time pluck an entertainer, right, well, he whatever he expert in, is not politics, it's.

Not policy, and.

He has an audience.

An audience does not equate to intellect, if we can.

I'm not saying that what you have to say about about defendence, go ahead.

Yeah, I'm not saying it does.

I'm just saying these audience, these these black people who have these large audiences.

Instead of sitting on the sidelines complaining about them having a large audience and who didn't learn what how.

About go on that platform and deliver some of that truth?

Are some of that intellect that you have to his audience, Like even if you sit around and you talk about you know, you saying about the person that you that sits outside of a stoop and they have a lot of misinformation, are you talking about the people that were saying the things about Obama?

Those people will continue to have misinformation if somebody doesn't go to them and inform them.

But this was the point that miss, let me, let me just respond, please, This is the point that maybe you, miss, I'm saying when I'm trying to inform you, when I'm saying, no, that is actually not true about Obama, and somebody say yes it is because Okay, you are not curious at that.

You are not right.

I can't feel your bucket is full.

You don't want to hear what I have to say.

Number two, I'm not complaining about anyone having a large audience.

I'm complaining about who his audience is.

He has a large audience of mostly conservative, white folks, and they are treating him.

This is no.

Tiffany.

Do you have statistics that say Stephen A.

Smith's audience is majority conservatives?

I do Nielsen ratings or his ESPN show.

Nielsen Ratings qualifies that.

Well, no, that's the ESPN.

I'm talking about his podcast because most of the time of these funerals, I don't.

I don't know his podcast.

I just know he built his audience on a majority of white people.

So I don't and I would I would love to dig into and I'm happy to come on here next week because I would love somebody to prove to me that his audience is a majority of black people.

That's a feeling, but that's a fact.

So does that make you anti intellectual because you're spewing feelings?

You know, I'm gonna respond to It's literally five minutes left in the conversation.

I want to respond to what he said.

Weigh in, but I'm going to respond to this he said, that's a feeling or an opinion.

Not necessarily, it's somewhat informed because if you look at who his audience, how he built his audience, the suggestion that a majority of his audience would be comprised of black people is not a well informed one.

It's it's logic to say most of his audience are white people.

Are you suggesting that most of his audience are black people.

I don't know what most of his audience is, but I know I started, you know, reading steven A's columns when he was writing for the Philadelphia Inquirer, when he was covering Allen obviously way back in the day, and then I followed him the cold pizzin first Take and everything else.

I think that this new, you know, political Stephen A with a conservative audience is relatively new, so I would before these white people were talking about him.

It was majority black people in the barbershop that was talking about steven A.

But I'm just talking about the audience in general.

Like you said Mark la mont Hill shouldn't be on Joe budden show, why you actually said You actually said he should be on CNN.

Yes, So that's the difference between saying he should not be on Joe Budden.

I'm saying he should be on CNN because he should have never gotten fired from CNN.

If Mark is happy on Joe Budden's podcast, more power to it.

What I said was they lack an understanding of Mark.

I felt like he's disrespected on that podcast based on clips that I had seen what Angela said, and Angela caught a lot of strays for things I said, so I wanted to be clear.

What Angela reference was a moment where they dismissed his humanity on that show when he talked about his friends being killed in Palestine.

And I do think that is based on what I've seen.

I do think that is a consistent, consistent pattern where I do feel like Mark is not necessarily well received there.

But Angela once again, other people.

I just I will say Joe did apologize.

It's more than just you two in here.

Just you got a hard out, but you get these dudes in here.

I know, but Joe is crazy, But Joe did apologize for that moment.

I get to all that if we sort I want.

We can continue, Charlene, and.

To be continued, you trying to talk twenty minutes ago, I got to like one, you got time got.

That's crazy.

I was just appreciating watching the mini pod that.

I know, the Invisible Man, Robert's a good conversation.

It was it was all right, the only the only uh, My only criticism of us, I think as we approach these discussions is that we are part of that intellectual curiosity that we all must have.

We must be able to accept criticism without necessarily being defensive, and that being our immediate posture to it.

And one of the things that I saw in the comments, and one of the things that I saw when Joe Button was making those comments, is we want to be individuals that people come to.

It's in our phrase, it's welcome home, that feel as if there is a comfort level to come in to our doors and hear the things we have to say, and whether or not we're talking about it from a respect perspective or intellect perspective.

I think that throughout that conversation, it's not that we can't sit out here and be like, I'm sorry you felt that way, because that's like human gut gas lighting.

We have to acknowledge that there were people who felt foreclosed from a conversation because of our tone, ten or vocabulary.

And how do we make sure that these are some of the people that we do want to reach, or at least I want to reach.

That may not be everybody's ministry, but I would like to meet.

I would like to have some of those listeners from Joe that are like, you know, maybe maybe we can come over there too, maybe there's an hour we can spend there too, And that may never happen, but uh, you know, that's just kind of my perspective on it.

And I feel like the only other thing that I felt was like weird, and I know we don't do that, and we fixed it, but I was glad that we didn't necessarily stick with using you know that Joe Button in the title and y'all had my face.

It was handsome, but we had like Joe Button in the title.

On you get to that be don't be trying to scoop me be.

I told Angela that too.

I was like, you know what I'm it was first, but it was my face and I didn't know, and I just felt like I just felt like, right, damn.

Description, because I don't have no no problem.

So we had our thumbnail.

What but car is talking about is the thumbnail for last week's show, said Joe Button's podcast and the dumbing down of America and Bacari's standing there in the middle getting the haze up.

He did for another too much, so he was in the middle of it, and I think that what what we did wrong, and I do want to.

I do want to apologize to Joe Button's cast, to their team, to their production company for that title.

I'm an EP on this show and so I own that wholeheartedly.

We should have titled it differently.

Maybe they wouldn't have looked at it.

But they they got us back.

They got the whole podcast taken down for copyright and fishment because we actually used their clip.

They only took that clip out.

It's still under challenge.

We reposted it without the clip, but I would just say to them, well played.

But I do apologize for titling the podcast.

Maybe we should for that purpose though.

I mean, the conversation we had was about the dumbing down.

But I think that what they took offense to is that it looked like we were saying that they are responsible for the dummy.

Well, we all apologize, thanks Tiff.

Well, I don't apologize one.

I don't necessarily credit all of us with wanting to be curious.

I think we have to declare that for ourselves and then act that way if it's a true statement.

Too.

Typically, I'm never confused about what perspective you're coming from, because you kind of stated very clearly every time you say a thing, and it is often clear, I think to the audience.

You know how you'll have relatives or uncles or friends who you're like, they don't suffer fools Like, that's just not the uncle you're gonna go to to bring up that kind of mess with.

And I don't necessarily take offense from that uncle.

I just know what I'm getting when I walk in the door, that that's not the one who's gonna play with Nichols with me.

He don't believe woulden Nichols are wooden, and therefore we're not gonna play a game with the where the where the Nikels are wooden?

Tiff, You're kind of that for me as it relates to this show.

And I don't think you hold yourself out there as being something that's you're not one either curious about the things that are incurious to you.

That's not to say you're not curious about things, but things that you've determined to be in curious to you.

You don't want to go the next layer layer.

And if many of us are being honest, there's some people we're not gonna waste time with or issues upon because it doesn't say she had us in any way, form or fashion.

And I wish more of us would frankly be honest about that part of ourselves, Like I'm not going to feign curious.

I'm not going to and curious.

I'm not going to feign interested and what it is that everybody has to say because I'm not that isn't necessarily my personal testimony.

My personal testimony is sort of closer to that, to that tank half empty versus half full scenario.

If you have room in your brain, if you've got room in the conversation for what I have to contribute, and I mean legitimately, then I feel like this is a conversation I can stay a part of.

But if it becomes very clear to me there's no room here for what I have to contribute, no matter in what way or at what level of substance I do it, then it's a waste of all of our times for us to continue that going on.

I'm actually I didn't know we were at a war of words with other podcasts till this morning.

My brother told me he's a subscriber to Patrina Patreon Patreon, and he was like, I was about to cancel my subscription if they were go come at you.

And I was like, who are you talking about, because I don't even know who Patreon is.

And then you know, we get in the dialogue and he's telling me who is what, and I'm like, yeah, we said something, but it was a response to this.

That and the third I say that to say, I know, we feel like these things are much bigger than what they really are in the in the scale and in the frame of the world to everybody, but it isn't that serious to a lot of people.

I hope we can keep this sort of at that level.

One of the most brilliant things I heard at the opening of this topic was from Brother Abram ken Deing, where he basically was like he considers the intellectual you know, sort of the intellectual drivers and thinkers of our day, to be the ones who are the most curious.

And I thought that was beautiful.

And I think it's beautiful to the extent that it leads to a pathway of greater understanding.

But I'm also not down for going on the platform that's the largest I don't know that we find ourselves in competition in those places, partly because I'm not sure what made you the largest.

I'm looking around at some people's numbers.

I'm like, well, God, who juiced this machine to make this the outcome.

I just think we ought to go places that allow us to be ourselves, that allow us to state truth.

And yes, the truth can be challenged, but it's still mine if I've expressed it, and then that has some intellectual honesty that they're not gas like men.

I'm not gaslighting you to think that the thing is when it really isn't.

And if some of those norms can be absorbed, then all cool, Great, I'm taking this hot ass sweat off.

I agree with the last thing you said, Andrew.

I think that you know the one thing off and Floyd in the summertime, I.

Think the one thing that would keep me from going to a place is it's not if it's not a good faith conversation.

Absolutely, that's the one thing that keep me from going to a place.

But you said something else.

You said, people that allow you I think was the first thing you said, people that allow you to be who you are.

Yeah, that you don't have to change codes to like show up.

That that's on you.

No, no, no, no no.

What I mean by that is you're not welcomed and you're not legitimated in the space unless you're splitting certain verbs in that verbs, unless you're laying down lines, you know, like you're laying down a track.

And I'm just saying to the extent that that is the environment that's created or else you're debased or legitimized in the audit, in the eyes of the people you're in discourse with.

Then it can't be an honest and intellectual conversation in my opinion, like I can't, but you can't.

Want me to.

It's okay, beca you.

If you express a different thought, it's totally cool.

All I'm saying is is I don't want to feel outside of myself in order to enter You're right, that is completely controlled by me, Charlemagne, whether I feel in or outside of myself.

I don't want the pressure to be outside of myself in order for me to fill at home in the conversation.

And I can be outside of myself, I can be in environments that are completely different every day of the week.

I've done that.

I've run for election in one of the most incurious states I think out there right in so many ways, so it's not unlike me to be in those places.

I've never felt the pressure, however, to show up as something that I'm that I'm that I'm not.

And so so long as the conversation can stay legit on those various planks, we're good to go.

And if they can't, I'm not likely going there anyway.

I just I for me personally, I think that I want to stand on something I said earlier, which is that in a portion of being intellectually curious, is you cannot be above reproach from criticism, understanding that criticism, and at least at least sitting in it for a moment to see whether or not it's something that can make you better, or it's something you cast aside.

Is it constructive or is it destructive?

But the other thing is, and I think this is where I'm somewhat disagreeing with with with my brother Andrew, is that I have this unique belief that Andrew Gillam is the most talented political communicator official that I've ever been around.

And I say that with a great deal of humility, because I think I'm really really good at this right and Andrew.

But Andrew is the only person that I can say that I've been around and be like, man, buddy better than me at this, Like he gets it, he conceptualized it, he puts policy, and he can go and articulate.

And that is one of the major reasons I disagree with you in Tiffany's kind of a thesis here, because I think we're missing the moment where it's incumbent upon us to meet people where they are.

We have a skill set and this is not this is not some anti intellectual putting us on another play, But I believe that there is a skill set which is measured for this moment, something that I don't even think that the Chuck Schumer's and the King Jeffries, et cetera.

Have, But for this particular moment where we it's incumbent upon us in a responsibility to meet people where they are, and we can't disregard who those people are or disregard the platform upon which we may meet them.

And so I just feel that to be a part of the responsibility, even with the skill set and talent that I hold all of you all up to have, but I just think that was important for me to couch Andrew in that discussion, so one he knows how I feel about him.

But to the reason that I say that, yeah, I get it right.

This shit may be hard, it may be uncomfortable, They may not even give you the benefit of their humanity.

But oftentimes you're not even talking to that individual.

You're talking to that impressurable mind.

That may be somebody that you can change, even slightly, if it's a city council race, or it's a proposition or whatever it may be.

And I think we miss that sometimes, understanding that, yeah, protecting our piece is something we have to do, but understanding your skill set, God's responsibility, the platform we have, I would just say in synopsis, never be above reproach to criticism and to you know, I think that we have to accept the challenge of meeting people.

With Are are we using the word intellectual wrong?

Because because what y'all should be saying is academic, right, Because intellectual is just to be able to think, reason and understand objectively.

Right.

Like I think what y'all are saying is y'all y'all are talking about academics like anybody.

Joe is an intellectual.

Joe Budden is one of the most prolific rappers ever.

Joe Joe probably got a better macabulat.

Than all of us.

Stop card, Joe Budden can rap his ass off.

Now you're about to make this man hate me because I'm about to be.

Remember from the one song, But y'all remember Joe from the podcast.

I remember Joe from Rappings.

But I'm just saying why.

Leonard think he older than us.

Y'all just know him from the podcast.

I know him when he had.

Because you and Leonard are the same age and the rest of us are young.

First of all, you're younger junior down Andrew, you've been trying to get in.

After that, I want to get back to quick, which was simply say I haven't disqualified any platform.

In particular.

I talked about a couple of planks that I need to be in place for me to be anywhere, and that's not to disqualify a place.

And I and I and I generically think that, yeah, it does require.

All communication requires at a certain level, meeting people where they are if each side is going to be heard.

I just don't always.

I don't always.

That doesn't always equal to me the glass half empty side of the equation every time.

Meeting people where they are doesn't require them dumbing down or me smartening up necessarily.

The way I consider what it means to meet somebody where they are is to see that their situation and circumstances might be right just like mine, or it might be or me maybe the up too, so opposite side of where I am, and they still deserve what is a respectful exchange, you know, off jump, I people don't have to use the same vocabulary as me.

For us, we meet met each other where we are.

We don't have to go to the same schools.

And I've never credentialed myself by education.

I think I probably carry the lowest amongst it, amongst my siblings who have been educated, amongst my friend base who have been educated, so.

That you don't count anyway.

On that point.

So I don't think those are righteous criteria in my opinion.

I don't think your degrees are righteous criteria for me.

I don't think where your parents come from, what was before and after your name or righteous criteria for me.

My criteria are much more a humane and basic level of entry than that.

So if we're saying, Leonard, you raised that you thought we were saying we met academic when we said intellectual, and I don't think any of us think that.

Is there a way that we're defining And I'm saying we are very loosely because we all clearly have very different opinions here, But is there a way that you're hearing any of us describe or define intellectual that is striking you as more actandemic?

And if you can't explain that, that would be helpful.

I mean, I think the whole conversation.

But that's what's so interesting because Mark isn't on that show to be an academic, you know what I'm saying, Marcus on that show talking about pop culture, Marcus on that show talking about you know, women like he's just talking about regular things that they would normally be talking on that show.

And then when the conversation, you know, turns to something that might be around.

Social justice or you know, activism or you know politics, then he comes in and he's Mark Lamont Hill to academic.

But I think a lot of us look at Mark a certain way, and so you think that's what Mark is doing on when it's not.

That's why I say him and Flip can have that brotherly, you know, kurk.

Fuffle that back and forth because that's how they they get down on the show, like they talk about things that happen behind the scenes, they bring it to the podcast and they're able to have those type of interactions.

But that wasn't an academic debate like to where where Mark was using some you know, fifteen letter words and Flip was confused about the words.

That was that was just some nigga ship.

Yeah, well we talked about that because I heard from a lot of men who are Joe Budden podcast listeners, and what they said to me, Leonard is there are so few spaces for black men to gather.

There are so few spaces where black men can go and exhale and be themselves.

And what they said is, you know that Mark Lamont Hill and Flip exchange is so common.

They're like Tiffany.

That's happening everywhere across barbershops right now, on street corners, everywhere.

And the intimation was, and I receive it, but the intimation was, you were weighing in on something that you don't touch.

You're weighing in on a culture of that exists between black men that you that's exactly what they said, I'm from we.

Now apparently share a vagina, were the same person, and why all of what Tiff said.

I also said, they can't even distinguish between the two us because they're like, why y'all in the.

Angel caught a lot of straits or things I said, But I did receive what black men were saying, and they were saying, like, don't you do some like, you know, ignorant shit because they acknowledge, like, yeah, some ignoran shit on that show, But so what is our ignorant shit?

And it's for us?

And you know, no, I didn't look at it as a gender thing at all.

It was literally just just a black Yeah, it was just it was just a black community thing.

To me.

It was like, yo, man, if we're trying to build community, and we need community.

Now more than ever.

Like, it's not even about knocking the platform.

I don't think you should knock the platform, but don't don't knock Mark's role on that platform, because I think Mark's role on that platform is very important.

I think when you got there, when.

You command the type of audience that you know, Joe Budden has for all the type of issues that will be you know coming up and have been coming up over the last ten months, and we'll.

Be coming up for the next few years.

You need somebody like him.

And that just beef with our conversation about it was I felt like we may have positioned marks like the guy fighting out of the corner, you know, the keep, and I was thinking, which is why I said, I wish we could interpret what we think is being said.

And I think where we into the conversation was like each of those men knew exactly what was being said, what shot was being fired across which bow, and they were prepared to meet each other at that respective place.

There were no fools, there were no there was no confusion about the words exchange or anything like that.

I just felt like each man met the moment for for what they had going on, for the exchange that was going on.

And I heard directly from a good friend of mine, he's a lawyer.

Came it was family home company rescued me out of my corpse of a house and basically was like, look, man, I'm just saying I know it's something shit don't listening to.

That's why I listened to it.

And at the same token, he's subscribing to NPR every morning, and it's listening, you know, so it doesn't even have to be a fight of amongst hedgemonds, Like I'm listening to the smartest thing versus the thing you're listening to.

It's not how you got downe with it at all.

It was like it's some nigga ship and I love it and that's why I listened to it.

But I love y'all too, and I listened to that on the Native Lamp podcast.

And that's the thing that I guess frustrates me the most awesome.

Yeah, every I know y'all, single one of y'all.

I'm here in the corner like I don't even know what we signed up.

Even when you look at even when you look at the conversation that was happening, Look how the audience is interested.

There's people who listen to Native who listen to Joe, people who listen to Joe who listened to the Native land.

So that lets you know that Joe y'all are not far from each other in any way shape of fact.

Thing that I think that was my money that was that was you.

Need to get the briefing on not cutting people off in the middle of it.

I mean if I if I don't cut nobody off, yeah, it'll just be tiffing and Angelo over and talking about I should want like.

At that point, go ahead, Lena, you are the way.

Listen, he has a heart out.

Go ahead, Bakari, and then we'll go ahead, Bakari, and then Leonardo closes.

Now I just want to make sure.

I want to make sure that listeners know that I don't think we say this and I definitely don't believe it that there is a huge gulf between you know, what goes on over there and where we are and if it is a golf Hopefully the conversations we can have, we can have them on a certain level, that we can bring communities together in the spirit of welcome home instead of drive people apart that that is the only thing that frustrated me in reading the comments.

I felt like we put ourselves in a position to and it was you know, when you drive people, when you when you jones people like I was talking about pump pump, pump it up and all that stuff.

That's one thing, But to just push people away from not having a purpose or seat at the table, I think is another.

And I think that people felt that whether or not that was our intention or not, that's literally all it was.

It's just like the rhetoric seems like y'all were so far apart, are you know, you know, y'all look at them in a certain way, like, you know, kind of looking down on them, And I'm like, no, we should be looking.

At each other, you know, eye to eye, because I want to see everything.

I want to see Mark Lemon Hill on Joe Budden, I want to see Angela Rai on steven A because I know, you know, whoever wants to go to these platforms, whoever we on these platforms.

I want to see Bakari and steven A have a conversation, even though that might not ever happen, Like it's the reason we bring, you know, so many different voices on Breakfast Club.

It's like, wherever the audience is, let's amplify the people who have, you know, something to say.

Like it's just weird that you know, everybody's drawing a line in the sand and we're being so divisive to each other as a community.

Because if we're really trying to build community, let's build community for real.

Yeah, And I think I think that we are.

I think that we do also have to understand that everybody plays a different part.

So if Tiff is saying this is my ministry over here, this is the thing that I can do and I do well, then we have to trust that somebody else can play their position.

I really would like for us to get underneath this.

Blanket labeling that we do of anti intellectualism, of elitism, of the boulet, of the democratic shields, Like what is beneath all of that?

And can you really hear people for the distinctions?

One of my favorite things about this show as long as we've been on is that we there's always a distinction.

There's always a fine point that somebody offers where it may even shift my opinion, you know, it really might.

I was glad when Leonard was like, I want you to listen to the show.

I promise you.

I was like, I am not listening to their show.

I am not listening to it.

I just knew they were gonna be it was gonna be some craziness, and I am so grateful that you pushed me to listen to the show, so much so that I went into our chat dropped the show link.

It was like Leonard said, listen to this, here's the time stamp.

It changed my perspective a lot.

On flip it changed my person I could feel like I heard the pain in Joe.

It felt like, no matter how high up you get, you never get the recognition you truly deserve, which is amongst your people.

And that's something that whether we have the same degree, went to the same school, live in the same area, or make the same amount of money, that's something that we all should be able to relate to as black folks.

So I think, if there's nothing else, if we know where our end goal is, liberation for black people, even if our means is different, that's the conversation I really want to have, and it's the one that I've been in earnest having for several months now since this terrorist cuts off.

Imagine if Bakari and tiff never went on Abbey Phillips show.

Think get about that I'm conflicted about and we need you in that space.

You're great in that space.

Because if you weren't there, how many things would just go would just fly and people would probably just take his gospel if Tiffany wasn't there to dispute it.

If Bakari wasn't there to dispute it.

Like think about Obama going on O'Reilly back in the day, Think about John Stewart going on Fox News back in the day.

Imagine if people didn't go in those spaces to combat some of the bullshit.

I think that we need to be everywhere there's eyeballs.

We need to be everywhere our people are listening, because you know that truth does get the people.

And you may not see it in that moment.

Yeah you might.

You might be in that studio and feel like you just wasted your time because you was arguing with somebody.

But think about the millions of people that are at home watching.

Are the millions of people that are at home listening they're getting something from it.

They're like, damn yo, Macari, Really you know said some ship last night on seeing in a Tiffany?

Really doesn't it last night?

On seeing it?

And like you need that?

Mark sets in on Joe Budden podcast.

I personally feel like you you need that, and I don't think we should we should knock it.

Ever, Well, I have I have thought some questions on that, but that's a conversation.

I don't have to text you about because I'm I'm I'm seriously conflicted about going on that show.

We've talked about it a little bit here, but.

Angela stopped listening to Angela and it will probably be she can testify.

No, don't listen to me.

No, I make my She's not intellectually curious about what I have to say on this top.

On this topic, Angela think we all need to be on there or as a no go, So that's something different.

I think Angela's was the agreement.

Yes, but I have I have.

Conflict about going on that show, Charla Mane, because I think it is dangerous the way that they are platforming literal white supremacists, and not everybody deserves my audience, not everybody deserves my debate, and so it does feel icky to me, Like I watch people on there when you are getting to the point where you debate in slavery.

Something about that does feel beneath me.

And I don't think it's anything wrong with feeling that way, or even somebody does think is wrong.

Then that's just where I stand, and I'm just on the wrong.

Side of you.

But let me also let me also, I mean, it's it's one of the only shows where you have whatever however you want to describe people where you have that cross section of individuals that are there.

But also like, we have to not come from a place where we are foreclosing on platforms we won't go to like we we have to.

I mean, you're too talented.

I mean I feel like I said the same thing about Andrew, Like we there.

It seems like we we always come up with a litany or list of like I'm not gonna go there.

I have, but we have to be willing to take our talents in these spaces, not quite come as you are a type of deal, but take your talents in these spaces and be willing to Yeah, have these discussions and realize that at the end of the day, it's not about changing that person's mind that's sitting at the table from you.

At the end of the day, it's about talking to the broader audience that is thirsting during this vacuum for somebody like Tiffany Cross and so I wasn't a part of those conversations.

But let me just ask you to, you know, politely, reconsider that notion.

Just if you're weighing as a balance, I want you to reconsider it because the need is probably greater than the can then the condemnation you may have for the particular person you may be may be there with.

I think.

Tif gave the best example, Tiffany, you gave the best example, that Slavery example.

Imagine somebody wasn't there to combat that because there are people peple out there who believe it.

There's people out there who actually believe what that young lady said.

It's actually people out there who think just like her.

So somebody has to be out there to give the real information.

That they're not.

For platforming that person because seeing they should not be putting them on.

To me, that's where I began my broadcast journalism career, and it is abhorrent to me to witness them devolve into that kind of thing.

It is not actually healthy political discourse.

It is a Jerry Springer like segment where you literally will have a white supremacist sitting across from somebody like me, or you'll literally have Scott James regurgitating white supremacist attitudes, policies, politics, et cetera.

And I'm supposed to legitimize this point by debating him.

It's not necessarily you know, like I shouldn't be a part of the debate.

It is this news organization should not be putting setting up that kind of conversation.

I think that's a disgrace.

I agree with you to this parameters.

I don't don't think this is pick on tiffany day, but I'll just say definitely at the that and I said this to you directly, that we have to check ego a lot of times and a lot of these spaces and to the if the most salient point, like echoing in your mind is this person doesn't deserve me across from them, I just say that's the wrong part of the that's not a place to begin in the conversation.

They may not stand down ten toes down.

I don't know why supremisist does not deserve.

They don't deserve And as.

You are, all I'm simply saying is is we have to challenge our own ego and some of it.

And I don't think it's ego to not when we say this person does deserve.

To be, Oh, well, then I guess I got an ego because that's me.

That's that's where I draw a car.

I don't want to deride it.

I don't want to really drive us down in the conversation.

I apologize for moving us that direction.

This is meant and and and real love for you, and not just for you, but for all of us.

Because I have to do it myself.

I'm like, I've debated at that level before, I've debated above that level.

There's no reason for me to have a legitimate, a legitimate person who sympathizes with white supremacists, as I said in the debate, one who if if I'm not calling him it, the ones who are it seem to believe they're in good company with them, So so I get that.

But there are people who are legit moved by your words, who might be where they are and the position of the debate simply because they haven't heard the other side.

That's all.

That's it.

They maybe where they are simply because they don't know the fruits of the other side.

And I gotta run.

I gotta run.

But I do want to say one thing.

Andrew said something on this podcast a couple of weeks ago, and he said he never wanted to be blind sided again about what the other side thinks in this country.

So therefore, when I see these people platformed on the CNNs, you know the MSNBC's of course you see them on Fox.

I watched that because I too want to know what other people are thinking.

But I am very appreciative when there's a Tiffany Cross, when there's a Bacari Sellers or whoever to confront that.

And I will end with this, are we better than our ancestors?

Because I know Malcolm X, James Baldwin, they publicly debated the debated white supremacists all the time.

They publicly confronted white supremacists all the time, and they would smack them down with their black intellect and they're black excellence.

So wherever there's.

White supremacy on cable TV, I want to see black intellect and black excellence like the Tiffany Crosses of the world.

And I'm glad and I thank you for your service.

To be continued.

This is a conversation that's ongoing.

Thank you, What are you got to You gave us way more time than you had, so thank you Lenar for joining the conversation.

All right, well, we're moving us right along.

I think now we got to get into some calls to action.

We kept you all here for a long time.

It's a long show today, but we wanted to be sure to address this issue because we did read a lot of your comments and did hear from a lot of you for laying in.

So thank you all to our viewers, and we also want to let you know if you're watching this show or listening, at the end of the show, we are going to play Angela Roun's a professional development program of young folks, and she asks them the way in with their thoughts on the whole intellectual debate.

So at the end of the show you'll be able to hear their thoughts as well.

But for now we're going to move on to cause to action.

Who cares about truth?

On the last more than.

Okay, we told you it was going to be a spirited conversation and it certainly is.

Thank you guys for sticking with us on a long show today.

I do want to remind you that please tune into our mini pod because we get to sit down with Ajaka Owen's mom.

She's the subject of a very striking documentary on Netflix, The Perfect Neighbor.

It was so striking it is number one on Netflix right now.

It is about a woman who was murdered by a white woman who happened to be her neighbor, and I encourage you all to watch it, but please be sure to tune into Native Lampod's conversation with them.

And right now we have another that was not my call to action.

For the record, I have another call to action, but I'm gonna kick it off with my co host, Angela.

You want to go first.

Sure.

My call to action is to talk to somebody you don't agree with this week and really listen.

I had the opportunity to do that last week, and to listen to a podcast that I don't normally listen to.

It proved to be enlightening.

So that is my challenge to y'all.

I like it, Andrew was yours.

Build your things on things that last, Put your hopes on things that last.

Put all everything you're building on things that last, because slippery is all of the ground.

And learn from the movements that have actually something to teach us.

There was a time in this country where eighty percent of Americans believed in social security and retirement benefits.

There was a time in this country where eighty percent of the politepole believed in workplace protections.

There was a time when eighty percent of this country was prepared to go after big oligarchs and the wealthiest, consuming as much as they could for themselves, and it was a widely popular set of ideas, the New Deal, And when the New Deal was popular, it was popular amongst over eighty percent of Americans until those people realize that those same benefits would be extended to black people.

And that's when the benefit, the support for those benefits dissipated.

So check out the sum of us.

Read a little bit about these parts of movements that I think we can build from, grow from, learn what we can from them, and leave the rest that doesn't serve us behind.

Because our only pathway out of this is going to be on the ground that's solid and that gets shored up by our continued activism in this space.

At least that's what I believe.

I'll continue to believe that until a new belief takes over.

Did you say, build your hopes on the things that.

Last, Build build everything on the things that last.

Build everything on it.

I just want to get it right from when I repeat it like it was my own.

Everything on the things that last.

Dream, build it last.

Build your hopes and dreams on the things that last.

Honestly, that's beautiful, Andrew, thank you for that.

I do want to share Bakari.

So, Bakari has been going back and forth, as I said, because he's in court, but he did when he was running out, he did tell us his CTA and it was really similar to yours.

Angela.

He said, I need no, no, no.

He he just said, to basically approach conversations open.

I think it's all you know, all about our conversations that we've had.

So he kind of shared his ct and his perspective and our conversation with Charlemagne.

But essentially he was saying, you know, be open to have conversations with people.

Show go to where people are even you know, no matter what your preconceived notions about them.

So sorry, b if I have butchered your CTA, but next.

Time, keep your ass here.

Next time homework.

But if I mess it up, you can correct me.

Next week you can do a dis tape on social media like you probably.

Probably we sorry Beyonce from messing up as your backup dancers.

My ct A is this week in Minnesota, Texas, New York, and Pennsylvania.

Uh, they are looking at dwindling funds for SNAP benefits and uh even Wick which which helps to feed over seven million low income mothers and children.

Those funds are running low.

SNAP is of course federally funded, but it's administered by the states, and so the shutdown impacts the people who get these benefits.

So if you are able to help in any way feed someone who may not have their benefits, who may be too proud to ask.

You can anonymously leave a bag of groceries on their door, mail them food.

You can have food delivered to them if you feel in fancy, Uber eats them dinner for a week.

Whatever you can do, even if it's somebody you don't know, if you see somebody on the news talking about it.

However, we can help each other in this time.

I think it's so incredibly important, and I'm cheating because I have another call to action.

I do want to tell our Native Land Pod audience that Angela Rye turns twenty nine years old this week.

She's celebrating forty six.

She is turned at forty six this week, and so we want to wish our dear sister a happy birthday.

I hope that you spend that day I don't think you will, but I hope you spend that day doing nothing in service to anyone but yourself.

Like to go to sleep.

Okay, is that what you're planning on doing?

Sleeping?

I do think so.

And I was like, for my birthday, wish is for Andrew to get well, because I'm watching him blow his nose.

It's so nice.

He's been sweating the whole show.

Andrew's been fighting bickness since last week because the show.

Last week, ever, he got well.

Here's what you know.

I'm not gonna do my birthday be around Andrew because I do not want whatever.

Angel You need some rest, and Andrew and Angela you need celebration.

I will say, you guys know the Machetes always we are a very giving, loving, supportive group of girlfriends, and so you do.

You have something coming your way from us, But I won't say what it is.

We can talk about it later.

But if you guys catch this on numberfore Sunday, be sure to wish Angela a very happy birthday.

I will be tweeting out her personal cell phone number so you can tell her directly.

Stay tuned for that.

And as always, we want to remind everybody if you like what you heard today, and I really hope you did, because we've been Andrew's stripping.

I don't know what's happening.

He's getting undressed.

I was distracted though, like I saw Andrew stripping.

I don't know it's happening.

But uh, we're here for it, Andrew, We're here for it, not.

Go straight.

But no, that is why I know you said because you've been hot and cold, Andela being rude talking about you.

If you liked any part of this conversation, truly, I just wanted to say all of us really appreciated reading your comments, hearing from you all, So please share the video.

Tell a friend about the podcast.

You know, some people were complaining, like, oh, you guys are doing this for clicks.

We talk about things of substance.

You know, Angela had a great interview with Jenny Nelson.

Please, by all means go flood that clip with comments.

I don't know he's going through menopause.

He's like chill.

Menopause shows up in all different phases.

To be guilty.

But no, I was shaking my head your comment about they're just doing that for clicks.

I'm like, click for who We'll just we're saying like we wanted more viewers, and of course we always do, and that's that's why we show not by any means and certainly not by being messy, but but having a very healthy exchange of ideas and ideology, which we do on this show every week about things of Stuffarence.

Okay, we got two minutes before we got to be out of the studio, so I just want to tell everybody that there are other clips and things that we would love to have from this week that we discussed that we would love to hear from you on.

Feel free to drop a video, drop a question, share the video.

Also, please check out other choices on Reason Choice Media.

Our girl Jamil Hill shout out to the Macheties, she hosts Politics and Si Cup hosts Off the Cup and I know it's the edition which we talked about Noah de Borasso with the more you know, and please be sure to give us a follow on all our platforms.

We certainly heard.

From a lot of you, so you just showed up to make a comment on our alleged beef.

We hope that you will stick around for the substance that we try to offer on this show every week.

I don't know how.

Many days there are until midterm elections, because at this point, Oh, Angela's telling me there are three hundred and seventy six days, which is almost a year.

Isn't that crazy?

Three hundred and seventy six days left until midterm elections.

I'm not sure if we're gonna have free and fair elections, but certainly now's the time to be informed and stay focused on what's happening while we prepare for the worst to come.

Thank you guys for joining us.

We are your hosts.

Bakari Sellers allegedly is somewhere fighting a good fight in the courtroom.

Andrew Gillam, who is going through the menopause hot and cold.

We send our prayers.

Angela Rai, who is getting ready to turn up for her birthday, and by turn up, I mean turn it down, getting comfy in the bed, relaxing.

We're on down for what she deserves it.

And Tiffany Cross, thank you guys for tuning in.

Welcome Home, Welcome Home to the Native Landing on the podcast space Tess and for greatness sixteen minutes it's so hit, not too long for the crazy ships.

High level combo politics in a way that you could taste it then got chested.

Politics touches you will and if you don't touch it, so get invested across the t's and dop the i's, kill them back to get them staying on business with ride.

You could have been anywhere, but you truset us natively and podcast the brand that you can trust you.

Hey, everybody, So, because we had such a long, in depth conversation today, we're actually gonna move some of our viewers questions and comments over to our sub stack.

We invite you to continue the conversation over there, real or perceived beef whatever.

We're broadening out this conversation into what it means to be an intellectual, what it means to find common ground with all of us, so that we're not excluding anyone.

We are not engaged in the math the power politics of subtraction or division.

We are engaged in additional multiplication and for that reason we want to hear your thoughts.

Go over and leave your comments, let us know what you think, send us a video as you normally do, and hopefully we'll see you over there on substance.

Native Landpod is a production of iHeartRadio and partnership with Resent Choice Media.

For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.