 Oh my goodness, it's Friday again. You know what that means. Trump week, and it's been a full week in many ways, but this has been a different week. We've characterized this as shame at the border. I want to change it a little bit though. How about national disgrace at the border? Okay. What do you think? Against my will. International disgrace at the border. Yeah. Because the whole world's watching. Yeah. Cynthia, what do you think? I think it's horrible. I think it's horrific what is happening. And it's all private. This is for profit stuff that's happening down there too. It's not like our military that are running these camps. This is for profit private people that are running these camps. They don't have blankets. They don't have medicine. They don't have toothbrushes or soap. You've got kids taking care of kids. They don't have diapers that are being changed. And they don't allow anyone in. This is the thing that really gets me. Security, security. Not a single senator gets to walk through that door. Even the Geneva convention, allows the Red Cross to come in and monitor what's going on. Right. Exactly. They're not even compliant with the Geneva convention if this was a war. Stalag 17. Oh, yes. Absolutely. And there's people that are bringing, Red Cross is bringing stuff. My own church, the United Methodist Church, Uncor, has been there from the beginning for a year now trying to bring things for these kids and they won't accept them. Well, maybe the president didn't know the details. Oh, please, don't give me that. I don't believe it for a minute. He knows all of the details and does not care. He watches television all day. He's got to know. He's got to know. He knows. So what do you think they think about us now around the world, about the children, about the toothpaste? The United States is up to us. Yeah, or worse. Or worse. And that shining city on the hill is no longer shining. Right. But you know what? Our allies have been our allies for decades. Not anymore. When this president is no longer around, they'll remember how the United States used to be. I hope so. And they'll remember and they'll come back to us and they'll remember what we once stood for. I hope so. I think maybe so. Give us your tired, huggled masses. Longing to breathe. To breathe free. I think of that and I am so unhappy that we have lost it. For a time anyway. Well. Now you know the Congress, at least the House, passed a bill providing 4.5 billion dollars to support those kids in these Stalag 17 installations. But it had controls on it. It said you can only use this money for the kids and those installations. It said it passed a bill for 4.5 billion dollars without any controls. Allowing him to use the money for his long-awaited wall and other things along those lines. Security. Then Nancy Pelosi said, OK, OK. In order to get this passed, we're going to take our controls out of the House bill. And I think it's going that way. That's what's going to happen. So there's no way to be sure. In fact, you can be probably sure that the controls won't be there and he will misuse the money. What are your thoughts about that bill? We carried out. She didn't want to. I don't think she wanted to have a controversy while the children were in such dire straits. That's what it was. And that would put it on her. That when you implement a law, it's the devil in the detail. And those controls needed to be in that bill. And the narrative of this whole thing is really what upsets me is when Trump gets in an interview and says, I'm just following what Obama did previously. Come on, really? He did not. And it was not like this, not in any shape for him. Was there child separation? Yes, in specific cases where one of the parents was either drug running or there was a domestic violence situation, then in any case, the child could be separated from the parent. But it was not a standard practice to separate those children. That was the quotation of Roman 13 from Jeff Sessions as a validation to repute these kids. He's made Obama a scapegoat from the beginning. But I don't see the media challenging that. I'm with you on that. I'm with you. I don't think the media does challenge it. We challenge it. We always challenge it, and that's good for us. So what about now the G20, where he made plenty of statements, and you've already established to me, we've established many times over that you can't trust what he says. It's just he's into the lie, wraps himself in lies. So what about G20? Is the same pattern going on in G20? What's happening there? Oh, it's 10 times worse. Are you kidding? When he said it's none of your business, when that reporter asked him, are you going to say something to Putin about his interference in our elections? And he says, what I say to him is none of your business. And he said it with such sarcasm and attitude. The sarcasm and the sarcasm and attitude, what does that play in the First Amendment? What does it play in the freedom of the press? What does it play in the interest of the American public being informed? Where does it play? And it's not rhetorical. I mean, I really want to know what you think about that. Well, where does it play is, to what degree are you underselling this country in order to gain whatever you're gaining from Russia, either through the 2020 election or some past unknown debt that you're tied up with that no one knows about, because we don't know what your tax returns are, or the investigation is not complete. Who knows what his attraction is to Russia and why he favors Russia in so many times, in so many ways. And this is just one more example of, it's none of your business. What is? It's the American public business. He's going to be with the Saudis. You say, wait a minute, freedom of the press, First Amendment, he represents us. We pay as a salary. He lives in our house. He lives in our house. He's there for us. He's there representing us. He's there to improve our national position in things, but he won't tell us. That's one thing. The other thing is, not only will he not tell us, but he is demonstrating that he doesn't even feel obligated to tell us ever. That he can go and talk to these leaders and do conspiratorical things, collusionary things, if you will, and not tell us. He can do it on his own account and not tell us. That's extraordinary. It's another break from the norm. Right, and it's not new because he did this last year. Remember, no note takers, not even the note takers that were for Putin. So we don't even know what he said last year. Right. He's doing it on his own account. As we said a couple of shows ago, he's running a sole proprietorship government, and we're not involved. It's all him, and he doesn't know how to do it either. What about the comment about Don't Metal? Oh, my goodness sakes. They asked, he's sitting right next to Vladimir Putin. They said, are you going to ask Russia about the 2020 election? Any kind of, you know, very lightheartedly goes, Don't Metal in our 2020 election. Smiles. The newspaper's all reported it that way. Yeah, it's a smile. Smirking. I've seen the video. Smirking. I saw the video footage, and he was smirking and smiling, and it was a lighthearted joke. It was a lighthearted joke. And you're thinking, okay, put this in the context of the other comment to George Stephanopoulos about, I wouldn't necessarily tell the FBI if I got information from a foreign power, a foreign country, about, you know, dirt on my opponents in the election campaign. And you just, you know, put the pieces of this puzzle together, and you're seeing there is a open yard sign saying, you know, we're open for business. Help me in any way you want for me to win the 2020 election. That's what I got out of it. What did you get out of it? Same thing. What is he really saying to us? Same thing, and he's going to have breakfast with the Saudis, you know, on Saturday, and he's meeting again with Putin today on his own. And yeah, I think it says, it says that he does not give a care about what's really going on in America. And all he cares about is his power and his control. And to see the book on Putin's face when he did that, it wasn't just a sarcasm on Trump's face, and his smile, but that smile of, I think he's been smiling like that since 2016, right? You can't touch me. You can't touch me. Look at this. Look, everybody's making jokes. It was in, you know, public on camera, and he's just going, it was the smirk of the century. What about the Saudi guy that he was standing next to? I said Prince Salman, I guess. He was standing next to Salman in this group portrait, and really being very friendly with him. I mean, and of course, the sale of weapons continue because they can't override his veto on that. Extraordinary, the sale of weapons continue, the travesty in Yemen continues. Nobody can do anything about it. And nothing's been done about Khashoggi, Khashoggi either, you know, an American, you know, reporter. It's also somebody can sell, some companies in this country can sell weapons. That's what it's about. You know, our previous presidents have been pretty mum about the behavior of Donald Trump in his, you know, 875 plus days or whatever the number is, until recently where President Carter actually did make a comment about this, about Trump saying, you know, don't meddle in our elections. And President Carter said the following, there is no doubt the Russians did interfere in the election. And I think the interference, although not yet quantified, if fully investigated, would show that Trump didn't actually win the 2016 election. He lost the election and he was put in office by the Russians. Now that's from a former president of the United States, although President Carter is 94 or years old, but he's really sharp still. But he's a sharp guy and as a former president, you rarely see a president comment that overtly about the behavior or actions of a current president. It's the president's club, they don't do it. When you shake it and bake it, he's gonna do exactly that for this election. He's gonna win this election with the help of the Russians doing the same things and it's a smirk. And you know, it's like right out there in public, gonna do it again, right, plain view. That's what I've been saying. I think I say it every single week, don't I? And he's gonna cheat. He cheated before, he's gonna cheat again. And if we don't do something specific and intentional about it, then we're gonna be stuck with them for another who knows how long. Yeah, well, now, Mother's gonna testify. Is that gonna change anything? July 17th. Is that gonna change the recipe around impeachment? You know, it could now be a bullet point on the agenda of the Democratic candidate's discussions is election security. And you may finally start to see or get what you're wanting. I hope. Yeah, because I think at some point, someone's gonna say, well, good is all the merits of each candidate when it's not gonna make a difference because he's already rigged the election. I've been saying that all along. Right, so you might as well, actually. I know. You have. Some of us have. Now, of course, if it gets really bad in Iran, that could be a factor in the impeachment dynamic. And I think I mentioned this, my own theory about it is that Trump has pulled the cork out of the bottle on cyber terrorism and the cyber war. And it's free for all now. And he said he was attacking them. They will undoubtedly attack us. They have the innate ability, the indigenous ability, if you will, but they can get help from Russia who'd be only too happy to help them. So we have the prospect of cyber war where grids will come down and people will die. Do you think that will change the dynamic of impeachment? Well, I think it plays a part because one of the things that keeps them from, just like that Neil Katyal memo in the DOJ that says we can't indict a president because it would interfere with his ability to president. I think we need to interfere with this guy's ability. Well, Neil would like Congress to ask Mueller, well, if it weren't for that memo, would you have indicted him? Right, exactly. I'd be sitting on the edge of my chair for that one. And I believe that Mueller would probably say yes. And then we'd have a different kettle of fish, wouldn't we? Well, he said in the very beginning that he took that into consideration before he did any of the other stuff that he listed, right? Was that he knew he couldn't. So, but he also said, you know, but I also can't exonerate him. I was weasel words as far as I'm, you know. He shouldn't come out, he should have known that Trump would misuse it and he'd get barred and misuse it and all that and the public wouldn't understand or read it. You know, he needs to testify and he needs to get square with us. Anyway, I don't think he's done us a big favor, a favor we expected from him. Okay, we're gonna take a break for one minute. We're gonna come back and then we're gonna talk about, ooh, all the other things. We're gonna talk about the national policy, the spending. We're gonna talk about the infrastructure. You know why? Because we connect the dots, that's why. We'll be right back, connect some more dots. Hey, Loja, my name is Andrew Lanning. I'm the host of Security Matters Hawaii, airing every Wednesday here on Think Tech Hawaii, live from the studios. I'll bring you guests, I'll bring you information about the things in security that matter to keeping you safe, your co-workers safe, your family safe, to keep our community safe. We wanna teach you about those things in our industry that may be a little outside of your experience. So please join me, because Security Matters, aloha. Hi, I'm Rusty Komori, host of Beyond the Lines on Think Tech Hawaii. My show is based on my book also titled Beyond the Lines, and it's about creating a superior culture of excellence, leadership, and finding greatness. I interview guests who are successful in business, sports, and life, which is sure to inspire you in finding your greatness. Join me every Monday as we go Beyond the Lines at 11 a.m., aloha. I mentioned infrastructure, and there's so many things like infrastructure where he has said he's gonna do something, nothing, even McConnell, nothing, nothing. Not a penny, nothing. Now, the reason I'm provoked about this is that I started watching yet again designated survivor on cable, on Netflix. Designated survivor is in season three, and designated survivor, I've been waiting for cable to do a movie about some of the issues that come up right now, the issues that we talk about. And right now, the episode I'm watching is all about infrastructure. And it's all about the president's need to get in there and rebuild infrastructure. And it reminded me of these connected dots kind of discussions that we need to have. What happened? You know, is that old thing about what happened to this? What happened to that? All this stuff. I mean, even gun control, what happened? What happened? I don't care. What really happened? So I think it's just worth mentioning that nothing's happened. What the phrase comes to mind when you talk about all these things that aren't happening is what was Rome doing when Rome was burning? Nothing. Nothing, nothing. Yeah, there you go, I like that. I thought, I think, you know, we have other fish to fry here, but I just wanna mention that it was very interesting last night or the night before about the debates. How do you come away from these debates, Cynthia? What do you think? Lauren stayed really strong in the first one. I didn't, nobody else really stood out to me. Kelsey Gabbard did a fairly good job, but I don't really trust anything she says because I know her past. And I wish she'd talk about that a little bit more instead of I'm a soldier. She was in, I believe, in an office position. So it's kind of weird for her to come across as a soldier. So that part, I mean, she comes across really good, but she just has this sort of weird blank look on her face all the time. I thought it was good the way Beto and Juan kind of went back and forth about speaking in Spanish too, and I thought that was kind of cool. In the second, but I still thought Warren was the best, even though she just sort of sat back, she didn't come out really strong, but she's just, yeah, her policies win. She's got a plan for that, and that's her, you know, her catchphrase, and she does have a plan for just about everything. And they're good plans. I really like Warren. She's getting better and better in my mind. I mean, the second one, I thought that, well, I love the line that Harris said when she says, hey, America doesn't want to see a food fight when everybody would, I'll go back and forth. Just, hey, America doesn't want to see a food fight. They want to see how we're going to put food on their table. Yeah, and then she promptly got into a food fight. Yeah, exactly. Stolen food at Biden, which I thought was kind of. That's a politician. There you go. I mean, she was really good, but the fact is she was attacking other Democrats and making a mess among the Democratic party. Yeah, I didn't like it. Swalwell was my favorite out of the whole night. I would like to have seen Biden come back a little stronger when she went after him, but I think Swalwell was the guy, and it was his comment about the torch and how he was in grammar school, I know, in middle school, and a senator came and talked to them about how they need to pass the torch to the next generation, and that senator was Joe Biden, and I thought that was a really powerful. Powerful, important statement. Yeah, exactly. So what do you think of Harris and Biden? Well, I think she did what she tried to do is draw him out, show the world that, yeah, if I could do it to Joe Biden, I could do it to Donald Trump. And I think that was her main objective. Generally about the debates, I was reminded of what Ronald Reagan, his first commandment was, and that is, thou shall not throw any other Republican under the bus. But by nature, all these debates is all about throwing your fellow Democrats under the bus in order for you to kind of claw your way up to the top. But remember, when you get into these general elections, excuse me, the primaries and these debates, whoever does emerge as the final candidate, are they so bloodied and bruised that when it comes to the general election against Trump, that they're tattered and torn? And that's why Reagan said that, you know? Because they're tearing each other up. Nobody's torn up Harris yet, but that'll come. They have to stop it, to some degree. Yeah, and I understand, and I'll take your point that Harris was showing us that she is winnable. She can fight with Trump. And in fact, in my mind, my perception of what was going on is, I saw her on the stage with Trump. I saw her wiping up the stage with Trump. She could do that beyond any of the others. She would nose-to-nose with him and beat him to a frazzle. I think it's clear, and that is a big piece. Even though she might not have been fair to Biden, even though she may not have the policies that Elizabeth Warren has, she's got guts. I think Elizabeth Warren does, too. So I think she could fight with Trump just as well and has a little more political experience under her belt, more so than common Harris does. So maybe those two women. How about that? That'd be good. I could handle that. What didn't come up was age. And let's hypothetically say Joe Biden because he can take on Trump like no one else can. Okay, I'm not saying that's the case, but you cannot help equate Joe Biden to John McCain and the age factor, the health factor. And what was the primary key component of John McCain's loss, the selection of his vice president, because the vice president was one heartbeat away from the president of the United States. She killed him. So this equation will be no different with Joe Biden that will run through the back of people's minds. Who's his VP pick if he's the nominee? I'm just saying you could have a very rich, very rich pool of candidates. He had a very careful choice if he's the nominee. Yeah, and if he'd be smart to pick a very strong vice president pick because John McCain didn't. Right. Oh yeah, absolutely. So it's interesting how some names are elevated and other ones are flat. We haven't changed our view of them and other ones have declined. And this is gonna happen more and more. It's really an interesting experience, although I'm sad because they didn't follow the Reagan formula. Well, I don't know, the first day did. The first night did. That was one of my notes was that there was this wonderful feeling of camaraderie in the whole panel on that first night. The one issue was how to get rid of Trump. Right, the second night was more of a free-for-all. But that first night was, there was a real sense of camaraderie between everyone. You get different policy, not personality. Right, exactly. Now what about Trump and the rape case? Can we talk about that for a minute? Yes, please. Yeah, yes, but you have some thoughts about that. Oh, I have a couple. Yeah, I actually have a lot. This is number... Hold it to a few minutes, please. I could go on for days, but that's okay. I'm saving that for my show later on today. Everyone, tune in to find your respect in the cast. We'll be talking about it some more. But at any rate, he says, she's not my type. Now, I want you to look at her next to the pictures of all of the people that have claimed that he insulted them. And they all look the same, and they all look just like his wives. So you're gonna... And he said to each one of them, oh, she's not my type. So what's the opposite flip side of that statement? Well, she is my type, and I'd be happy to rape her. Yeah, exactly. Thank you. I'm sorry, but not my type is a really bad response to this allegation. The worst news boss. She's not my type, and therefore I would not have raped her. So that's ridiculous. I would not have raped her. Oh, you said you didn't know her, too. Yeah, but nobody believes that. Right, because there's a picture of that together. I know they got confirmation. Two other women who were consulted at the time. The problem is rape is a felony. Yeah. It's punishable by decades in jail or worse. Right. And yet he gets a pass on it. It's a moral sin. She still has the dress. I hope the women of this country unite against him on this. I hope she still has the dress, and it's able to find some kind of DNA on it, and that, because she does have the dress. And I hope, and she's turned it in. So if they can find some DNA on that, she doesn't have to bring the rape case. The state can bring the rape case. Well, yeah, but this goes to a whole new area. Monica Lewinsky. That's what I've reminded them of. Exactly. Let's assume she finds the dress. I mean, she has the dress. She has the dress. Let's assume that the modern science can pull some DNA off it. I know when that begins. Let's assume it's a suspicious DNA, and we believe it's his DNA. But we have to get a swap from him. Where are we going to get that from? Because he's not going to cooperate. Have we? We're going to do phone around and grab his code. When he's done? Yeah, he doesn't cooperate with legal process. Think about that part. Thank you. Catch me if you can. So it's going to be hard to make that case without his DNA. I mean, the travesty is, here's yet another woman coming out and making this allegation. And it's yet a peep within the news cycle, and it's a peep within the ranks of the American public. Yeah, that's the point. This is horrific. It's me. That's because it's the new normal. Well, the deplorable new normal. The deplorable normal. And I guess maybe I'm just getting too old. I'm just shocked that this is a blip in the news cycle. And yet again, it's this aspect of Donald Trump isn't really even being talked about again at all. A little bit, but not enough. He has them hypnotized somehow. He has the press hypnotized. And you know, very interesting. He goes, yes, he goes to Japan. He goes to the G20. He's not in the news very much. The press is all running to the other side of the boat all week with the debates. It's very interesting. And he's quiet. I don't think he's quiet because he wants to be quiet. I think he's be quiet because they ignored him. And that's what they need to do. They need to develop their own agenda and to connect the dots in their own way and not let him do it. The distraction, the shiny object, they've been following that around for the last three years. And look at that's gotten us. We have one more point. What does that say? Supreme Court. Supreme Court. You're going to be my handwriting. No, I cannot. I just know. It's not on his list. I'm just going to put it on the list. Let's talk about the Supreme Court this week. That was special. Go ahead. Well, the Supreme Court came down in two very important cases. And one is kind of a green light for the Republicans to gerrymander and basically rearrange the board of each county within each state on who's going to be part of that precinct. And what a horrible decision that is. However, now on the other one is the 2020 census question. Whereas you're trying to load a question and that's going to exclude millions of would be census participants. And they didn't outlaw it. They just said, your motivation for allowing this to come to play is weak. So they basically just kicked that down the can until later. But there is a finite deadline of when you can actually print these censuses. Happening now. Yeah. So this question most likely will not get on the census. It's interesting how they did that fuzzy kind of opinion on it because you would have thought that maybe the president could do this kind of thing. All you'd have to do is demonstrate that it was a sincere motivation in the question. But in practical terms, they wiped them out on it. Yeah. And you want to know if Tom Hufflinger or Huffler, remember he was the Republican operative that when he died and on his computer was a whole map and roadmap on how this question will get on the 2020 census and game it towards the Republicans. So that came to light. Now, that wasn't introduced to Supreme Court, but it was introduced elsewhere. And you've got to wonder if somehow that permeated its way before a decision was made. It's not supposed to, but you have to wonder. Well, the Republicans are bent on suppression of votes and on scaring people away from the polls. And even though, from a practical point of view, they're not going to have the benefit of this immigration question on the census. I think it's too late for them. And the census is only every 10 years. So as far as 2020 is concerned, it's too late. So they'll find, they can find. And I guarantee they will find other ways to suppress votes. Jury mending. And jury mending would be one of them, just one, and scare people away. Closing polling stations, making them too far away. So there was a pyrrhic victory at best on the census question. I don't think it means that much because there's so many other things Republicans can and will do, and that's the new norm for them. As you win elections by cheating, that's how you win elections. And so the whole thing about apportionment has been a Republican stable for 20 years at least. And they want stable. And they want to do that again. And they got a pass on it. And then Supreme Court didn't restrain them in any way. And you can do really draconian things with reapportionment. And we're going to be faced with that in this coming election. What to do, what to do? This is an example of what happens when you move the Supreme Court over, when you pack the court with conservatives and right wing. I think that the end of the day, that day, they announced both of these decisions. It was not a good day for the liberals, progressives, the Democrats, and the country, sorry. OK, final comments. Looking forward to next week. What do you got? Looking forward to next week. Oh, gosh, let's see what Iran. You can follow me the wrong way to introduce that. What are you expecting next week? I think Iran is going to be a big thing. It's going to be big in the news. I think we're still going to be hearing a lot about the debate coming up. People are going to be explaining themselves, trying to say a little bit more about how they feel about things and what they had said in that 30 seconds on the debate stage. And then I think we're going to be really dealing with what's happening at the border. I'm hoping anyway, because now we've got people like Umcor and Red Cross, people really starting to clamor. And hopefully, in my heart of hearts, I'm hoping that America will start to just stand against this, to stand up and say no more, because it is the silent people that are just as complicit as the guards standing at the door in my mind. For me, every week is expect the unexpected, something that's not on our list that will soon be on our list. So am I looking forward to it? No, because it usually is bad news. But secondly, I think there will be some developments. I think there's back channel communications going on right now with Iran. Iran can't afford a war. We can't afford a war. They can't hold up with these sanctions much longer. And I think there is some back channel communications. If it hasn't happened, it's going to happen. It's a reality show, isn't it? All these issues and all these troubles, they keep on coming back like bad wine. They never actually go away. They never get resolved. They're with us like the pox. And wait, there's a new one coming back. I mean, I say coming back, it's the same sort of thing. It's the fiscal management. It's the cap, what do you call it, the deficit? The deficit, the budget. The deficit. The spending. Yeah, the inability of federal government to pay bills. And that's coming back in September, I tell you now. And there's no solution for it. I'm not sure that Congress is any better off. And I'm sure he'll take the same position and try to wrangle something out of it, use it as a negotiating tool. And it's coming back in September. So what is that, 60 days? We'll see. Use a bad wine analogy. Remember, when all bad wine is consumed, there's nothing left but a hangover and a headache. OK, but we here don't do food fights. Thank you, Tim. Thank you, Jay. Appreciate it. Thank you, Cynthia. Thank you, Jay. Aloha. Aloha. See you next week.