 I'm Jay Fidel, and that's Tim Apachele, and Cynthia Lee Sinclair, and we're doing Trump week. But I have some comments I want to make, you know, it's like Charles Dickens. We live in interesting times, you know, and we live in Trump world. Trump affects everything, you know. He's the first X number of articles in the Washington Post and the New York Times. Every day people really need to know what he's doing because he's wrecking our democracy, and he's wrecking our moral order and the world liberal order that we worked so hard to achieve in World War II and thus afterward. And now we have to follow him. We're part of a journalistic effort to follow him and to make sense of what he's doing, and thus to find out how to correct our course, either now or soon, but not later, sooner. So Trump week is intended to connect the dots and reveal these processes, reveal, you know, the news behind the news and the trends and sea changes, okay? So here we are on a given Friday trying to make sense of it. Tim, what is the most important story of the week? Well, I'm conflicted between the Republicans that have stand up on their own two hind legs and voted against the national emergency, those brave, leavened Republican senators that did that, and excuse me, 12, 12, and between that and the threats that were levied from Donald Trump on the Breitbart interview about basically trying to prime the pump for violence. Well, let's unpack that, okay? The first one, why is it so important that the Republicans defected? Now, all of them, some of them were switched around, and I get an image on the ones who were switched around, you know, why affirm this or not, is that he makes these calls and threatens them, threatens them with a primary, and they fall into it. They agree, they are frightened by him, he's trying to intimidate them, and he achieves that. And the weakness he's working on is that these guys see the job of serving in the Congress as a career, not as Mr. Smith goes to Washington and does the right thing. And this is a great weakness in our system right now. We talked about that last week as why do these Republicans are sitting on their thumbs silent, and we talked about how their career is more important to them. And sure enough, we had four senators that were vehemently opposed to this national emergency, went on the record, went to the Washington Post, did editorials, Tom Tillis from North Carolina, and then at the last minute they switched their votes because Pence and Trump called them up, most likely, and said, I will come out against you. Because Trump said, this is about me, and it would basically be saying this is about loyalty to me. Yeah, it's not a matter of substance, it's loyalty, and there were a couple of articles in the paper about that, which is really awful, to have people, A, intimidate, and they run the government on the basis of a personal demand that way. Anyway, okay, four of them. You have their names? Well, I know Tom Tillis was one. I don't have them. Well, actually I do have some of them here. Let's talk about Senator Ben Sass from Nebraska. Now before he switched his vote, he said, as a constitutional conservative, I do not want a future Democratic president unilaterally rewriting gun laws or climate policy. So that was his statement before the vote. That's pretty definitive that I don't want this national emergency. And he got to him. And got to him. Let's also talk about John Barrasso from, a Republican from Wyoming. He said that I think it's not the path that we want to go down. And then we had John Cornyn from Texas, not a good strategy. So these are all came out and said, you know, this is not a good idea yet. And Trump got to them by intimidating and telling them to be a primary... They don't call the bully pulpit for nothing. Yeah, well, I got words for him, but they're not fit for your time. But we did see a certain amount of defection here. And that's the golden. That's the good part. What about that? Do you think there's a trend going on, Cynthia? Well, I think that some of these senators only did this just because they did it for their constituents, right? And hopefully that does mean that there's a trend, that they're starting to listen more to the people that elected them than the president or one of his henchmen. And I don't use that term loosely either. Do you think that this play in Congress and these midnight intimidation calls have any effect on the Supreme Court? Because this is going to come before them. It shouldn't. It shouldn't. But do you think... They're pointed for life. They're beyond public polls. Do you think they're going to uphold the national emergency? No. I don't either. I think they're going to strike it down. And I know that Kavanaugh was appointed by Trump, but there's no guarantee that because he was appointed by Trump that he'll vote for Trump. On his and Trump's agenda. I think we've seen Roberts didn't fall in the suit with Bush and Trump on the Affordable Care Act. So once they're in there, I think if they're really hard trying to follow the law, they'll look at the law. Yeah. If, there's a big if in there, if they're going to be following the law. Well, it's not only the law. I mean, it's more than just the law here. Yeah, moral standards. It's a fundamental constitutional issue about the balance of power between the three branches of government. That is the law. The Supreme Court is trying affirmatively intentionally to wreck that. So if they see that, you know, they can't possibly support him on it. I would be my hope that the Senate actually has enough votes in the House, will have enough votes to override the veto. I don't think it's likely, but wouldn't that be nice so that the judicial or Supreme Court in our District 9 or District 5 doesn't have to get involved with that. It's been taken care of and it's off the plate. I think it will affect the Supreme Court to know that it came that close to an override. Right. I hope there is an override. I hope there's more defections. Right. If he does more crazy things in the next, you know, few weeks, maybe they can achieve an override. That would be a real break for us. Right. Okay. Let's talk about the next one. Let's talk about all the criminal prosecutions that are going on, Cynthia. What happened this week? Well, Manafort was back in front of the judge, but in my mind, she didn't give him a very hard sentence either. She had the possibility to give him 10 years and gave him three and a half. So now it's, you know, four years and three, so he's only got like seven years, but the best part was afterwards when they hit him with how many, nine indictments, 11 indictments or something like that? From the state of New York. From the state of New York. Right. Afterwards. And these are charges that he cannot get pardoned from. So those, you know, come to freedom. I know it's significant that they did it so soon after, you know, I mean, within minutes he's like, and that was a statement to Donald Trump. That was a statement saying, this is what's going to happen. Your part, your power of pardon will not affect this. Yeah. I guess, you know, it's funny that the federal sentencing judges may have had that in their minds, you know, about the possibility of pardons didn't matter that much because I think it's clear he will pardon them on the federal charges. Why would he now? Well, maybe it doesn't matter. Because if he's going to take a lot of flak, a lot of heat for the pardons, I wouldn't. Because he knows that the state's going to take him down anyway, so what good is a pardon? So why take the heat for it? So he's, you know, he's cagey enough to know that a pardon won't do any difference. He's just going to take a flak off. But it will hurt him. It will hurt him. Maybe it will hurt him with some of the senators who would vote on override, you know, maybe they'll say, oh my goodness gracious, pardoning people who are. You know, you just sunk about 25 feet, you know, because you probably thought you were going to get a pardon. Yeah. And I don't think he's going to get one. See, if those two judges had given him just a thought, if those two judges had given him a really long sentence, you know, cumulative sentence, then Trump could say, well, that's too long. Well, it's too much. Stay over it. They just were trying to hurt me. Yeah. It's just political sentencing. I thought about that very thing. They didn't do that. Right. They took away his ammunition. Exactly. I thought that very same thing, too. Yeah. Yeah. So you think the state court will hit him hard? Yeah. I do. Absolutely. I do. And now they're coming out. Oh, New York. My home state. Well, I'll tell you, you know, they're talking about being able to indict him on charge state charges in New York also. Not just him. I mean, President Trump. That's the way you talk. I don't think they could do much with it until after he's president. No, but they can indict him at least. Yeah. So because there's been all this stuff about, can we indict a sitting president? And now they're coming out with stuff that says, yeah, we can do it on state charges. It comes to the almost veers into the Nancy Pelosi about no impeachment discussion that we had this week. Right. And the thing is, well, why bother if you know it's not going to work? Well, at the same time, if you know that once Mueller's report comes out and this shows that it was clear high crimes of Mr. Meaners, if you fail to act, even if you're not successful, you're basically saying anyone can get away with breaking the law. Right. Well, I don't think she meant that, though. No, I don't. But I think she has that option. A lot of people took it the wrong way, I think, and I agree with you that she didn't take that off the table, Mueller's report off the table. Right. She said only if, unless there are other things that come forward. Right. You will? Yeah. And there will be. And I think she was sharing that. Sorry. You know, what do they say? There's nothing worse than an impeachment that an impeachment has failed. Yes. We've been saying that. Yeah. We've said that many times. And if she believes that it won't fail, she'll move for impeachment. Right. But even if you know you're not going to get the votes, you still have to go to the motion and say to the American public, these are the charges, these are the things we've identified as high crimes of Mr. Meaners, and we're putting out the table and we're going to do what we can as stewards of the Constitution. Right. And I agree with you absolutely. I think there should be impeachment here. And I think it will put the Republicans, you know, it will put them in relief. I mean, it will show them clearly for what they are. Right. Partly. It will push them in the corner. Yeah, it will push them in the corner. Yeah. And they'll be revealed. And the reality is, you know, we get the new normal, we tend to accept what he does. Right. We shouldn't do that. No. In fact, he's done so many things already that are clearly impeachable, that are heinous offenses, that are treasonous offenses, that we shouldn't tolerate that. We should go after him right now. Well, it gets worse. And I want to ask you guys, I guess it's your turn, Tim, I want to ask you about that incredible remark that he made in a blog, was it? No, it was a bright part. It was an interview. A bright part. A bright part. Can you give us the language? I can give the language because I was really taken back, and this goes back to what Cohen said about him not willing to leave office peaceably, that he was implying violence in the Cohen testimony. We saw this being implied at the 2016 election, that if I don't get elected, it's all rigged, and basically implying that the whole election was rigged, and that would incite violence. So here's what he said to Breitbart. Now enforcement, let's see, law enforcement, military, construction workers, and bikers for Trump, they all travel around all over the country, they've been great, but these are tough people, but they're peaceful people, but they're peaceful people, and Tief, that's the anti-fascist group, it's an anti-protest against fascism, and Tief, and all the better hope, they stay that way. Well, he also went on to- So that's not only implicit, but also explicit in my world. Oh, yes. He went on to go and say specifically about Congress and the investigations, very specifically referred to the investigations, about being something that could trigger this kind of bad reaction, bad, all bad. Well, you said this was an illegal and conflicted investigation in search of a crime. Oh, you already had it, oh yeah, right. Well, you know, before we do the break, I'd just like to know your visceral reaction to that, and compare it, I mean, consider it with Michael Cohen's closing remark on the Wednesday hearing. It was the first thing I thought of was what Michael Cohen had said, and then I also decided to go look up a little bit more about the Enabling Act of 1933 in Germany. In Germany. Oh my gosh, this is exactly the same kind of thing that Hitler did when he walked, and we're following, I should say, he's following the exact same path. Hitler said almost something identical to this same kind of threat, trying to incite the violence, and so I was absolutely floored. I had to sit down, my knees kind of went weak, and I was terrified, and I thought this is it. This is the exact evidence that shows his intent, and that is his intent, I believe. Yeah, it goes back to, I could shoot somebody and fit that in. Exactly. I am lawless. I am a criminal. I'm above the law, not only the Constitution, but criminal law. Beat up the protesters. All do your legal fees. All of that kind of stuff, right? Well, my visceral reaction was profound, because I felt that, again, where are Republican House of Representatives? Where are Republican senators? When do they say, my job's not worth this guy being above the criminal law, and or the Constitution? When are they going to say, I don't care if I get re-elected? Yeah. And at some point, they're going to have to measure one or the other. Yeah, and while they're oath of office, they're duty to the country. They're duty to all the people in the country, and he is making threats. Threats that you're talking about in Breitbart, to activate the lowest part of our community. The part of our community that he's bought off, like a biker, is that you kidding me? And trying to get people activated in the military. They're supposed to be expressing the rule of law. The police are supposed to be expressing the rule of law. He's going to twist and contort our basic institutions against the rule of law. And I kept waiting, okay, who's really responsible for guiding him onto the road, the road of democracy? And it's got to be the senators and the House representatives of his party. So it's a test, it's a test of our democracy. It's a test to see whether there can be proper balance of power. And whether these institutions can work quickly enough to stop the executive. Right. I know with John, David, and my brother yesterday, I think it was, about the presidential creep. That's a double entendre, isn't it? The creep of power at the president level. Throughout the national history. And clearly that is moving faster now than ever. And it's scarier now. Throughout history though, and I'm sure you shared that. Throughout history we did have this, you know, balance, imbalance, balance of presidential power. And you know, through the decades and centuries, we've been back and forth on the executive office. It's different. This is different. This is different. And they felt the same way. With that visceral reaction, I think we need to take a short break. Okay. Good idea. Aloha. This is Winston Welch. I am your host of Out and About, where every other week, Mondays at 3, we explore a variety of topics in our city, state, nation and world. And events, organizations, the people that fuel them. It's a really interesting show. We welcome you to tune in and we welcome your suggestions for shows. You got a lot of them out there. And we have an awesome studio here where we can get your ideas out as well. So I look forward to you tuning in every other week where we've got some great guests and great topics. You're going to learn a lot. You're going to come away inspired like I do. So I'll see you every other week here at 3 o'clock on Monday afternoon. 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. Okay, we're back with Tim Appichella and Cynthia Lee Sinclair talking about Trump, which we have to talk about. It's our duty to talk about Trump. So I'm trying to connect the dots. We have more fiscal issues. We have his budget that he submitted. And it's a whopping increase for the military. I'm not sure that we need that. And then at the same time, a huge reduction for social services. What happens, Cynthia? Medicare and Medicaid. And you have, what, 845 million? Billion. Is what the cut is? Billion? Million. Million. Million. Million. Yeah. To Medicare and Medicaid. And that is just huge. And you've got something, cost plus 50, what is that? Cost plus 50 is the concept that wherever we have troops in the world, we're going to charge them the cost of that being stationed and 50%. Now, our troops being deployed all over the world, believe it or not, are doing us a favor. They're keeping the United States secure as well. And, you know, be it in Japan or wherever we have troops in Europe, you know, they're there for a reason. That's to have security in the world. To be an active member of NATO. To be a, you know, a present force in Asia, the Pacific. Now to charge them and then want more money, the 50%, that's not doing us any favors. He's got to be kidding. No, that's part of his budget. It's got to be kidding. Because, A, they're not going to want us there. They want us out. Many of them want us out. They want us out anyway, right? And B, they're not going to pay us. So we're making ourselves enemies to the world, the world. Well, it gives them an excuse to pull out and make this country weaker. Yeah. Because, oh, you're not going to pay? Well, fine. I'm going to call them back. And again, it pulls the rug out from under NATO. Right. NATO is having a bad day these days. Yes, they are. And the EU and all that with Brexit going on. Brexit going on. And I believe the same Putin that is affecting the vote and Trump's policies in this country, the same Putin. Had a hand in Brexit vote. Had a big hand in Brexit vote. And he has a hand in Brexit vote right now. Right. And he's trying to wreck, you know, the solidarity of Europe. And he's doing it. He's trying to wreck the solidarity of this country. And he's doing it. Unfortunately, he has a useful idiot, as the term is portrayed. We have one in the Oval Office. Yes, we do. Playing, you know, doing Putin's bidding, as far as I'm concerned, because I've seen enough things to say, what's going on here? And it's unfortunate that our president of the United States is more akin to an allied with Soviet, well, excuse me, that was a slip of the tongue, of Russia versus NATO. Right. So, let's just put it all together. He's increased the military budget beyond what the military wanted. What's that about? He was looking for war? What is he looking for? Well, he's even bringing back all of the troops. He keeps talking about bringing all the troops back from everywhere. Yeah. So, if he's bringing them back... Saving money. Saving money, why does he need so much more? And the military guys don't, they don't really want it. They don't have a plan for that money. What is he trying to do? Pump everything up for a war? Well, maybe he could pump up the military budget and then borrow it for his wall. Which is what he's been talking about, too. I think that's part of it. But the other part is he's trying to develop a special relationship with the military. When he says in Breitbart that he has the military, he's trying to curry favor with them by giving them all this money, you know, because those guys like money. I guess it's a theoretical thing. They don't really need it, but they like money. Sure. And so, you know, this is his way of buying the military, loyalty, I think. Right. The other, okay, and then he's knocking off the social program. He swore that he would not reduce Medicare, Medicaid. Or Social Security. Or Social Security. Yeah, that's not a big cut, but there's cuts to Social Security. It's just the beginning now, I tell you. And before you know it, the very base who needs this money more than anyone else, the poor impoverished core of the country in the red states, they're going to get hit. I don't know if they realize that. Red state? All 50 states use Medicare if you're past 65. Sure. Get out of the baby boomer. Medicaid, and Medicaid is, you're right, this is red state big hit. And I'm wondering what he's thinking. Well, I don't know. I mean, he's breaching his promise. He's watching on his campaign promises. And he's hurting everyone in favor of what? Money that we don't need for military. Okay, and aside from that thing about, you know, what is it, cost plus 50% and all that, this is all like loony tunes. Right. Where are we going with this budget? Congress, this is going to be another test of his power. Right. Congress is not going to buy it. There's no way Congress is going to buy it. He needs approval of the budget in Congress. I agree. I have sort of an idea about what I think maybe is behind this, too, is he's been trying to, you know, make this huge chasm between the classes. You've got upper class, you've got lower class. And if he can take away their money, take away their funding, take away everything that they have and need to be able to be functional, they're no longer functional. And they're desperate and then they're in need of him. Right? And then he can control them better if he controls their money. And he'll lie to them. And he'll lie to them. They will accept his life. They will be desperate so they will buy into it. They will accept his life. I agree. Remember before you know it, you have a divisiveness. Right. A polarization of the society. Right. And they, you know, they won't realize that he has created it. Right. And then they'll be fighting in the streets. Right. And then he will do his military law thing. Right, martial law. Martial law. Yep. And before you know it, he'll be more powerful. And his state of law. All more, rather than wait for the, rather than wait for Congress to react to the budget, all the more reason to set that red line right now on the national emergency. What better reason for you to say, just establish it now. You're almost there. Override the veto. And then when it comes to the budget, it'll be a little bit easier. Right. I hope the Republicans wake up on this. Now, we didn't cover the wall specifically. So we started out with Congress would not give him the money he wanted for the wall. Then he declines the national emergency. And that's really tied up in court. That's not happening right now. But he lies to the public. He says, it's happening. All we got to do is finish it. And those people stand behind him in these ridiculous rallies. He's had one press conference in the last 81 days. Wow. That's it. And the rest of the time, he does these set up rallies with a wall of supporters and base people behind him. And it's like contorting the whole thing into U.E. Long in Louisiana. And he's realizing the dream of U.E. Long in Louisiana. So, okay. So now he's not able to get the 8 billion or whatever he wanted to. How much was it? 6 billion. It changes every time. It's up to 8 now. 5 billion. 7 billion. It's over 8 billion. 5.8 now. 8 billion. Now he wants to get that out of the military when it's a national emergency. Now he wants to get it straight away on the budget. But they already said no. And they're supposed to, the house is supposed to control the money. So he's going to do it no matter what. Even if all the steps up to this point fail, he's still going to try to do it. How would that work in the budget? He would budget what, 8 point something? Well, he needs really to do what he wants. It's well over 22, 25 billion dollars. So he's getting increments. Just a nuance. Remember when he signed, remember the House and the Senate said, here's our packet. You get 1.3 billion. Remember? He signed that. Remember, he signed that. Oh, yeah. That he accepted it. Yeah. Okay. So he no sooner assigned it, accepted it, then he said now it's a national emergency. So he can't be trusted at his word on this issue. Yeah. Okay. So he wanted a 5.7. Now he wants 8 point, whatever. Yeah. And before you know it, it's going to go up to well over 22, 25, and it will never stop. Yeah. And if we go back a little bit, if we remember when DACA was still a part of the deal, they offered him, how much do you remember? 25 up front. 25 up front. And signed up on DACA. It was a DACA exchange. And he didn't want to sign for DACA, so he first said he would do it, and then he took it back. Well, Stephen Miller got his ear, and that was the end of that. So, you know, here we are trying to connect the dots, you guys. Whether you've thought about it or not, I really like your thoughts now here today about why he's doing these completely inconsistent things, and just rattling sabers and shaking the pie as much as he can every day. You never know what to expect. Why? Is there a method about that madness? What's happening here? Can I quote Descartes? I think therefore I am. Okay. So, if he's rattling sabers, he's thinking rattling sabers. That's within his mind. It's really that simple. He's chaotic within himself. Well, what's his purpose? I believe he wants to follow right along the same dictator footsteps of every other dictator that's worked their way up. And if he can handle it, and he can make it happen before the election, because I don't think he will be re-elected, but if he can get it done before the re-election then he can take over. He can decide he wants to stay. If he can declare martial law, he can decide he wants to stay. Have you got it, Cynthia? I think what this is all about is power. I totally think that's what it is. And he wants to empower himself and enhance his dictatorial power. Yep. One more thing we had, and let's see what, oh, was it... The unanimous health vote? Yeah. 420 to zero. How often does that happen? Yeah, exactly. 420 to zero. Making the Mueller report public. Public, right. What happened there? He didn't want to do that. He was opposing that. So this is a big embarrassment to him. It is. 420 to zero. Four people just voted present. They kind of abstained, yeah. Well, it could have been similar in the Senate had it not been for Lindsey Graham putting in what I call a poison pill. And to Chuck Schumer's resolution, and the poison pill was, okay, we'll do the vote here in the Senate, but I want to have an FBI... I want a special counselor to investigate the FBI and Hillary Clinton for her emails. So he's going back to that. So that was the poison pill. That's why the Senate's not going forward on this resolution. But the House did. The House did. 420 to zero. Amazing. We live in a constitutional crisis every day. Yes, we do every day. And that's why we have to come back next week and keep our fingers on this. It's so extraordinary. That's an important conversation. Thank you, Tim. Thank you, Jay. Thank you, Cynthia. Thank you, Jay. Have a good weekend. You guys are great. Aloha.