Join the riveting conversation with me, Jack Hopkins, and my esteemed guest, investigative journalist Jonathan Greenberg. Greenberg, a Yale Law School alumnus and former Forbes 400 reporter, uncovers the audacious financial fabrications of Donald Trump, or his alter ego, John Barron. Our dialogue reveals the enigmatic loyalty Trump maintains within the GOP, as we dissect the reasons behind the party's unyielding support and highlight the fear tactics used against its members. With each shocking revelation, understand the deep-rooted implications of Trump's manipulation of his public image and financial status, as we scrutinize the mechanisms of power that keep him afloat.
As we question the Department of Justice under Merrick Garland, Greenberg brings his expertise in investigative journalism to bear on the DOJ's approach to the January 6th investigation. He critique's Garland's strategy, pondering if his bottom-up case building is the most effective way to confront the threats to American democracy. Reflecting on legal scholars like Laurence Tribe, we delve into the intricacies of Garland's cautious progression, contrasting it with the urgent need for a robust and aggressive defense of democratic principles.
In our final exchange, we embark on a strategic discussion to transform the political narrative through media campaigns in swing states. By confronting voters with innovative and thought-provoking messages, Jonathan aims to provoke powerful self-reflection on one's values and actions. Through the lens of "Dems Vote Haley" campaign and the potential resonance of the hashtag #hatriot, Jonathan explores tactics to engage and sway non-mainstream media consumers, combat voter complacency, and challenge the disbelievers of our democratic processes. Don't miss this episode for a deep exploration of the power, fear, and pivotal moments shaping democracy's future.
Join the riveting conversation with me, Jack Hopkins, and my esteemed guest, investigative journalist Jonathan Greenberg. Greenberg, a Yale Law School alumnus and former Forbes 400 reporter, uncovers the audacious financial fabrications of Donald Trump, or his alter ego, John Barron. Our dialogue reveals the enigmatic loyalty Trump maintains within the GOP, as we dissect the reasons behind the party's unyielding support and highlight the fear tactics used against its members. With each shocking revelation, understand the deep-rooted implications of Trump's manipulation of his public image and financial status, as we scrutinize the mechanisms of power that keep him afloat.
As we question the Department of Justice under Merrick Garland, Greenberg brings his expertise in investigative journalism to bear on the DOJ's approach to the January 6th investigation. He critique's Garland's strategy, pondering if his bottom-up case building is the most effective way to confront the threats to American democracy. Reflecting on legal scholars like Laurence Tribe, we delve into the intricacies of Garland's cautious progression, contrasting it with the urgent need for a robust and aggressive defense of democratic principles.
In our final exchange, we embark on a strategic discussion to transform the political narrative through media campaigns in swing states. By confronting voters with innovative and thought-provoking messages, Jonathan aims to provoke powerful self-reflection on one's values and actions. Through the lens of "Dems Vote Haley" campaign and the potential resonance of the hashtag #hatriot, Jonathan explores tactics to engage and sway non-mainstream media consumers, combat voter complacency, and challenge the disbelievers of our democratic processes. Don't miss this episode for a deep exploration of the power, fear, and pivotal moments shaping democracy's future.
Welcome to the Jack Hopkins Show podcast, where stories about the power of focus and resilience are revealed by the people who live those stories and now the host of the Jack Hopkins Show podcast, jack Hopkins.
Speaker 2:Welcome to the Jack Hopkins Show podcast. I'm your host, jack Hopkins, today. I'm thrilled to have investigative journalist and fact checker Jonathan Greenberg, forbes 400 reporter in 1984, who taped two interviews during which Donald Trump pretended to be the fictitious John Barron. Now Jonathan Greenberg's career started four years ago at Forbes magazine. He's been an investigative, financial and political journalist for such national publications as the Washington Post, the New York Times, mother Jones, Forbes, money and GQ.
Speaker 2:In this episode we talk about all things Donald Trump we talk about why do Republicans continue to support Trump. We also discuss who the two most fearful appearing Republicans in Congress happen to be, and you're going to love the discussion we have about that. We're also going to talk Merrick Garland what he's doing and what he's not doing. In this episode. Jonathan said something to me that got a wide-eyed are you kidding out of me? That's not easy to do and after I said it I was like boy. I don't remember the last time I said that Jonathan said something that it was just spontaneous. It was that shocking to me. You're going to love this episode with Jonathan Greenberg because Jonathan is going to reveal some things, some insights that I hadn't thought about, things and perspectives I just, I hadn't thought from that angle and it was really eye-opening.
Speaker 2:So, without further ado, let's get into my conversation with investigative journalist Jonathan Greenberg. Okay, jonathan, as you know, through text messages that we've had back and forth, I've been excited about having you on, and when you accepted my invite to be a guest on the podcast and I started looking further into your body of work, I was like holy cow, this guy is so much more. There are so many layers to this onion, so I want to get into those layers as we go through. Maybe let's start with the thing that I hear mentioned about you, probably more often than anything, and that is donald trump, the forbes 400 and john barron and your role in all of that.
Speaker 3:Yeah, thank you. It is a funny Jack, a funny circumstance of life that I happen to be just in the timing. I was at Forbes magazine in 1980. I got there out of college and I was a researcher, a fact checker, and we heard after a year there they said to me you know, you're one of the, you know, the most factually focused researchers and there's this big job Malcolm is asking for to start to run the research for this new project, the Forbes 400. And so I took it on and you know, for the next 13 months traveled around the country and talked to people and I had a specific focus on the harder to measure real estate wealth, because you don't have, like, if you have built, you know, some wealthy person's stock in a company that's easy to measure the value of, but in terms of real estate wealth it takes a lot to know. And I had my grandfather was involved in real estate and knew a number of people in New York and I just I would go out and interview people, talking to them about other people and other holdings and doing a lot of research. So through that I came across Donald Trump and you know was interviewed him as Trump Tower was being built and he cons me into putting him on the Forbes 400 when he was really. All the wealth was in his father's hands, not his, and even that did not amount to the amount of money it would have taken to get it. He was probably worth, as I learned much later based upon a filing that you know. This was before the days of the internet, jack, so you know there was a file in the New Jersey Gaming Commission that folder that said what he actually owned and it only became public. I was only able to access it about six years ago online and I realized that he was worth less than $5 million at the time and we put him on it $100 million and from there he continued to game the system and plant lies using this fictitious John Barron that his secretary had in the interview to talk about Donald's wealth and it sounds just like Donald Trump if you listen to both together.
Speaker 3:And when I wrote this series for the Washington Post about it, it was a big expose. It was international news because I saved the tapes. I'm sort of like a pack rat. I've been a journalist for over 45 years now, since I was in high school, and I saved everything, and so I saved the tapes and I didn't even realize that the tape of me interviewing John Barron the two tapes were there. I didn't realize they were fake until I went looking for the tape for another project that I was doing. Someone who I had interviewed their family said could you find that tape of my father? He's now deceased and it's from 35 years ago and you know, I'd like you to move it on to digital. I said, sure, I'll do that. I went looking for the tape and then I said, oh, look, here's the Forbes 400 tape. And then I was like John Barron and it was just oh my gosh, I've got to listen to these tapes.
Speaker 3:Anyway, I played the tapes I, I you know and in it he planted these false narratives about his wealth and his family wealth that stayed with Forbes throughout the 80s and allowed him, as Trevor Noah said on the Daily Show, the origin lie upon which Trump built his bullshit career. He actually used these inflated estimates to borrow money from banks. Most people believed no one would actually lend based on it, but in fact they did, and he's a master at lying. He's the most successful conman and liar when people so. When I was at the Washington Post and I played the tapes and we had everyone from Marty Baron, the fantastic investigative reporter and editor who was the editor-in-chief, who really one of the greatest editors of all time the movie Spotlight was built upon him and all the managing editors, the senior editors. They were all sitting around the table and he looked. Marty Baron looked at me and he said you really didn't know, that was Donald Trump.
Speaker 3:You know, because it sounds just, and what I've written about that, and I think is, really goes to the core of Trump's ability to succeed, despite getting caught again and again in his lies, despite getting caught again and again with his fraud, despite needing to be sued by, you know, every person who wants to just get him to pay out a freaking contract that he has signed. I mean 3,000 lawsuits, what we don't, and the ability, the way he scanned, you know, his way to the top of the Republican Party, starting with 1% of the vote and having Jeb Bush and others there who were, you know, extremely powerful and well connected, and the way he has completely vanquished the Republican Party, is that it goes to that theory of how, in the very beginning, jonathan Greenberg, you know and for you know, could not have anticipated that someone would call Forbes. You know, having talked to me the year before, met with me, knowing what his somewhat, what his voice was, but having not spoken to him since the year before and saying I'm John Barron, doing a little bit of a Queens, you know, street twang to his voice and pretend to be his own, his own VP of finance, and speak in the third person to plant lies and, you know, ask for it to be off the record. You know which? Of course it's. You know it's really interesting from a journalistic ethics perspective is 28 years. You know it's really interesting from a journalistic ethics perspective is 28 years. You know there's a statute of limitations, but there's also like, well, if it's off the record but you don't fucking exist, I'm sorry, my friend, can I say oh no, if it's off the record but you don't exist, I mean, you know, am I supposed to honor that agreement? I mean, you're obviously playing me and you're playing Forbes. Forbes and he did for a decade. But what?
Speaker 3:The larger lesson from that is that, as journalists and people say, how could Forbes be so stupid? How could Jonathan be so stupid? We have a system, jack, both in media and in politics and in business okay, all three of these areas, the main three areas of it and in law, that anticipates that people are not going to lie shamelessly and relentlessly and refuse to participate in the very normative foundation of the institutions of modern society and modern life, absolutely. And as a result, no one was prepared for someone who could lie the way Trump did and attack the way Trump has, the way Trump did and attack the way Trump has. So, just as you know. So how could you know? Nobody in history has pretended to be their own PR person when calling the media and talking to reporters they've talked to before.
Speaker 3:And in the same way, you know, know, you go to business, you sign a contract, you lend, you know, trump money based upon him saying he has these assets or these wealth, and then he's saying you know, you know, screw you, you know, try to collect or sign a contract for the glass and the Taj Mahal, the 600 million dollar casino he built, and the poor glass contractor three million dollar contract to put in all those windows lays out the money and he's like it comes time to collect, pays all his workers and he's late in collecting. Where's my money? And he's like actually, you know, I don't think I'm gonna pay you all that money. How's 25? What do you mean? 25? You contracted for three million dollars.
Speaker 3:Yeah, well, how's you know what? How's nothing, sue me, it'll cost you millions and maybe you'll get 25. And he's like so what will you offer me? Is, will pay me 90? Well, how's 30? So, and suddenly the guys negotiate, similar to the judges that we see, similar to merrick garland, cowering in fear that trump be treated fairly and it not appear political yes, and, and and here's a good place for me to let the listeners know, or the viewers, you and I, the relationship you and I have.
Speaker 2:We started out in disagreement regarding merrick garland. This was at a time when I was vehemently defending merrick garland, and, and the time span, and I, I, I don't know, but just off the top of my head I'm going to say that goes back what? Maybe a year ago?
Speaker 3:Probably two.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I guess probably would be two. And yet we kind of at least as you do online we kind of became fast friends in that we recognized we had so many other things that we were in agreement on. But here it is, we've come full circle and now I'm standing shoulder to shoulder with you and I'm saying you know what gives. You know, merrick Garland has let us down. Let us down. Yeah. So let me ask you because, as an investigative journalist, you you've known the players for a long time. You've you've known their backgrounds. You've known how trump has been able to rig the system on his behalf. What was it specifically about? How the DOJ was moving or, in this case, not moving forward? What experiences from your background over the last 40 years were kind of pinging and saying they're going about this wrong?
Speaker 3:they need to move now. I I just want you to know, by the way, that um, you're not the only one who's who's come around to change um. It's it in terms of merrick garland, lauren's tribe, um, the, the constitute, the harvard constitutional law professor, who, who's perhaps the best known constitutional, you know law professor in the country, on just just a few days ago, in response to a tweet that I made on his you know, on his comment, um basically pulled out, pulled his support. I'm trying to find it for you so I could read it for you. He pulled his support um from uh about about Donald Trump, Um, and I I'm sorry about about Merrick Garland, who he had always supported, Um, and so that happened March 31st.
Speaker 3:I'm just going to read you the tweet I had written in response to him, talking about the parallels the 100th anniversary of Hitler being sentenced, something that very few people know that I thought was very important, which is that German judges in 1924 had the legal power to deport Hitler to Austria. That's what the law said they would do. Instead, they bent the law to be fair to his Nazi demands. Usa should have learned from history. Instead, Biden appointed the weakest attorney general imaginable to counter the most dangerous coup ever. Lawrence Tribe, in a post that's had 970,000 views, responded to me. Sadly true, On his page, a tragically weak attorney general pitted against the most dangerous coup attempt in our entire history. Garland is a nice, smart and principled man, but one wholly unsuited to his job. I plead guilty for having overestimated him massively.
Speaker 2:Wow, as do I, as do I so this is.
Speaker 3:This is, and this is newsworthy I mean Tribe was holding out. The question is what we do about it now is a different question. But the question you asked me is how I recognize an investigative, financial and legal journalist, which is what my background is, you know, and what I've done for you know 40 years looking at you know, with you know I have this degree from Yale Law School for a master's for investigative journalist and basically a number of people who write about the law have this degree. There was just five people a year that went through the program, but we got to study with really smart law students and great lawyers. We got to take first amendment law and the concept is to get in you had to have already used legal journal, legal research to help make you know, to create better insight for the public into complex legal situations. And so when he first made what we're used to doing is reading between the lines of what people say and what people don't say One of Garland's very first speeches would be that we will go after anybody who has crossed the law.
Speaker 3:We will follow the leads, the criminality, wherever they may lead. No one is immune from prosecution. And then he started building the case from the bottom up and I was like, wait a minute. What he's saying between the lines, jack, is that he doesn't know whether Trump was guilty of organizing and inciting the January 6th attack on the Capitol of the United States and the Congress to disrupt the election, the proceedings of validating the election, in which 140 members of law enforcement the most police officers killed in any incident in the entire history of the United States. He doesn't know if Trump was responsible for that. He's going to go to the bottom and find out and I was like what I mean, did he not?
Speaker 3:watch Trump withholding the aid and saying fight like hell. And so that's where I immediately thought something is really, this guy is passing the buck. And then a year later, a year ago, Washington Post comes out with a story that says that he did not meet the FBI once, Never went to, you know Chris Ray's. A whole nother story. Catch and kill. You know Kavanaugh. Catch and kill, raped, you know Kavanaugh. I mean incredible that Ray still has a job. Incredible that Detroit still has a job and, frankly, incredible that Merrick Garland still has a job. Incredible that detroit still has a job and, frankly, incredible that merrick garland still has a job. And all of this goes to biden. You know biden.
Speaker 3:After his first year in office, you know, you know he said you know, my biggest mistake that I've made as president was overestimating the willingness of Republicans to reach across the aisle and reach a consensus. The new, you know, Republican Party and I was like wait a minute, where were you eight years during the Obama administration when you were VP? This is their MO. So back to the you know the story. In the Washington Post they said that, for one, people at the Department of Justice were instructed not to say the T word for Trump in Merrick Garland's office, because it would make in his presence, because it makes him angry when people talk about Trump makes him angry.
Speaker 2:Are you kidding me?
Speaker 3:I can't make this stuff up.
Speaker 3:And the other thing that came out that very few people are aware of is that Garland issued one of his first acts within months a memo to every member of the Department of Justice. Remember there were thousands of prosecutors across. You know various districts. You know and in every you know every region of the United States, in the federal you know the federal court system, that nobody could make a case against a political, a federal action without my prior approval and consent. He cut the legs off thousands of prosecutors.
Speaker 3:There is a very good federal case to be made for conspiracy in RICO against the fake electors in Arizona, in Georgia, in Wisconsin, in Michigan, in Pennsylvania, in Wisconsin, in Michigan, in Pennsylvania. These people signed sworn affidavits saying these are the certified and correct certification for my state, based upon Trump telling them to do so with no facts, no votes, no collections. It's called election fraud and it's a penalty punishable by five years in prison. Open and shut a case as you could possibly want. He didn't bring a single one and neither did he allow any of the US attorneys in any of these states to bring them.
Speaker 2:What's the end game of Merrick Garland?
Speaker 3:Well, he doesn't want to appear political. The end game of Merrick Garland to be most charitable and it's a great question, jack, and so it challenges me to get out of my indignation into his head the end game of Merrick Garland, I believe, is to restore normality and civility to the justice department after it was gutted by Trump and Barr.
Speaker 2:Do you think he has a clear understanding about the threat a second term of Trump represents, or do you think he's just in denial?
Speaker 3:I think he's in denial. I think he's, I think he is. So it's a great, great question. Um, um, I think he is. He is an institutionalist of the highest order and the institution of the, the senate confirmation process of the Supreme Court, was abused in order to deny him a seat on the Supreme Court and every and he has an MO which is about restoring, you know, institutions and not appearing political.
Speaker 3:And that the seeing what happened with Comey, with Hillary Clinton's emails being brought up eight days before that because they came into Anthony Weiner's ridiculous BS case about sexting someone who was under I mean nothing to do with anything, but he brought it up the same thing that was already investigated. And he's like, well, we can't do that before an election, we don't want to skewer the election, and he is so institutionally, it's like there is that he absolutely is in denial and doesn't see. He's got blinders on, he doesn't see the larger issue. And the fact is, hey, you know, mr attorney general, if democrats staged a coup and sent thousands of people to attack the capital and hang mike pence, or hang kamala har or whatever you know to, because she didn't go along with Biden stealing the election, I'd be first in line to say, yeah, bring them up on charges. This isn't the way we do things in this country, but the idea that it's a Republican and he doesn't want to appear political.
Speaker 3:And there also are a lot of very conservative influences on Merrick Garland, including a lawyer who had, you know, worked with Gorsuch, and there are, you know he is institutionally adverse to listening to public opinion, for example, but it really has resulted in and he's a very weak man. I mean, people say he went after the you know the, uh, oklahoma city, uh, you know terrorists and he got a conviction that people were giving me this. You know, constantly he's got a 99 conviction rate. He's getting his ducks in a row. I'm like, yeah, 99 conviction. If trump is never convicted, it will stay 99. You know, if he, if he's, if he's not convicted, because he'll never bring the case, right.
Speaker 2:Which begs the question then, does does President Biden understand the real threat to this nation, given that? Look, we've had all of this time that's passed of inaction from the DOJ, from Merrick Garland. So my question is does President Biden, do you think?
Speaker 3:does he truly grasp what awaits? Yes, I think he does. Okay, I think Biden does get it. I hear it in his speeches. His State of the Union was phenomenal, I mean, and he's you're beginning to see it in the ads. He sees he look, let's go back to the beginning of him appointing Garland. I believe he did not plan. I don't think he appreciated it then. Jack, it's a really good question. There's Biden now and there's Biden then. There's Biden now, who's like holy cow. You know, we're not going to get this guy on trial before the election. What the fuck? I would agree.
Speaker 3:And Biden then, though, made a miscalculation along with the centrist Democratic Party. Do you know what? Do you know what that miscalculation was? When he appointed him in, you know, in late January, february. You know what's that for? It's sort of like this stay the course thing. He, he appointed garland because it's his turn and he was going to get this, and then jan 6 happened. He said garland before jan 6 happened. He, first of all, he has this sense of loyalty which you know, I mean, you know, might, might really be the death of our democracy and the Democratic Party in free and fair election. This idea that it's his turn. You know, certainly I think it's his turn business. I think it's very, very destructive when the fact is, we need our best champion. We need to take off the kid gloves. We got to stop bringing, as Don Winslow said last night, you know, a spoon to a knife, fight you know I could not agree more.
Speaker 3:And so what Biden thought in the beginning, in the beginning, was that, like 160 Republicans, or 180 Republicans in Congress and in Senate, voted not to certify the election and voted for the insurrection. This was at a time when Mitch McConnell was saying we have got to. You know, this can't stand. We've got to do something about this. They didn't get the votes. They got six Republicans to vote to impeach. They didn't get enough, but there was a sense that they're going to pay for it at the polls in the midterm election. We're going to ride this to the midterm election and Americans because even the Republicans are standing against this. Nobody could believe at the time that Trump would try to own this and own the Republican Party and every freaking member in the House and the Senate, except for a few who then resigned Cheney and Romney, the people you know Sass now Lisa Murkowski, the few that stood up again but that they would all buckle down and say, yes, you won the last election, mr Trump. I mean 94% of the Republicans who vote for Trump in the primary, the Republican primary this week, last week, last month, against Nikki Haley believed the election was stolen. There have been six and that Trump won it. Sixty three federal lawsuits, half of them before Republican judges, for fraud brought by the, by Trump and his minions. Not a single case of fraud proven in a single district. Not a single case of fraud proven in a single district. And yet, because Trump says it was stolen, there were millions of votes and he saw them stuffed in. They 94% of our fellow Americans vote, are voting for him, so they.
Speaker 3:I don't think Biden foresaw that. Don't think Biden foresaw that. I think Biden thought that the Republicans would be routed in the midterm. Instead, saudi Arabia cut their oil production and the oil companies jacked up the price because they don't want, you know, they want a fossil fuel thing. And inflation, you know, increased a lot and gas prices were up and inflation became the issue of that election.
Speaker 3:And they're not that, not the fact that there was a coup attempt and that the person is still in charge of the republican party and there are all these members in the republican party. I mean ron johnson's re-election in Wisconsin, vance being elected in Ohio and turning a seat those are two seats that would have allowed the Democrats and losing the House. I mean, everyone said it wasn't as bad as it usually is. Well, you know what? There's not usually a fucking insurrection, with 140 Capitol police and an attempted coup organized by the outgoing president and supported by more than half the members of his party in Congress, as they're running and cowering for their lives. But now they're going to rubber, stamp it and say throw out the votes of hundreds, of tens of millions of Americans because Donald Trump doesn't like it, we're part of his cult and we're afraid of him. I mean, that hasn't happened in the past.
Speaker 3:So we the idea that they didn't pay for that in the midterm election was something Biden didn't expect. We did lose the House, and in losing the House, we lost the ability to you know to and losing the Senate to you know. Of course, no one could anticipate Sinema and Manchin being such traitors to the Democratic Party. But we lost the ability to overcome, override the filibuster, do away with the filibuster and expand this Supreme Court, this rigged and bribed Supreme Court. And we lost the ability to enforce Voting Rights Act, which the Supreme Court no longer allows to do. And so we have gerrymandered purple states, one after another, by gerrymandered red legislatures in states that vote mostly Democrat, even in states like Pennsylvania. And so we, one after another, and we and we don't have the ability to make DC a state, which it should be by any logic.
Speaker 3:All these things, jack, could have happened if the Democrats had done better in the midterm election based upon Biden's you know, you know incorrect assumption that it would be. You know that the Democrats would pick up in that election because people wouldn't stand for the insurrection. So I go back to the original premise, that we are unprepared politically. Biden was unprepared. We're all unprepared for someone as shameless and hate-fueled and violent as Donald Trump, just as Germany was unprepared for Adolf Hitler. I mean, trump is the most successful liar. It's a column I'm working on since Adolf Hitler.
Speaker 2:So what's been more shocking to you the actions and stance and behavior of Donald Trump himself and stance and behavior of Donald Trump himself, or the fact that so many Republicans in Washington have stood with him?
Speaker 3:That is, they're both. So I mean Trump is being Trump, the support he receives, or there's a third thing or that so many Americans are willing to believe his lies and vote for him and are willing to turn a blind eye to the Gospels, to their own religious ethos, to the gospels, to their own religious ethos, whether they're Christians, whether they're Protestant, whether they're Catholic, whether Jewish or Buddhist, or, you know, Muslim or Hindu. All the great religions speak of compassion. They speak of, you know, of the need for conciliation. They speak of welcoming the stranger. You know, yes, we have real problems with the border and asylum being gamed and it's a huge issue, and Biden tried to fix it. The Democrats tried to fix it. Roberts said, no, we don't want to fix, we want a problem. And they've been the party of no for a while. But what is it is? It is really, really, in terms of the Republicans in Congress and leadership, it's, it's very dismaying. I mean, no, you know who would have thought that Trump would have the power to primary out Liz Cheney? I mean, I saw she is a, you know, such a staunch. She is so much more conservative than the Donald Trump, for God's sake. She, you know, and so much more. You know institutionally connected she goes to.
Speaker 3:I saw this video in that time of Matt Gates. Matthew Gates in Wyoming campaigning, you know, for against Liz Cheney because she was against Trump. Here is this freaking. You know East, you know elite dandy, I mean, the guy is a dandy, I don't, I mean, that's a word, an old English word, but it's, I mean he's, let's say he's the least manly guy you could possibly freaking imagine, With the most privilege, Wearing a freaking bow tie in Wyoming, where I don't think many people are wearing suits. Even when Dick Cheney was from that state, he didn't wear a suit right Until he got to Washington. And here he is sitting there telling people to vote against Liz Cheney. I said this is never going to fly and she loses in a landslide. And so they saw that. They saw that.
Speaker 2:That's one of those things that I don't think gets talked about as much as it probably should. The Liz Cheney Wyoming thing. Probably should. The Liz Cheney Wyoming thing how incredibly out of character that is geographically, demographically, and yet those tentacles still reached far enough into that kind of territory that they were able to pull that off. So I appreciate you bringing that up, because I think so many people forget that it wasn't just Trump primary, liz Cheney, it's all the factors surrounding that. Again, looking at where it is, I'm sure you've been to or through wyoming, as I have many times. As you stated, that is not someplace where I would have placed my bet that matt gates could go and get leverage I mean it would tar and feather the guy.
Speaker 3:I mean sure, if you're talking against a hometown woman who is like carry the conservative banner like stronger than almost any woman in history, right?
Speaker 2:how much? How much of a role jonathan and I know we're kind of getting on the outer fringes here, because this is speculation, I guess you could say maybe even bridging over into conspiratorial thinking Regarding Russia, regarding Trump and the relationship between Vladimir Putin. What factor, if any, do you think fear plays?
Speaker 3:I was going to get to that. It's a great question, I think. Fear, these are death threats. I mean you look at the Republican, like really staunch conservative Republicans in Georgia. Was it Raffsinger, the Secretary of State, even Governor, governor Kemp? I mean you know the, the, the, the security that they needed, the death threats, the people who hated on them and their family for denying trump his victory, to, for not, you know, uh, allowing themselves to be in on the steel, it, just it. I think, I think it's real. I think there are oh and, and that's why I am, you know, one of the, the charges I have against Merrick Garland, as we are launching a petition. You know, by the time this podcast airs, we will have a petition on changeorg for Merrick Garland to resign Because Biden is in an uncomfortable position to have to fire him.
Speaker 3:But the idea of a consorted intimidation and incitement, the threats that he puts out, it's very similar to the Nazi brown shirts in, you know, in the early 1930s, targeting their enemies. There was assassination, there were death threats. You know you tried to talk against Hitler and it, you know, and you know there was, there were all sorts of, you know, of threats against you and it's just. I do think that they fear for their own safety. You look at those women who had to move out of their houses. Whoever Trump targets get, say even Judge Nguyen you know leticia, james, yes, anyone who defies their cult leader, their god, who they idolize in a way that I mean who comes out on easter sunday and said he's been persecuted worse than christ, I I mean it's, it's such sacrilege and yet he is their religion.
Speaker 2:Now he is without question without question, it's been within probably the last four to six months that the fbi I believe it was the f? Fbi that stated there were over a thousand Russian spies operating in the United States. Now I realize that not every Russian spy is a dedicated assassin or an assassin period, and that they have other projects that they specialize in, but some of them clearly, as we have seen from the assassinations and poisonings from around the world. If there's one thing Vladimir Putin has proven that is in the back of the mind of about anyone, I would suppose it's that if he wants you dead, he can reach out and touch you and it won't end well. Now, do you think that is a factor that Republicans at least think about? Because, like you said, comparing Hitler and going after his enemies and Trump, do you think there's a connection between Russia, trump and how they fear their fate may come into play?
Speaker 3:I I mean by the way their fate may come into play. I mean by the way the way Russia has been able to play this country. I mean the 60 Minutes report about the Havana syndrome. I agree, I mean where the hell is the FBI, jack?
Speaker 2:Right.
Speaker 3:Five to 10% of the top CIA and FBI agents have been subjected to this in the United States, not when they're there in Moscow, not in Havana, right.
Speaker 2:I mean it's an act of war.
Speaker 3:It is an act of war. It's astonishing that this is not bigger headlines and it's astonishing that Chris Wray has his job I got it, it's astonishing that, merrick Garland.
Speaker 3:I mean, you know you go back to the NRA with the money given from Russia to the NRA, you know through their agent, and you go back to Trump's election in 2016 and you go back to the obstruction charges, to the obstruction charges and the fact that Mueller found that there was indeed huge Russian collusion and Barr rewrote the report and they got away with that. But going back to your question, because I do have a circuit to this right way, but I do get back to the question, I do try to- I like how you do that, because you bring in so many others.
Speaker 3:But as a journalist, I know it's really important to answer the original question. I think there is compromising material and data. What do the Russians call it? Compromat? That's it.
Speaker 2:Compromat, compromising.
Speaker 3:I think they have it on Trump from his early visits. That's the pee, pee tapes, things that you know not. Look at Lindsey Graham and his about face on Trump. You know they're they always and I think they the Russians have aided in that. I think the Republic, you know Hoover, used to have those folder files on people. I love the uh. You ever hear the? You know the watergate tapes with uh, nixon complaining about jay hoover to halderman? Yes, I have, you know the part. I mean I do. I'd love to fire that bastard, but he's got too much dirt on all of us. Yes, yes, nixon. Yes, this is Nixon.
Speaker 2:You know Lindsey Graham and Ron Johnson two names you just brought up. Every time they speak, I've never seen more fear in a politician than I do when I see Ron Johnson refuting the claims that people make. And Lindsey Graham Lindsey Graham borders on horrified. That guy will say do explain away literally anything. Do explain away literally anything, even if it requires him to do a complete 180 from the day before, as long as he does not risk pissing someone off.
Speaker 2:The level of terror I see in those two. I don't think that's completely lacking in other Republicans. I think they're just better at one staying away from journalists, staying away from reporters and not getting the hard questions, or being a little more low key than Lindsey or Ron when they are. What are your thoughts on Ron Johnson and Lindsey Graham in terms of? Is it that maybe there's just more dirt and more compromising material on those two? Those seem to be two of the most hardline defenders of Donald Trump and people who want to always throw up that wall about questions regarding russia, I mean really hardline putinists, and we could probably throw, you know well, tucker carlson's in that, though as well.
Speaker 3:I, I mean there's, there's, um, it's, it's. I. I think the Trump and Putin agenda are, are the same. I think Trump is carrying water for Putin and has been. You know he is a Russian asset. I think he you know the fact that he ripped up those interpreter notes that he met privately with, you know, the Russian ambassador, with no people you know, for an entire day after these incidents. I mean he's, he clearly has, you know, he clearly is doing Putin's work. You know, a lot of people like, like, don't see the whole long tail of Putin's agenda, and I think it's important to understand that, because I think that speaks a good way to Putin's agenda, which was, I think, goes back to about 2011, 20, you know, is that he's never going to beat the West in a like, all out battle. He's not going to, you know, fight a war to beat NATO.
Speaker 3:What his greatest strength is to undermine the Western democracies and their faith in fair elections and create dictatorships similar to his there, because a dictator doesn't care about international relation or their allies. A dictator, I mean you know it's called a kleptocracy. You know I've written about them before when I wrote about Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines and his wife and their assets and stuff. There's a term kleptocracy. It means the state exists for the financial benefit and power of the person on the top or the dictator on the top, and it's also a thugocracy similar to Hitler's state that it you know that it uses, you know it defiles any democratic institution. But he wants to see those and it starts with Brexit. You look at his ability to separate the UK from its allies and spending millions of dollars to push the Brexit bill and to find you know groups there who would gain political power from, you know, pushing away the EU and the exception it starts with Brexit, it goes with Banyan and they have found the issue of immigration is a very ripe issue because of climate change, because of immigration, because of the influx of Islamic immigrants and Islamic terrorists into the West.
Speaker 3:It's a very good and values that are very antithetical to Western liberal values, especially in Europe, in France, in Germany, in every state based upon, just like here, something that has some sort of fact the fact that we have these immigration laws and we're not able to maintain safe and secure borders in the face of people who want to move to our country, who are willing to play those laws, abuse those laws. So we have the asylum law in America. I mean it's like, you know, really that is not what it's meant to be. Say, you're an asylum seeker and stay eight years and you know we'll maybe come in when we do your calling. It's just like it's not the way it's supposed to be. But they're abusing that and drawing power from the us versus them and the. You know the distancing that comes of that. And then they're undermining the faith in electoral institutions by, you know, using Trump, as Bolsonaro did in Brazil, as you know Orbán's doing in Hungary, erdogan in Turkey. I mean, they are really finding, you know, finding very sympathetic people who gain a lot of power, and it's like very sympathetic people who gain a lot of power and it's like this will be your kleptocracy. You know that's what Trump is going for.
Speaker 3:He is a Putin styled kleptocracy. What's amazing is that all of these Republicans and you know we go back to the John Birch Society, by the way started by the Koch brothers, you know whose father literally made his fortune trading with Soviet Russia and Stalin in the 1930s. You know then becoming like virulently anti-Soviet, anti-communist. But you, you know you have Reagan. You know tear down the wall. You have. You have a history of Republicans. You have a history of Republicans. You know being very zealous about standing against. You know Soviet expansionism and the Soviet Union we need to show is strength. It's. It's like whatever their parents or whatever they felt you know about russia has now completely changed and done a reverse. I mean he has his ability to, you know, to, to, to, to get people to believe any lie and any sort of belief. It's like liz cheney against the matt gates's of the world and Trump. It's. You know Putin, you know who would have been, I mean attacking his allies, attacking Ukraine and the expansionism and murdering the opposition in his country.
Speaker 3:You know it, just, it just is like people are willing to accept virtually anything, and it goes into this Christofascist alliance what I call a Christofascist alliance and Trump and these multimillionaire ministers of these large churches that have been mobilized for decades to support right-wing causes and an end to government programmers. It goes all the way back to the New Deal.
Speaker 2:End to a government that helps people, as opposed to a government that, while he may have many different angles that he's going for at once, but one of them is simply groom and normalize the conversation of praising a dictator, to to make that sound okay, to make that sound normal, so that when he makes that slide, if he is in the position to make that slide into a dictatorship, people will be of the mindset of you know, I mean, look at orban and putin, they're not so bad. And and not that they're not so bad, but that his massive line of eight years of bullshit has conned them into believing they're not so bad. Is that what he's doing when he's praising dictators?
Speaker 3:Yes, that's what he's doing. He's normalizing fascism, he's normalizing anti-democratic totalitarian power. He's normalizing the crushing of opposition, as opposed to the concept that opposition politics, compromise, um, you know, has been. You know, multi-party systems, a free press, a free media, freedom to dissent, freedom to protest, these are all values that have been intrinsic in the united states, for, you know, since our founding. Yes, and the idea that leaders, world leaders, who stand against those values are strong and that's what we need is that strength also says that those values are weakness. And there's no coincidence, jack, that Trump paints a world. Trump paints a nation on fire, a crime system out of control. Only a strong man could protect you against the criminals, the urban criminals, the code word for Black People and People of Color in Cities, and the immigrants who are coming to massacre their rapists, their killers. And the fact that crime is down to historic levels and is much lower than when he was president, the fact that the average that immigrants are less than one-third, that an American is three times more likely than an immigrant to commit a crime, because, let's face it, I mean, they're not here to commit crimes, they're here to make some money and send it home to their starving families. Right, um right. You know who's gonna commit a crime. You get caught for the crime. You know you'll be deported. So this is nowhere to commit. If you want us to commit a crime, just stay there in mexico, man, and work for the cartel. They got plenty of money. Same with with, you know, salvador gosh. You know these terribly dangerous guys. If you want to be a criminal, this isn't necessarily the place to come. We have a pretty decent local law enforcement system and you know you're, like, more likely to get caught for your crime here than there, and certainly you're less likely to be, you know, to be able to bribe the judge and get out of a criminal conviction. So, but these lies that you've got to be afraid, say that Biden's not protecting you, he's weak, america's in decline, america's on fire.
Speaker 3:I mean, I heard him in Michigan the other yesterday. He's doing this speech. This state is horrible. It's a terrible state. I mean, here is this guy born with a silver spoon up his ass. Billions of dollars, private school, never rode the subway, never even, you know, did a day of honest work in his life. Right, that wasn't business. Has you know protocols for people to open Diet Cokes in front of him and pour it on ice, like he's never helped a working person in his life or given to any real charity, robs, charities that he sets up.
Speaker 3:Here's a guy telling people in Michigan that your home state is a horrible place and that they don't ride him out on a rail and say, screw you. You know, I'm fourth generation here in Michigan. My father and grandfather are part of this state. I love this town, I love this, you know this state. But he says this is a bad place and it's bad people and it's you know, everything is terrible because only I could make it good again the way it was three years ago. Oh, and let's go to that. Are you better off than you were four years ago? The beginning of COVID, right, right, I mean. I mean it was like another world.
Speaker 2:It was it. It really was like another world. It was, it really was like another world. I know that you are cutting it close on time today and that you have to go, so before we do that, I don't know how much you can say about it, but I know you've got something pretty damn exciting that's going to be coming out tomorrow. Is there anything you can say about that?
Speaker 3:this isn't here until next week, you said, or well? Yeah we.
Speaker 3:We are starting. You know I'm, I'm, I'm focusing my energy and my time, you know, on on the StopTrumpDictatorshipcom effort. The project is like the Lincoln Project, except it's focused on short web videos in swing states that shift the narrative and that really take the kid gloves off. Focused on targets. We started with a Dems Vote Haley in South Carolina campaign. We got 400,000 views from 200,000 people and we probably moved 50,000 votes by just showing them. Hey, you're in South Carolina, you want to do an anti-Trump vote? This is the way to do it and and stayed in the race another week, which was helpful to her.
Speaker 3:We're doing this to shift very core narratives that need to be shipped. We're starting with a video. Are you a patriot or a hatred? And we're using this term hatred to really define people who are motivated by hate, who are following Donald Trump, who think that they're patriots and are wrapped in the flag. We're showing them. You know, the fact is, we're reclaiming the flag and patriotism for Americans and voters who support an American system, way of life and our history and our great nation and our great democracy that we've built over 240 years, instead of a Putin-style thugocracy. So we're going to have a series of that.
Speaker 3:We have videos that are aimed at people who are complacent. It's shocking to see people and I'm sure you'll find it, chad were mostly focused on not preaching to the choir. The fact is, if you're reading mainstream media, if you're watching CNN or the Washington Post or the New York Times, or you know, you're getting your news sources, you know that Trump didn't win the last election. You know that that's not the people we need to sway. We need to sway people in swing states and we're creating videos that, instead of people leaning forward. Let me read the news. We're looking for people who are checked out of the news and we're running them as YouTube ads targeted to adults in specific swing states with specific messages, so that when they go on to watch a rap video or a how-to video or a sports short video or Colbert or something or an SNL skit, they see the thing that says skip ad and we deliver it while they're leaning back a narrative that hooks them and they watch the first five seconds and then they watch. Thursday, we had 400,000 views in South Carolina for $9,000. That is less than 1% of the cost of what Democrats are going to be spending on radio and TV blanketed over the airways where people tune out, blanketed over the airways where people tune out. We're looking for people to tune in. So what we're focused on is messages that get people tuned in.
Speaker 3:We're going to show people what a Trump dictatorship looks like and will mean to them a few years from now. If they think it makes no difference. For those many young people who feel that I talked to a 24-year-old guy, many young people who feel, well, I talked to a 24-year-old guy. It really, you know, if you college educated last year and he's like you know, biden, trump, they're all corrupt, they're all in it for themselves. I'm not bothering to vote and I'm like you can't draw a distinction between the life you're going to have with Biden and Trump. We're going to help you do that. That's the StopTrumpDictatorshipcom program.
Speaker 3:We're also going to look out after third-party voters and let them know that. You know Cornel West may talk a good game, you know, when it comes to sticking it to the man, and you know, and brother, you know and getting it, you know getting. You know Black Americans, what you know, what you've deserved and these types of things, but it's just talk. The fact is you will be voting for Trump. You vote for Jill Stein. Oh, you think her climate policies are better than Biden? She's going to support a Green New Deal. It's going to seem very quaint the difference between her policies and Joe Biden's when you've got a Trump dictatorship and you're living under the boot of the fossil fuel companies, kicking back money to Trump and he's running a Putin style. You know, look, look at Putin. Where's? Where's the Green New Deal there? And the same with RFK, of course.
Speaker 3:Most of all, this idea that RFK oh, you think he's going to, I mean, it is a vote for Trump, looking to peel off those third party. And we're looking to try to explain to some people who are still voting for Trump of those people who are the hardcore people who don't believe that Biden won the last election that Biden did win the last election. And maybe we could peel off with the hatred You're wrapping in the flag. You're a hatred. You know, we see you. We see you. Everyone's watching this video. Your neighbors are watching this video. Your grandchildren are watching this video. You know, when you go to the dinner table with you, they are not seeing you as a patriot, they're seeing you as a hatred.
Speaker 2:And I want to thank you, jonathan, for I'm going to make a prediction on this fourth episode of the Jack Hopkins Show podcast that hashtag hatred is going to trend all the way to the top. Hook you and stay with you, because it so completely captures what's happening Hatred, and to be able to make that little step, hatred to patriot, that's something that I think is going to effectively stick in the mind of people, get them to ask themselves the question what is the difference between a hatred and a patriot, and which one am I? And if someone will take even three seconds and ask that question of themselves, three seconds and ask that question of themselves, they're going to find the distinction and, hey, let's push this campaign.
Speaker 3:Is it tomorrow that you are releasing this? Yeah, the first one, but we'll be releasing a series, including when this comes out.
Speaker 2:We'll have a new one there next week too. I'm so excited for this. Such a beautiful uh. Are you a patriot or a hatred?
Speaker 3:it's. You know, I love, I love that what you just said. I mean the idea that um, uh, excuse me, um, um, you know the, the, the idea that that that it's, that it's a question they ask themselves and it sticks in the mind. Yes, you know, there are a lot of we. We want to peel off the independents who still think it's patriotic. I was shocked, jack, that in North Carolina, in South Carolina, the vote that the military bases, which there are a lot of the military Trump got 25 percent more of the vote than Haley. You know who. You know.
Speaker 3:I don't agree with all our politics, but she is probably one of the most impressive women to come out of the Republican Party in a decade. Come out of the Republican Party in a decade. And you know, and the fact is, they believe that Trump won the last election. They believe the lies. They're only in it because of this narrative lie, but they are our armed services and our veterans. You know the suckers and losers to Trump's mind. You know they are just checked out.
Speaker 3:So the idea that they believe that they're being patriotic when they support trump and we're presenting something well, does this look patriotic to you? You know the largest number of law enforcement. You know killed, not a peaceful trance. Being injured at the capital attack, gen six, you know saying that you don't believe in the constitution. What is patriotic about any of these things? And we're putting the word hatred over a Confederate flag because this is the last time people were so against the United States government. They succeeded from the United States. This time they're trying to overthrow the United States government. So that is, and we're going to get into foreign policy, we're going to get into ethics. But asking themselves that question is a really good thing, Planting that seed of doubt from which the truth could grow.
Speaker 2:And I challenge anybody watching this episode to think about patriot without also having hatred immediately pop up in their mind. Human mind forms associations, somebody who watches this podcast episode. I challenge you a week from now, try to think of patriot without also thinking of hatred, and I think that's the effect that it's going to have, jonathan, is that, like you said, it's going to be a seed that's planted and it may not be immediate, it might not happen in that moment, but because the word patriot is used and thrown around so much now, every time that pops up radio, tv, online, it's going to trigger patriot or hatred, and I think it's going to give people pause, and just enough pause. Like you said that, it plants that seed of doubt and when that happens, people have the opportunity to think and that's the one thing they've not been doing.
Speaker 3:That's true. That's a great spot to leave it, jack. Thank you so much. To be continued, I really appreciate you and where this interview has gone. I'm looking forward to seeing it.
Speaker 2:We'll do this again sometime.
Speaker 3:Thanks, again All right.
Speaker 2:I hope you found episode four of the Jack Hopkins show podcast with guest Jonathan Greenberg to be as captivating and riveting as I did. You know there were a lot of things that Jonathan talked about that I know some people aren't comfortable hearing things they really don't want to hear because it forces them to think about things they don't want to think about, and I'm of the opinion that's exactly why people must hear those things. We have to move forward based on truths. We can't cling to this illusion of what we hope is happening, of what we hope is going on. We have to, at every step, constantly be looking, examining, listening, getting as many facts as we can and reassessing and asking ourselves and asking ourselves am I clinging to an illusion, what I hope is happening, or am I looking and judging things in as realistic of a way that I can? The latter is to expose yourself to people telling you things that, deep down inside, you know are almost certainly true, but that part of you doesn't want to hear, resilient and move forward with the kind of vigor and determination and grit that it's going to take to get us across the finish line. And boy did Jonathan Greenberg make a huge contribution to that today.
Speaker 2:You can find out more about Jonathan Greenberg by going to JonathanGreenbergcom. That's J-O-N-A-T-H-A-N. Greenbergcom. Also, check out JackHopkinsNowcom. That's my newsletter. That's where I write articles and publish videos that are all geared towards building psychological and emotional resilience, because that's what the right is desperately trying to chip away and erode from Democrats. Wear it down, wear us down until we reach a point of hopelessness where we give up and we don't show up at the polls to vote. We can't afford that. So if you would like some help there, go to jackhopkinsnowcom. Thank you for tuning in to the Jack Hopkins Show podcast. I'm your host, jack Hopkins, and I will see you next time.