Brief
The text discusses the high unemployment rate in the United States during the Great Depression in 1932, and how the current Trump administration has brought the stock market back to 1932 levels. It criticizes Trump’s attacks on the Federal Reserve chair, his prediction of a recession, and his tariffs that are making goods more expensive for Americans. The text also mentions a lawsuit filed by Harvard University against the Trump administration for freezing over $2.2 billion in research funding, and the concerns raised by Senator Mark Kelly about the incompetence of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. Finally, the text reflects on the passing of Pope Francis and his advocacy for the vulnerable and marginalized, in contrast with the Trump administration’s policies.
Main Body
00:00:00
In 1932, the unemployment rate in this country was 23. 6%. Let me say that again. The unemployment rate in 1932 was 23. 6%. We were at the depth of what came to be known as the Great Depression, the cruelest economic depression in American history. Starving children were going to bed hungry in this country in 1932. The suicide rate was skyrocketing. And today, the Trump stock market is on its way, according to the Wall Street Journal, to the quote worst April since 1932. Prior to the Donald Trump stock market, not a single economic indicator in this country has ever resembled anything in 1932 during the entire course of our lifetimes. But now Donald Trump has managed to bring the stock market back to 1932. The difference between 1932 and today is that 1932, the only hope, and I mean the only hope that people had in this country, came from the newly elected president of the United States. Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who was working every day then to lead the country out of that depression, which is exactly what he did. Every president in our lifetimes has always known every minute of the day how to instantaneously crash the stock market. They’ve all known how to do it. And not one of them has chosen to do that until Donald Trump. Every president always knew that all he had to do to crash the stock market was to take a public swipe at the chair of the Federal Reserve, who has always been, no matter who it is, more popular with Wall Street than any president of the United States. So for better or worse, Wall Street always respects the Federal Reserve chair much more than they respect the president of the United States. And now that respect gap is bigger than ever. And so Donald Trump decided that once again today, he would attack, publicly attack Jerome Powell, the chair of the Federal Reserve, who was appointed to that job by Donald Trump in his first term, and then was reappointed by President Biden. That’s right, President Biden. Reappointed Republican Jerome Powell, who was originally put into that position by Republican Donald Trump. And so the guy who says he always chooses the best people is now attacking one of his best people and crashing the stock market every single time that he does it. No president has ever been stupid enough to do that until Donald Trump. At 9:41 a. m., Donald Trump decided to go on social media and predict a recession, which no president has ever done. No president has ever predicted a recession during their term. So Donald Trump predicted a recession, and then he blamed it on the Federal Reserve chair, saying there can be a slowing of the economy, otherwise known as a recession, unless Mr. Too Late, a major loser, lowers interest rates, N-O-W, capital letters. Now, all those Trump voters who believed Donald Trump was going to make the American economy better all by himself, all of them thought that he was able to do that, and they never once, never once on the campaign trail heard Donald Trump say he could only make the economy great if the Federal Reserve lowered interest rates. Never mentioned that on the campaign trail. But now Donald Trump says, ‘I, the only one who can fix it guy’, I can’t fix anything unless the chair of the Federal Reserve fixes it for me.’ That’s what he’s saying now. Speculation today then ran wild that Donald Trump would try to fire the chair of the Federal Reserve, which is against the law. CNBC’s coverage of the market today once again turned dark.
00:04:46
This is what you get, I mean. Somebody needs to turn to the camera and tell the president to stop. I mean, he is messing with the foundation of this country. He’s messing with the foundation of the economy. He’s messing with America’s place in the global financial system.
00:05:03
It is against the law for the President to fire the Chair of the Federal Reserve, and Jerome Powell has said under no circumstances would he quit if threatened by Donald Trump with firing. But having seen Donald Trump defy the law in other arenas, The stock market is worried to the point that the Wall Street Journal titled its editorial tonight, ‘The Fire Jerome Powell Market Route’. The journal editorial says, markets fear Mr. Trump really might fire Mr. Powell, not that it would do the President any good. He’d have to remove more than the chairman to change. The Federal Open Market Committee, which sets interest rates and tries to satisfy the central bank’s dual mandate of maximum employment and stable prices. This is a recipe for more market uncertainty. The tariffs will cause at least a one-time increase in the price of tariff goods, which may become more entrenched if the Fed accommodates them by cutting rates. Markets are spooked because they don’t know-if Mr. Trump listens to anyone but his own impulses. Everything you’re about to hear is something Donald Trump apparently does not know. And it is this: The chairman of the Federal Reserve does not set interest rates. Nope, he doesn’t. Interest rates are established by a majority vote of a Federal Reserve Committee of 12 members. The Wall Street Journal notes Mr. Trump can’t fire the regional Fed bank presidents on the committee, and all 12 voting members seem to agree with the Fed’s recent policy moves. Even if you don’t buy a new car during the Trump years, your automobile costs are going up right now tonight. NBC News is reporting, quote, ‘An extended trade war could cause the average annual cost of car insurance to rise more than $300 by the end of the year,’ according to estimates from the insurance agency Insurify. I bought a Kia four years ago because it was the cheapest car in its category. And now it’s in the shop waiting for a part to be shipped from South Korea. It’s going to be a lot more expensive than it would have been during the Biden presidency. And while I’m driving a rental car during this very long wait, it turns out, for that highly tariffed part to arrive, this is what I’m hearing.
00:07:45
Starting next week, all vehicle prices go up because of the 25% auto tariff. That means if you’re thinking about getting a new or pre-owned Nissan, now is the time. Why wait and pay 25% more? Come to Nissan and Van Nuys today and lock in those pre-tariff pricings before it’s too late. Once prices go up, they’re not coming back down.
00:08:06
You know, car advertising always delivers the simplest messages. And so these ads now presume that every adult in America understands who actually pays tariffs. There’s a whole new car advertising genre now about pre-tariff pricing. Lock in those pre-tariff pricings before it’s too late. Now is the time. Why wait and pay 25% more? That is not followed by a Trump campaign ad saying, ‘Don’t worry, China will pay the tariff.’ You don’t have to worry. Don’t worry, South Korea will pay the tariff. Japan will pay the tariff. Germany will pay the tariff. Everyone knows now. Everyone knows Donald Trump has been lying every single time he has ever told his voters who pays those tariffs. He always said China pays the tariffs. He always said the foreign countries pay the tariffs. He was lying every time they said it. And now his voters know. Now they know. In April of 1932, when the stock market was falling exactly the way the stock market is falling this April, no one could afford to buy a car in America. No one except the very richest people in America could afford to buy a car in 1932. And so here we are at the make America 1932 again moment when Donald Trump is turning the stock market into its 1930. To performance level right in the middle of the worst depression in our history. That’s where we are now. That’s where the stock market is, not the economy. Luckily, hasn’t gone to that point yet. But even Donald Trump now is predicting a recession. Donald Trump is making everything in our lives more expensive with his tariffs as everyone in the country is looking forward to the benefits, for example, of retirement accounts. Every one of them has, every retirement account now has less money in it than it did when Joe Biden was president. Thanks entirely to Donald Trump, who inherited the strongest economy any president has ever inherited, and all he had to do to continue to claim that the surging Biden stock market was all thanks to him. All he had to do would have been to do absolutely nothing and just stay on a golf course all day every day and have nothing to do with government. Everyone in this country would be economically better off if Donald Trump had just done nothing. And so, we might be on the verge tonight of the made-for-TV drama that will sink the stock market even below 1932 levels if Donald Trump tries to fire the Federal Reserve chairman against the law or somehow have Jerome Powell locked out of the Federal Reserve building in Washington, D.C. And all eyes will once again turn to the United States Supreme Court, who would have the last word on a confrontation between the president and the chairman of the Federal Reserve. But no one looks to the United States Supreme Court the way we used to. No one looks to the court with confidence anymore because Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas are both the most publicly, politically compromised Supreme Court justices in the history of the court. And because Donald Trump and his Justice Department lawyers have done nothing, nothing, despite a Supreme Court order to facilitate the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia from a prison in El Salvador. After the Supreme Court ordered the Trump administration to facilitate his return because he was forcibly sent there in what the Trump Justice Department initially admitted in court was a mistake. Today, the White House press secretary contradicted the Trump Justice Department’s own statements about the case in court when she said today, we did not make a mistake. It will be interesting to see. One of the Trump Justice Department lawyers tried to say that in court in direct contradiction to the previous Trump Justice Department lawyer who told the judge it was a mistake. Before that lawyer then, of course, got fired by the Trump Justice Department. Today, Florida Democratic Congressman Maxwell Frost was one of the members of the House of Representatives who traveled to El Salvador and was denied any opportunity to meet with Mr. Obrego Garcia.
00:13:01
This could happen to any one of our constituents, any one of my constituents in Orlando, Florida, tomorrow or the next day. And so it’s important that we draw the line here with Kilmar, that we ensure that he gets taken home, brought back home, where he can go through a process and go through due process.
00:13:19
Maryland Senator Chris Van Hollen did succeed in his mission to El Salvador on Thursday when he met with Mr. Abrego Garcia.
00:13:28
Do you think that the country is currently in a constitutional crisis?
00:13:32
Oh, yes, we are. They are very much flouting the courts as we speak. As the courts have said, facilitating his return means something more than doing nothing. And they are doing nothing. Yes, they’re absolutely in violation of the court orders as we speak.
00:13:51
Joining us now is Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island. He’s a member of the Judiciary Committee, the Finance Committee, and the Budget Committee is in the Senate. And Senator, let’s begin where Senator Van Hollen left off. What is your view of where we are in what everyone is calling a potential constitutional crisis?
00:14:11
Well, I think President Trump is giving the Supreme Court pause to consider the monster that they have created: inventing presidential immunity and allowing unlimited dark money into our politics and messing around with the Voting Rights Act and all of that. I think that there’s some real hesitancy. And as you start to see seven-to-two and nine-zero decisions, not tracking the familiar six-to-three split, you’re going to see, I think, more and more hesitation from the Supreme Court. And of course, lower courts over and over again are standing up, doing their jobs, making legal decisions and beginning to sanction the misconduct of Trump officials in their courtrooms.
00:15:04
The Donald Trump has said he throws in every once in a while that he really respects the Supreme Court. He’s he said that within the last 24 hours. But one of the issues now is: What incentive does Donald Trump have to obey the Supreme Court or comply with the Supreme Court since it appears he’s already gotten everything he’s ever wanted from this Supreme Court? He doesn’t need them anymore.
00:15:31
He may not need them anymore, but he still needs Republicans in Congress to continue to kowtow and bow down to him. And he’s making it harder and harder for them with his rash statements, with his denial of due process. Deporting people to foreign prisons without any kind of hearing about whether they really are gang members with the tariff warnings. The tariffs kind of lit a fuse under the American economy that is going to be going off in September when moms are going to the store to buy school supplies for their kids and see either way high prices or empty shelves. People are looking forward to it. They can see this. This is predictable stuff. So you can continue to pile on and pile on and pile on. And at some point, Republicans will begin to say, OK, enough. And I think a direct flouting of a Supreme Court order would be that signal to many. And it only takes four in the House. And it only takes four in the Senate. And then the madness ends.
00:16:38
Senator, you’re a member of the Senate Finance Committee, which the Constitution grants Congress exclusively control over tariffs. The Finance Committee has been in the tariff business since it was born, one of the earliest committees in the Senate. And so I’m wondering, among other things, are Rhode Island car buyers hearing the same ads that I’m hearing on radio and TV about come in and beat the pre-trap, get the pre-tariff price? Are they understanding what that means?
00:17:10
I think people in Rhode Island are seeing a buying surge. And it’s not difficult to understand that chaos and cost increases and corruption are not good for markets and are not good for the economy. And the chaos you described of threatening the Federal Reserve chair, and moving tariffs one way or the other. The cost increases, the tariffs are going to pound Americans with 145% tariffs on certain products. And then, you know, corruption is always a bad signal, but particularly the corruption of climate denial, which is sending homeowners’ insurance prices skyrocketing, in some cases, more than the underlying mortgage payment. Florida’s having a full-on meltdown with just property insurance. So people are not immune to seeing all of these economic threats and understanding that Trump’s bad decision-making, his rash and vengeful and ignorant decision-making is what is behind this pain.
00:18:12
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, thank you very much for starting off our discussions tonight. Thank you. And coming up, we have breaking news. Harvard University is suing the Trump administration for trying to take over Harvard University and run everything from the admission of students and the rejection of students to the hiring of professors to the hiring of everyone on the campus. The lead Trump team defendant is, ironically, a graduate of Harvard College who says he was a heroin addict every day he was in college. Harvard constitutional law professor Lawrence Tribe will join us next. The President and Fellows of Harvard College is the ancient label for the governing body of America’s oldest university. And they are the listed plaintiffs in Harvard University’s historic lawsuit filed today, in which the lead defendant is Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Harvard College class of 1976, followed by seven other defendants, including Attorney General Pamela J. Bondi and the current Secretary of Defense Peter B. Hegseth. Harvard’s 50-page written lawsuit filed in federal court in Boston today is, as you would expect, a thing of beauty. Some beautiful prose, exquisitely beautiful logic in an era where logic has become a precious commodity, and legal reasoning beautifully presented with a clarity that allows anyone who didn’t go to Harvard Law School or even go to college to understand it completely. Here are the first words. Of Harvard University’s lawsuit suing the Trump administration for freezing over $2. 2 billion in research funding. Quote: ‘Scientific advancement and the pursuit of knowledge fuel America’s innovation, economic success, and global leadership.’ The commitment to expanding human understanding is foundational at American universities, including Harvard, the nation’s oldest institution of higher learning. Since its founding nearly four centuries ago, Harvard’s students, faculty, and researchers have helped identify and solve some of society’s most pressing problems. Those path-breaking and life-saving advancements are due in part to the long-standing collaboration between universities such as Harvard and the federal government dating back to the Second World War. Millions of Americans are healthier and safer as a result. Federal funding has enabled researchers at Harvard to develop novel drugs to fight Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s disease, engineer nanofibers to protect service members and first responders, support American astronauts in space, and design an artificial intelligence system that can be used to diagnose and treat cancer. I told you some of that story of how government-funded research began in World War II at Harvard University and other universities last week, and what it has delivered for us in life-saving medical advances achieved by Harvard University researchers. But Harvard was saving millions of lives around the world long before government-funded research existed. A Harvard researcher came up with the smallpox vaccine in 1799. The list is longer than Harvard would ever choose to boast about in a tight 50-page legal filing which stuck closely to the relevant points, but did make points about some current research to stress how vital the current government-funded research is. pressing problems. Millions of Americans are healthier and safer as a result. Federal funding has enabled researchers at Harvard to develop novel drugs to fight Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s diseases, engineer nanofibers to protect service members and first responders. Oh, this is a repetition of what we had before. There was actually another passage. We can skip that. We already did. There was another passage in the Harvard lawsuit that said more about that current research. The Harvard lawsuit completely dismantles the false Trump administration claim that they are just trying to protect Harvard from anti-Semitism by defunding Harvard research. The government has not and cannot identify any rational connection between antisemitism concerns and the medical, scientific, technological, and other research it has frozen that aims to save American lives, foster American success, preserve American security, and maintain America’s position as a global leader in innovation. Has the government acknowledged the significant consequences that the indefinite freeze of billions of dollars in federal research funding will have on Harvard’s research programs, the beneficiaries of that research, and the national interest in furthering American innovation and progress? The trade-off put to Harvard and other universities is clear. Allow the government to micromanage your academic institution or jeopardize the institution’s ability to pursue medical breakthroughs, scientific discoveries, and innovative solutions. Joining us now is Professor Lawrence Tribe, who has taught constitutional law at Harvard Law School for five decades. Professor Tribe, such an honor to have you, especially on this subject. What should we be focusing on in this lawsuit?
00:24:20
I think we should focus, Lawrence, on the fact that quite apart from the many benefits that Harvard and other universities provide in the form of scientific research, medical innovation, discoveries of all kinds, quite apart from that, there are the fundamental rights that Harvard can now champion. The government is doing through many different agencies, including Robert F. Kennedy’s Health and Human Services, is saying that you have now become dependent on federal resources, and we will yank those resources under the excuse of fighting anti-Semitism, which has nothing to do with what Harvard is doing. We will yank those resources from you. Unless you do our bidding, teach the way we want you to teach. Use our criteria for selecting students, for selecting faculty, for selecting staff, essentially letting us take over. Well, if the government can take over Harvard, it can take over any private institution, any private university, college, junior college. Any private school, for that matter. And that is the end of academic freedom. Universities and private schools are centers of thought, discovery, but also occasionally disagreement with the government. And what this lawsuit says is: You cannot punish any of us, Harvard University or any other private individual or institution, because you don’t like the way we think. You don’t like what we say. Harvard is being punished for exercising its rights, and it’s saying: We now are entitled to an injunction against all of what you’re trying to do, withholding this money, threatening to deny us our status as a charitable institution to which people can make deductible contributions, freezing our funds. Putting work stoppages in place. All of these things harm not only Harvard, but the communities it serves irreparably with every passing day. And so Harvard has gone to court and said: Put a stop to it. And I think the lawsuit is irrefutable, and I’m quite confident it will win.
00:27:04
That was the next question, and you answered it. Harvard Law Professor Lawrence Tribe, thank you very much for joining our discussion tonight.
00:27:11
Thank you, Lawrence. Thank you.
00:27:13
And coming up, the most unqualified and incompetent Secretary of Defense in history has done it again. Arizona Senator Mark Kelly warned the Senate about Pete Hegseth before his confirmation vote in the Senate for Secretary of Defense. Senator Kelly joins us next. Donald Trump is the only president in history whose defense secretary was confirmed by the Senate with the tie-breaking vote of the vice president of the United States. That’s never happened before because no president ever nominated as unqualified a nominee for defense secretary as Pete Hegseth. The New York Times has new reporting on the most unqualified and incompetent defense secretary in history. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth shared detailed information about forthcoming strikes in Yemen on March 15th in a private signal group chat that included his wife, brother, and personal lawyer, according to four people with knowledge of the chat. Some of those people said that the information Mr. Hegseth shared on the Signal chat included the flight schedules for the F-18. F-18 Hornets targeted targeting the Houthis in Yemen, essentially the same attack plans that he shared on a separate Signal chat the same day that mistakenly included the editor of The Atlantic. Mr. Hegseth’s wife, Jennifer, a former Fox producer, is not a Defense Department employee, but she has traveled with him overseas and drawn criticism for accompanying her husband to sensitive meetings with foreign leaders. Mr. Hegseth. Brother Phil and Tim Palatore, who continue to serve as his personal lawyer, both have jobs in the Pentagon, but it is not clear why either would need to know about upcoming military strikes aimed at the Houthis in Lebanon. Two sources with knowledge of the matter have since confirmed the details to NBC News. The Defense Secretary actually has not denied the accusations in the report. If you listen to the way he bats away questions about it, he does not actually deny it. The White House Press Secretary also has not denied the allegations in the New York Times report, even though she tries to deflect questions about it. And Donald Trump just bats away the questions, but has not actually denied any. Of the allegations in the New York Times report. And when asked about it today, Donald Trump said, ‘Why do you even ask a question like that?’ Republican Congressman Don Bacon of Nebraska, a former Air Force general, told Politico today, ‘I find it unacceptable and I wouldn’t tolerate it if I was in charge,’ adding he’s acting like he’s above the law and that shows an amateur person. Democratic Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona issued a warning to the United States Senate. Before they voted on Pete Hegseth’s confirmation, a warning that foreshadowed today’s report by The New York Times.
00:30:32
It’s not just that Mr. Hegseth is unprepared for this role. The experience he does have is riddled with serious issues that should concern us all.
00:30:49
Joining us now is Democratic Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona. He’s a member of the Armed Services Committee and the Select Committee on Intelligence. Senator Kelly, when you were a Navy pilot, what would have happened to you if you had shared a battle plan with a family member?
00:31:07
Yeah, Lawrence, I would have gotten fired. I probably would have been prosecuted under the UCMJ for doing that. This is the most sensitive information we have. They say it’s not classified. Of course, this kind of information is classified. Launch time, the platform, as you mentioned, F-18 Hornet, time over targets, information about weapon systems, where they’re going. You’ve got to this information needs to be so closely held because if it leaks out, it puts people’s lives at risk. And I’ll tell you what, when during the first Gulf War where I was flying combat missions over Iraq. Not in any world would I have thought that Dick Cheney was going to release details about our strike. This is unacceptable. And we saw this coming with this guy, right? He wasn’t in any way up to the task, up to the job of being the Secretary of Defense.
00:32:06
Yeah, I mean, in that sense, this is so wild, I don’t think any of us could have anticipated this would be the problem. But you knew there’d be problems.
00:32:18
Yeah, that’s right. You know, when you think about it for a second, this is the stuff he should have been good at. He spent some time in the military. He served overseas. He was a major in the National Guard. He was in and out of different guard units. He should understand this. Now, think about him trying. And he doesn’t-he didn’t get this part of it. Now, he’s trying to manage a bureaucracy of millions of people and hundreds of billions of dollars. He is-he is going to drown in this position. He has no way up to this task. Myself and a lot of my colleagues saw this coming. But he got enough votes, and that’s because the President wanted him in this position. He wanted a guy who spent nine years on Saturday morning on Fox News to be in charge of our Defense Department.
00:33:06
So you now have one Republican member of the House saying he cannot do this job. How many more will it take to actually have an effect?
00:33:17
Well, that’s a question for the White House. I think Donald Trump should fire him at this point. If he doesn’t get fired, I mean, he should resign would be the thing that makes most sense. He’s got people quitting around him. Well, he fired his chief of staff. He fired his deputy chief of staff, his senior advisor. All of that happened in the last week. His spokesperson quit. So you can see already that there is incredible chaos at the top of DOD. And because of that, we are all less safe. That’s the most critical aspect of this, Lawrence, is that if you don’t have somebody in there doing this nearly impossible job just doing it decently, it puts the entire country at risk.
00:34:04
If Republican senators had just listened to Senator Kelly. Senator Mark Kelly, thank you very much for joining us tonight.
00:34:11
Thank you for having me on.
00:34:13
Thank you. Coming up, a person who only thinks about building walls wherever they may be and not building bridges is not a Christian. Those were the words of Pope Francis in February 2016 when asked about then-candidate Donald Trump. Sister Simone Campbell joins us next. In Rome this morning at 7:35 a. m., Pope Francis died at the age of 88 after a stroke and heart failure. On Easter Sunday, the most important religious holiday in the Catholic Church, Pope Francis met with Vice President J. D. Vance, a 2019 convert to Catholicism, at the Vatican for what the Vatican reported was a few brief minutes. Pope Francis has criticized Trump-Vance policies from a Catholic perspective. In February, the Pope wrote a letter to Catholic bishops about Donald Trump’s plan for mass deportations, saying, quote, I have followed closely the major crisis that is taking place in the United States with the initiation of a program of mass deportations. The act of deporting people who in many cases have left their own land for reasons of extreme poverty, insecurity, exploitation, persecution or serious deterioration of the environment damages the dignity of many men and women. and of entire families and places them in a state of particular vulnerability and defenselessness. The Pope attended the public Easter Mass in St. Peter’s Square yesterday where his remarks were read by a cardinal with the Pope saying, how much contempt is stirred up at times toward the vulnerable, the marginalized, and migrants. Today, President Biden, who was America’s second Catholic president after President Kennedy, released this statement about the Pope’s death. It is with great sadness that Jill and I learned of the passing of His Holiness Pope Francis. He was unlike any who came before him; Pope Francis will be remembered as one of the most consequential leaders of our time, and I am better for having known him. He advocated for the voiceless and powerless. He made all feel welcome and seen by the church. He promoted equity and an end to poverty and suffering across the globe. And above all, he was pope for everyone. He was the people’s pope, a light of faith, hope, and love. CBS’s Nora O’Donnell is the only American who conducted a television interview with the Pope.
00:37:02
A closed heart becomes hardened. It hardens and gets sick. It gets life-sick. The heart must be open. It is true that in many people, their selfishness leads them to close up their hearts. But that can be helped by talking, discussing, helping, right? Someone who dies with a closed-up heart is a pity. They miss out on a great happiness, that of going forward with an open heart.
00:37:33
Joining us now is Sister Simone Campbell, award-winning author of Hunger for Hope, Prophetic Communities, Contemplation, and the Common Good. Sister Simone, what are your thoughts tonight about the passing of this pope?
00:37:48
Well, I was really touched, Lawrence, first of all, to be with you to acknowledge the great gift that Pope Francis has been in my life and in the lives of so many. But his keen awareness that the essence of faith is. Is to be close to people who suffer and to let our hearts be open and respond in positive ways is at the heart of what our faith is about. And the fact that he did this until the day before he died. You know, on Holy Thursday, just this past Thursday, he went to the prison and washed the feet of prisoners in an effort to remember what Jesus had done at the Last Supper. This whole week, he’s been serving as he has in his pontificate. It’s an amazing witness to all of us.
00:38:44
I’ve never felt a greater gap between a pope’s teachings and kind of the unreachable-ness of some people to those teachings, including, by the way, Catholics, including plenty of Catholics. Who supports the Trump position on deportation and mass deportation and have ignored the Pope’s words about this?
00:39:07
Well, it’s a mystery to me, too. But I think what happens is people get caught in their own fear. And if you haven’t approached who immigrants actually are in your community, then you don’t know the truth of what’s happened. Can I give you an example? My community has been supporting a woman who got a visa to come with her very disabled infant to the United States for medical treatment. This boy was blind; he couldn’t hear, and he was only nine months old, but he had no sense of balance because his ears were such a problem. He got a cochlear implant. He’s making huge progress. And then they received a letter last week saying they had to leave immediately from the United States. He couldn’t complete his treatment. And so they left to return again to Peru. But I think that sort of removed viciousness means that the people in the administration don’t know the stories of suffering people. And they’re not willing to learn. And so my community helped her to get back to Peru. Now we’re working trying to find an alternative so that her son can continue the treatment now that he has his cochlear implants and can begin to hear. But who would want to hurt this family?
00:40:39
Sister Simone Campbell, thank you very much for joining us tonight and thank you for the work you’ve always done and continue to do.
00:40:46
Oh, thank you for this opportunity. It’s an honor. Thank you.
00:40:51
Thank you. Sister Simone Campbell gets tonight’s last word on Pope Francis.
FAQs
FAQ 1: How Does Trump’s Economic Policy Compare to the Great Depression?
Keywords: Trump stock market crash 2024, Federal Reserve interest rates, tariffs impact on economy
The Trump administration’s economic policies have drawn alarming parallels to the 1932 Great Depression, with the stock market poised for its “worst April since 1932” (Wall Street Journal). Key issues:
- Stock Market Volatility: Trump’s public attacks on Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell—a Biden-appointed Republican—have destabilized markets, spooking investors.
- Tariff Fallout: Auto tariffs (up to 25%) threaten to raise consumer prices, with ads urging buyers to “lock in pre-tariff pricing” before hikes take effect.
- Recession Fears: Trump’s unprecedented public prediction of a recession contradicts his campaign promises of unilateral economic control.
Why It Matters: The administration’s reliance on the Alien Enemies Act for tariff enforcement and disregard for Fed independence risks replicating 1932’s economic collapse.
FAQ 2: What Constitutional Crisis Is Emerging from Trump’s Immigration Policies?
Keywords: Kilmar Abrego Garcia deportation, Supreme Court due process, ICE detention controversy
The deportation of Maryland father Kilmar Abrego Garcia to an El Salvador prison—admitted by Trump’s DOJ as a “mistake”—has escalated into a constitutional crisis:
- Defying Court Orders: Federal judges accused the administration of “assaulting the rule of law” by ignoring orders to repatriate Garcia (NBC News).
- ICE Tactics: Over 1,200 migrants were reportedly detained without due process, prompting an ACLU emergency motion to halt deportations.
- Supreme Court Standoff: Judges warn that flouting due process for non-citizens sets a precedent endangering “every American’s rights.”
Key Quote: “If they can ignore due process for one, no one is safe.” – Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson, 4th Circuit Court.
FAQ 3: Why Is Harvard Suing the Trump Administration?
Keywords: Harvard research funding lawsuit, academic freedom Trump administration, federal grants freeze
Harvard University filed a landmark lawsuit against the Trump administration for freezing $2.2 billion in federal research funds, citing unconstitutional overreach:
- Government Overreach: The administration tied funding to micromanaging admissions, faculty hires, and curricula under the guise of combating antisemitism—a claim Harvard’s lawsuit calls “irrational”(Washington Post).
- Impact on Innovation: Frozen grants threaten breakthroughs in Alzheimer’s research, AI cancer diagnostics, and military nanotechnology.
- Legal Precedent: Harvard argues the freeze violates First Amendment rights, warning that unchecked federal control could dismantle academic freedom nationwide.
Expert Insight: “If the government can take over Harvard, it can take over any private institution.” – Prof. Lawrence Tribe, Harvard Law School.
