Could Trump Declare Martial Law & Suspend Habeas Corpus?

Written By Leeja Miller

Sources:

Transcript:

Welcome to Why, America??? With Leeja Miller, I’m Leeja Miller, let’s get into it. Today I’m trying the sandwich method–the bad news is gonna be sandwiched between two stories that are good news, because LISTEN I’m not here to further facilitate your doom scrolling-induced anxiety okay, we’re giving hope core, alright. First let’s talk about Harvard. Now I wouldn’t say I’m particularly a FAN, okay, I’ve spent a lot of time on this show criticizing the ivy league generally and Harvard specifically but I’ll suspend my hateration and give credit where credit is due!!

Okay, here’s the story. The Trump administration, through various officials, has been hounding a number of Ivy League schools in recent weeks with demands under the pretext that they are allowing antisemitism to flourish on their campuses in the wake of widespread pro-Palestine protests across the country. In retribution for that claimed insufficient response to antisemitism on their campuses, the Trump administration is making sweeping demands that would give it control over curriculum, who is allowed to teach, access to information about international students, and more. Harvard hired two lawyers to help it defend itself against the Trump administration–and their choices were interesting. They hired William A Burck and Robert K Hur, both of whom have ties to Trump. Burck served as an outside ethics advisor to the Trump Organization, Trump’s private business, and Hur worked in the Justice Department during Trump’s first term and was appointed special counsel to investigate Biden. And it doesn’t make sense at first but it’s actually a tactic a lot of people use when choosing lawyers. What’s the best way to beat your opponent? Hire the people who have an inside scoop on the tactics and strategies of your opponent. Harvey Weinstein hired a prominent victims rights’ attorney to represent him, for example. So these two lawyers were in talks with the Trump administration, trying to negotiate to get them off their backs, when out of nowhere they got a letter on April 11th from the Trump administration, on official federal letterhead and signed by three high ranking federal officials, making sweeping demands about hiring practices, admissions, curriculum, and access to international student information, demands that would have severely hampered Havard’s ability to continue functioning. On April 14th, the Monday following the receipt of the letter, Harvard publicly denounced the demands and said they would not comply. In retaliation, Trump canceled billions of dollars of federal money earmarked for Harvard, and threatened to cancel more if the University didn’t comply.

Hours after Harvard made its announcement, they allegedly received a frantic call from a Trump official claiming that the letter they received, the one on official government letterhead and signed by three high ranking government officials, was actually sent in error, they shouldn’t have been sent the letter, it was unauthorized. But then others in the Trump administration said that they stood by the letter and everyone was in lock step agreement on it, saying Harvard’s lawyers should have picked up the phone and called them instead of starting a public “victimhood campaign.” This despite the fact that they were literally in active discussions with the Trump administration and then all of the sudden received this very official letter. As Harvard said in a statement last week, “Recipients of such correspondence from the U.S. government — even when it contains sweeping demands that are astonishing in their overreach — do not question its authenticity or seriousness.”

And in any event, the Trump administration didn’t rescind the letter, and Trump doubled down, threatening to revoke Harvard’s tax exempt status and remove more federal money if it didn’t comply. And so, on Monday this week, Harvard sued the Trump administration, a move that reportedly brought so much school pride to Harvard’s campus that one student described it to the New York Times as akin to the pride felt during the annual football game against Yale. And listen, I’ve seen Gilmore Girls. That is a LOT of school spirit, okay! And as the literal wealthiest university in the world, Harvard has the funds to put up a hell of a fight, even without the federal dollars. And this is an existential fight, because despite having an endowment worth $53 BILLION DOLLARS, it is still dependent on federal funds to survive. Funds that go towards important scientific advancements for example, as its new home page seeks to highlight, but also funds that go towards so many other public benefits beyond CRISPR technology. Which is why they receive federal funds–they are a benefit to the public in many ways. Now LISTEN don’t think I’ve gone soft on Harvard, they also give legitimacy to some absolute fucking batshit theories especially in politics and economics and, as I said recently, seem to give doctorates out like candy considering some of the nut jobs that can put Harvard on their resume and then say the most unhinged bullshit that’s ever come out of anyone’s mouth. Not to mention the elitism that Ivy League schools breed, etc etc I’ve already talked ad naseum about this check out my episode about abolishing the Ivy League but ALAS, unlike what some people in my comments section want to believe, two things can be true at the same time, and it is true that Harvard also does contribute to the public good, and that is why it receives federal dollars.

AD

The world is watching Harvard and other institutions to see how they respond to Trump’s threats. And the news is interpreting those “threats” very differently depending on the publication’s bias. Recently I saw this headline from Salon: “"We stand for truth": Harvard sues Trump admin over federal funding freeze.”

Using the Ground News browser extension, it’s helpful to see that this news source has a left leaning bias. I really love this extension because it provides context, and I can see how other sources are framing the story by clicking full coverage.

On the Ground News website you can see that there are 423 sources covering this topic

Among them, left leaning MSNBC uses the headline: “Why Harvard Law Prof. Laurence Tribe is confident Harvard will win its lawsuit against Trump admin." while the far right The Daily Wire frames it as: "Harvard Sues To Restore Taxpayer Funding Frozen By Trump Admin” focusing on the perceived injustice that OUR HARD EARNED TAXPAYER DOLLARS are going to this institution. These are very different takes on the same story, and it's a clear example of how consuming news from only one perspective can limit your understanding of a situation.

This is where Ground News comes in - and why I've been using them for over a year. Today’s partner Ground News is an app and website that offers tools to help you critically analyze the news you read, providing context to understand the full picture.

By using the Ground News Vantage Subscription, I can also see the blindspot feed where I can see stories disproportionately covered by one side of the political spectrum. For example, no left leaning news sources are covering the headline that the military has been authorized to detain undocumented immigrants in New Mexico. Interesting. I feel better equipped to make sense of what’s happening in the world without being influenced by just one perspective.

I’m always really impressed with Ground News and genuinely think they’re a great resource. If you want to stay informed on US Politics and more scan my QR code, or click the link in the description or go to ground dot news slash leeja to get 40% off the same Vantage plan I use which comes to about $5/month. Ground News is subscriber-funded, so they don't rely on ads that could introduce bias! Subscribing supports my channel and an independent team working to keep the media transparent. Thanks Ground News!

In Harvad’s lawsuit, filed on Monday, which is a major ratcheting up of the conflict between the Trump administration and Universities, and the first major ballsy move by a university as so many others have capitulated, Harvard asserts that the government has no legitimate reason for removing its federal funding, its claims of antisemetism are unsubstantiated, and the only other reason they are withholding government funds is in an attempt to infringe on Harvard’s First Amendment rights to teach what it deems appropriate and conduct its business, including hiring and handling international students, as it sees fit. Harvard’s complaint makes it clear why it is so important that this lawsuit has been filed, not just for Harvard but truly for First Amendment rights across the country. The complaint says “Defendants’ actions are unlawful. The First Amendment does not permit the Government to “interfere with private actors’ speech to advance its own vision of ideological balance,”nor may the Government “rely[] on the ‘threat of invoking legal sanctions and other means of coercion . . . to achieve the suppression’ of disfavored speech,”. The Government’s attempt to coerce and control Harvard disregards these fundamental First Amendment principles, which safeguard Harvard’s “academic freedom.””

Yes it IS NOT LAWFUL for Trump to interfere with the speech of private actors through the use of coercion, that’s you or me or the new york times or harvard, to advance it’s own vision of “ideological balance.” And that section of the complaint I just quoted uses quotes from two different 2024 supreme court cases, meaning they are quoting from THIS conservative court’s own precedent, which is the only precedent this court seems to give a shit about, to argue in favor of protecting free speech from the coercive control and manipulation of the Trump regime. You love to see it. And this illustrates how Harvard standing up for its own rights is really standing up for all of our rights, by asserting that Trump cannot use roundabout means to try to coerce compliance and punish entities OR people for their speech that the administration doesn’t agree with.

Hours after Harvard first indicated it would not capitulate to the Trump administration, Columbia, after weeks of spineless compliance, in a message from its acting president, made a pledge that it would not allow the federal government to require Columbia to “relinquish our independence and autonomy.” And this is important!! Again, I will suspend my hateration where suspension of hateration is due. Columbia still fucked up, but this about face is evidence of the power of one actor standing up against injustice and tyranny. Which is why capitulation is so infuriating. Because the domino effect goes both ways. Stand up to him, and others will feel emboldened to stand up as well, whether you’re Harvard or you’re someone’s neighbor.

And what’s WILD is that, time and again, Trump has shown that in many regards his threats and bullying is all a show, a big paper tiger, and with adequate push back he and his administration will fold. At least in this case, according to CNN the Trump administration as of this morning, Wednesday April 23rd, seems open to negotiating with Harvard, though Harvard has indicated it’s not open to negotiating, which I loveeee I looooove a petty queeeeen Harvard yes hold your ground!!! And this is an important fight in light of the fact that Trump is not only targeting numerous other universities, but it is also targeting other entities attempting to force “viewpoint diversity.” Last week, acting US Attorney for the District of Columbia, Ed Martin, sent an official letter to a scientific journal from the American College of Chest Physicians, accusing it of having partisan bias and demanding that the journal answer a series of questions about how it vets its articles and whether it includes articles with “competing viewpoints.” This is notable not only because literally why is the DC US Attorney going after a scientific publication based in Illinois, but also because this man, Ed Martin, who’s not even officially the US attorney for DC, he’s the ACTING US attorney pending the confirmation of whomever will be the official US attorney in DC, he’s also the guy who sent a random letter to Georgetown law demanding that it comply with demands trying to control its curriculum and threatening to bar any Georgetown law student from ever serving in the US Attorney’s Office, which the president of Georgetown Law, a noted constitutional law scholar, responded to by reminding Ed Martin that not only is he just the acting US attorney but also that the First Amendment exists and his letter is in direct violation of it. This new letter to the CHEST journal seems like an attempt to do the same thing to this random scientific publication he doesn’t agree with, likely to intimidate them and all other academic journals into publishing more right wing fringe conspiracies which is ALSO notable because this is the exact strategy used by right wing loons in the 70s and 80s who accused various mainstream media publications of being biased and not publishing articles from “all viewpoints” to which the mainstream media capitulated which is why the entire overton window in the United States was yanked so far right that even those on the left are kinda right leaning compared to like every country in Europe for example. Because GOD FORBID anyone gets accused of bias. Like perhaps they aren’t publishing the right wing fringe theories because they have no basis in science and don’t follow basic standards for how to ethically and accurately conduct scientific inquiry. But that doesn’t matter because the second someone cries BIAS!!!!! The publications capitulate out of fear of losing their legitimacy. I hope these scientific journals do not fall for it today the way the mainstream media did 50 years ago (and still to this day, frankly). So I’m hopeful that Harvard’s willingness to stand up in the face of autocratic bullying and intimidation sets an example for entities across the country that are facing blatantly unconstitutional threats to their own federal funding and oversight.

Okay moving on I said this was a sandwich so I am so sorry but we’ve reached the center and it is not delicious. Let’s talk about the insurrection act, whether Trump can invoke it, and what that would mean. So reminder that on day 1 of this administration, Trump issued an executive order declaring an emergency at the border and he ordered some of his key officials, specifically number 1 national security risk Pete Hegseth and literal puppy killer Kristi Noem, to “evaluate” whether to invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807 in response to the “invasion” at our southern border. That executive order gave these two clowns 90 days to do their evaluation and send a report to the president. That deadline was on Sunday. According to various reports, they will be announcing their findings later this week, but have indicated they will NOT recommend invoking the insurrection act. Now is it heartening that on Sunday there wasn’t an immediate announcement that he would be invoking the act? Yes. And I’m not interested in making everyone think that with the stroke of a pen Trump could just deploy troops that would take over every major city in America. Reminder there are 330 million of us, spread across 3.8 million square miles, and about 1.3 million active military personnel plus additional reserve troops and other civilian workers etc that total less than 3 million in all. During world war 2, since we like to make comparisons, Germany had a total of about 18 million soldiers during the war to occupy a total population of around 200 million people spread across around 1.3 million square miles. And they lost. As Daniella Mestyanek Young, a scholar of cults and a US army combat veteran, also known as the knitting cult lady on Tiktok put it, [insert clip.] So let’s not turn to full on prepperism, though I understand the urge is STRONG. I’m not talking about this to scare you or put you on alert, but there are some concerning things that I think are worth paying attention to.

Namely, on Monday Trump posted, quote “We cannot give everyone a trial, because to do so would take, without exaggeration, 200 years.” He doubled down on Tuesday, saying to reporters from the oval office, "We have thousands of people that are ready to go out and you can’t have a trial for all of these people. It wasn’t meant. The system wasn’t meant. And we don’t think there’s anything that says that.” Going on to say, quote, “We’re getting them out, and a judge can’t say, ‘No, you have to have a trial.’ The trial is going to take two years. We’re going to have a very dangerous country if we’re not allowed to do what we’re entitled to do.” The problem is that denying due process rights to thousands of people because it’s an inconvenience is actually not something the President or anyone is entitled to do. The Constitution is literally written so as to make it inconvenient to summarily strip someone of life, liberty or property without due process, that’s kinda the point my dude. But boy howdy is Trump trying his best to find a way to do it anyway. To his… credit? I guess… he is at least ATTEMPTING to find a law that would legitimize this blatant unconstitutional abuse of power. First, through the Alien Enemies Act, which unfortunately for him the Supreme Court did say does not exempt him from still respecting the due process rights of immigrants. And so next might be the Insurrection Act of 1807. The insurrection act was passed by Congress in an effort to implement its authority under the Constitution to “provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions.” Repel invasions being key language here. Because as we know Trump has declared an emergency at the southern border and whenever possible has made it clear that there is an “invasion” taking place. The insurrection act gives the President the power to deploy troops inside the US to assist local law enforcement in suppressing an insurrection, rebellion, or domestic violence either at the request of a state OR if a state refuses to impose the laws of the United States. It is a shockingly broad grant of power to the president and has been invoked numerous times, Dwight D Eisenhower, JFK, and LBJ all invoked the act in order to deploy troops to assist with desegregating schools in the South after states refused to comply with the Brown v. Board of Education supreme court decision. Abraham Lincoln invoked it at the start of the Civil War. It was last invoked in 1992 by George HW Bush after California requested military aid to suppress the Rodney King riots. According to the Brennan Center, this is the longest period the US has gone WITHOUT invoking the insurrection act.

To be clear, the insurrection act does NOT give the president or the army the authority to go in and take over civilian law enforcement, only to “assist” them. This is not martial law. In fact, according to the Brennan Center, the term “martial law” has no established definition and, under current law, the president DOES NOT have ANY authority to declare martial law. So, again, the insurrection act is not the same as martial law. And even if it was used, it would not result in the military takeover of all of America because that’s literally not feasible given our size. Likely the result would be localized to the southern border, which is not to say oh it would be fine and nothing to worry about here!!!! But let’s not let our fears get overblown. As I said in my video about whether to leave the US, it’s important to keep a clear head about what is actually an active threat versus what is your fight or flight stress response hyperfocusing on in a way that is not helpful. This is still incredibly concerning for people at the southern border and for immigrants, and I will continue to be watching the administration’s actions regarding immigration like a fucking hawk because we have to keep talking about it. But me a white lady in Minneapolis I am not actively in danger of living under martial law. Even if the insurrection act were invoked to deploy troops in blue cities or “sanctuary cities” which also doesn’t have a clear definition, it would not constitute martial law, they would be present to assist local law enforcement, and his invocation in that case and probably in this case would be roundly challenged in court. Because while the insurrection act is shockingly broad and vague, the Supreme Court has interpreted it to still have certain limitations and courts can step in if the president acts in bad faith, poor judgment, makes a mistake, or acts in a way manifestly unauthorized by law. That leaves ample room to challenge these actions in courts. And if those challenges and court rulings go unheeded by the Trump regime, we will be dealing with a very different reality wherein Trump no longer feels constrained by any laws. We are not in that reality right now. Like I said, he is still trying to use legal means to justify his ends, even if the law is being stretched beyond recognition.

Let’s also quickly touch on the suspension of habeas corpus because I think this is another fear closely tied to the fear of the insurrection act and martial law. Habeas corpus, also known as the Great Writ, is the right to challenge your imprisonment. This right is as old as the Magna Carta, literally, it was deeply held in English law and brought over from England to the US. The UK parliament describes the Magna Carta as “the first document to put into writing the principle that the king and his government was not above the law.” The king and his government was not above the law, according to the Magna Carta, which was written in the year of our lord 1215. And the right of habeas corpus, the right to petition the courts to investigate whether your detention is a violation of your rights, to challenge the state’s ability to deprive you of your liberty, is a deeply held right that has been reaffirmed time and again by the Supreme Court to apply to anyone regardless of where they are and what their immigration status is. It is protected in Article 1, section 9, clause 2 of the constitution which says “The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.” And I don’t think it’s hard to imagine how Trump would spin it if he were to try to deny habeas rights to immigrants, as again the “invasion” word has been repeated over and over in an attempt to make it true even though it is not, there is not an invasion happening in this country, no matter how many people attempt to enter legally or otherwise, that’s not the commonly understood definition of invasion and we all know that. Congress is generally believed to hold the power to suspend habeas corpus, not the president. President Lincoln ordered the suspension of the privilege of habeas corpus towards the beginning of the Civil War, but it was met with such a backlash that he backtracked and sought authorization from Congress, which was granted. As with any invocation of the insurrection act, any invocation unilaterally by Trump would be met with swift challenges, not only because it is Congress that has the right to decide when to revoke the right, but also because the Supreme Court has literally confirmed that these immigrants that he is attempting to deport have the right to habeas corpus, to challenge their detention in court, BEFORE being deported. They JUST confirmed that a couple weeks ago.

Which brings us to the other side of the sandwich. And that is the order from the Supreme Court this weekend which indicates that at least some members of the court are getting tired of the games Trump is playing. So despite the very clear Supreme Court order from a couple weeks ago indicating that migrants being detained and sent to El Salvador or anywhere for that matter had the right to petition for habeas relief and were owed due process PRIOR to being deported, over the weekend the Trump administration was trying AGAIN to deport a number of Venezuelans detained at the Bluebonnet Detention Facility in Texas. The immigrants were reportedly being pressured to sign forms written in English not Spanish affirming their gang membership and then being told they would be removed to El Salvador within 24 hours. As with all of the removals recently, the Trump administration was attempting to simply move too quickly to be caught, so they could then wipe their hands and say we can’t do anything, the same way they’re doing in the Abrego Garcia case.

The ACLU was quick on its toes, though, and quickly appealed the deportations first to the 5th Circuit and then filed an emergency application with the US Supreme Court, because the 5th circuit set a hearing on the case for AFTER the men were scheduled to be deported. The ACLU asked the court for a classwide certification so that any ruling would apply to all the men detained at Bluebonnet, not just their clients, and requested an order barring the government from deporting the men without the notice and ability to file a habeas petition that the Supreme Court had ALREADY RULED they were due in a previous case. And at 1am Saturday morning, the Supreme Court came through in a 7-2 vote in favor of barring the government from removing anyone from the class of detainees from the US “until further order of this Court.” And interestingly, before the Supreme Court even issued its ruling, there were buses of Venezuelan immigrants headed for the airport, and after the ACLU filed its petition with the Supreme Court, the buses were turned around and returned to Bluebonnet. And this should give us all a glimmer of hope. Because of the frankly courageous actions of a few judges, namely Judge Boasberg in the DC circuit who has been fielding a number of Trump regime challenges, including this case and, notably the one where he ordered a flight full of Venezuelan migrants to turn around, they didn’t comply with his order, and now he’s looking into holding them in contempt. Judge Boasberg is, by the way, a Bush appointee whose first name is Jeb like we are not dealing with a left wing nut job judge here okay. Because he has stood up for the rule of law, along with a number of other judges around the country, in the face of very real threats, death threats in some cases, I do believe the Trump regime is at LEAST starting to take a beat before doing blatantly illegal shit. They turned the buses around. They knew that not only are these judges watching but the whole world is now watching, and we’re all seeing the pattern–deny basic rights and freedoms and then deport before they can get caught. This is unconscionable for most people on the left AND the right of the political spectrum. As evidenced by the clip I showed last week from Republican senator and Crypt Keeper nominee Charles Grassley’s recent Iowa town hall in which a bunch of white rural Iowans were screaming not about Medicaid or Social Security but about a man named Kilmar Abrego Garcia who the government admitted was removed erroneously and now is doing nothing to return home.

And the speed with which the Supreme Court issued its 1am order on Saturday is notable, as is its decision to issue the order before Alito finished writing his dissent. His dissent, which of course Clarence Thomas joined, wasn’t published until around 24 hours after the order was published. According to reporting from Slate, the dissent misstates key points of law and, most notably, makes bare misrepresentations of clearly established facts. Alito’s dissent states that the Trump regime’s lawyers told the judge that no deportations were planned on Friday or Saturday, so there was no need for the Supreme Court to take emergency action, which is patently misleading. The lawyer for Trump failed to state plainly whether or not flights were planned, he hemmed and hawed in open court, was ordered to gather more information and come back in half an hour, and when he came back he continued to fudge around and avoid stating unequivocally whether or not flights were planned. And this misstatement from Alito is either willfully misleading, or just a sloppy misreading of the clear court transcript. Either way it is an example of the growing cracks in the lies Trump’s team and supporters, including Thomas and Alito, are trying to tell the public and the courts. Specifically, in numerous court filings recently, the ones where Trump lawyers obfuscate the truth, brazenly lie, misstate facts, and misinterpret law, they’re also making blatant and sloppy errors that even people without a law degree would see. They misquoted the Supreme Court decision they were arguing against. Literally citing to the order and putting words between quotes that do not appear anywhere in the order. They argue they don’t have to answer any of the questions from Abrego Garcia’s lawyers because they are, quote “based on the false premise that the United States can or has been ordered to facilitate Abrego Garcia's release from custody in El Salvador.” Despite the fact the Supreme Court literally, clearly, unambiguously said you must facilitate the release of Abrego Garcia. They’re misspelling names of defendants, they’re misspelling words, quite literally forgetting to dot their i’s and cross their t’s. And these stupid little mistakes are important because it means they’re rushing, they’re getting sloppy, and it’s easy for anyone to see, beyond the talking heads and lawyer pundits, that they’re literally just doing a bad job. They can’t even get the names of the people they’re deporting right, let alone the law and the facts.

Outside the courts, other cracks are showing. Trump is considering continued negotiations with Harvard after it showed clear unwillingness to back down. He has backtracked after suggesting he could fire Fed chair Jerome Powell after markets have tanked. He’s indicated he may walk back the China trade war. Elon Musk has indicated he’ll be stepping back from DOGE because Tesla stocks have lost something like 70% of their value and his investors are fucking pissed. The regime is willing to do and has done heinous things to people who do not deserve them, and I’m not saying they don’t continue to pose a major threat, but the cracks are showing, and when met with strong opposition, they are backing down. Because the reality is that Trump likes to tout himself as a big strong businessman who knows how to force people to the table to negotiate, but the reality is that his tactic is mainly: make big threat, wait for other person to bend. Whether he’ll actually follow through with the threat, and double down when there are real consequences, is another thing altogether. He’s good at bloviating, but most of his power rests on his ability to intimidate people into never putting up a fight to begin with. It is important that these institutions with lots of power, the courts, Harvard, law firms, even the ACLU and other major nonprofits who file lawsuits against him and are being threatened with revocation of their tax-exempt status and more, it is imperative that they continue to stand up to this bullying, because they have the most to lose yes but they are also the best positioned to withstand the temporary wrath of Trump when he tries to follow through with his threats. An immigrant here legally on a visa or with protected status can get easily plucked off the street, they have very little power and very little ability to withstand that wrath. So it must be the more privileged, more powerful parts of our society that stand up to the bullying. I’ll do it by continuing to bring you the analysis you won’t get anywhere else, by speaking truth to power in the ways I am able to, by looking out for injustices in my own community, by being joyful and finding joy despite the fact that they want all of us demoralized and beat down. I encourage you to find ways you can stand up to the bullying in your own way and in your own community. Another major nationwide demonstration is scheduled for May 1st, May Day, that’s another great opportunity to get out on the streets and feel some agency and be in community with others who are pissed and see just how many of us there are. I’m trying to come up with good ideas for signs, you know some puns or sick burns or something, comment down below what you plan to put on your signs, give us your best ideas, I need a good chuckle!!!

And if you’re interested in joining MY online community and supporting my work please consider joining me over on Patreon where I launched the Why, America? Co-Learning Lab at the beginning of this year, a learning community having discussions and making connections, along with a monthly syllabus curated by me. All year we’ll be covering topics under the umbrella theme of “Eat the Rich: Building Solidarity in the New Gilded Age.” April’s topic is all about uncovering why fascism festered in America. This is all hosted over on Patreon, which is linked down below. If you’re interested, please join us. Patreon dot com slash leeja miller.

Thank you to my multi-platinum patrons Marc, Thomas Orf, Sarah Shelby, Art, David, R_H, L’etranger (Lukus), Joshua Cole, Thomas Johnson, and Tay. Your generosity makes this channel what it is, so thank you!

And if you liked this episode, you’ll like the one from last Friday where I covered all the headlines you might have missed!

Leeja Miller
Next

This Court Just Put The Trump Regime In Its Place | News You Missed