Synopsis: With National Guard troops deployed in cities nationwide without local consent, two prominent voices warn that America teeters on the brink of authoritarianism unless citizens take action against militarization at home. Description: The U.S. military is sworn to serve the Constitution, but that’s getting complicated under Donald Trump. Now the President is threatening to invoke the Insurrection Act. What difference would that make? Laura’s guests are U.S. House Representative Pramila Jayapal and Marine veteran Janessa Goldbeck, who say it’s time to reject authoritarianism and uphold the Constitution. Guests: • Captain Janessa Goldbeck: Marine Corps Veteran; CEO, Vet Voice Foundation • Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal: D-WA, 7th Congressional District Full Conversation Release: While our weekly shows are edited to time for broadcast on Public TV and community radio, we offer to our members and podcast subscribers the full uncut conversation. These audio exclusives are made possible thanks to our member supporters. Become a member today, go to https://Patreon.com/LauraFlandersandFriends. Watch the special report on YouTube; PBS World Channel November 2nd, and on over 300 public stations across the country. Listen: Episode airing on community radio November 5th & available as a podcast.
Synopsis- US Cities Under Siege: National Guard Deployed Despite Local Opposition: Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal and Marine veteran Janessa Goldbeck join us to discuss the implications of Trump's actions and what Congress, veterans, and the public can do to stop the militarization of American cities.
This show is made possible by you! To become a sustaining member go to LauraFlanders.org/donate
Description: The U.S. military is sworn to serve the Constitution, but that’s getting complicated under Donald Trump. The President has deployed National Guard troops to half a dozen U.S. cities against the wishes of local officials and ICE agents are roaming around communities acting under unclear rules. Now the President is threatening to invoke the Insurrection Act. What difference would that make? Laura’s guests are U.S. House Representative Pramila Jayapal and Marine veteran Janessa Goldbeck, who say it’s time to reject authoritarianism and uphold the Constitution. Congresswoman Jayapal is the Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement and represents Washington State’s 7th Congressional District. She has been at the forefront of congressional oversight and opposition to the Trump administration's immigration policies. Captain Goldbeck is CEO of Vet Voice, a national nonprofit that mobilizes veterans and military families to shape American democracy and defend the values they swore to protect. What can Congress, veterans and the general public do to stop the militarization of our cities? Join us for this powerful conversation, plus a commentary on the other times that the U.S. government has turned its military inward.
“What we're seeing now is the president attempting to reshape the U.S. military into a tool of his own domestic political control . . . And then to deploy uniformed service members and the National Guard across the country against the wishes of local elected leaders . . . I feel a lot of sadness and frustration on behalf of those who are serving in uniform today who are being put into this very partisan political position by the United States president.” - Janessa Goldbeck
“What law enforcement should be doing — of any kind, whether it's ICE, National Guard, whoever — is trying to deescalate. What we clearly see this set of military actors doing is escalate, right? When you crack down brutally, when you shoot a rubber bullet at a faith leader in Chicago, or when you violently push someone down to the ground, who by the way happens to be the father of three U.S. Marines . . . I think that is really an attempt to suppress any kind of dissent.” - Rep. Pramila Jayapal
Guests:
• Captain Janessa Goldbeck: Marine Corps Veteran; CEO, Vet Voice Foundation
• Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal: D-WA, 7th Congressional District
Full Conversation Release: While our weekly shows are edited to time for broadcast on Public TV and community radio, we offer to our members and podcast subscribers the full uncut conversation. These audio exclusives are made possible thanks to our member supporters.
Watch the special report on YouTube; PBS World Channel November 3rd, and on over 300 public stations across the country (check your listings, or search here via zipcode). Listen: Episode airing on community radio November 6th (check here to see if your station is airing the show) & available as a podcast.
RESOURCES:
Related Laura Flanders Show Episodes:
• Another January 6 Insurrection? 'War Game' Film Asks if We’re Ready: Watch / Listen: Episode Cut and Full Uncut Conversation
• Community Safety in a Time of Insurrection: Watch / Listen: Episode Cut
• Inside the MAGA Movement: What Happens Now?: Watch / Listen: Episode Cut and Full Uncut Conversation
Related Articles and Resources:
• The Resistance Lab, grassroots trainings led by Pramila Jayapal and thought leaders from across the movement.
• Pentagon orders states’ national guards to form ‘quick reaction forces’ for ‘crowd control’ by Aaron Glantz, October 29, 2025, The Guardian
• Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal at No Kings protest Seattle: ‘We are the people’s movement that will save our democracy’, October 18, 2025 - Watch - King5.com
• Former Military Leaders Decry National Guard Deployment in Illinois, by Hannah Meisel, Capitol News Illinois, October 16, 2025, WTTW-PBS
• Where has Trump suggested sending troops? In cities run by Democratic mayors, by Juliana Kim, October 16, 2025, NPR
•. We Found That More Than 170 U.S. Citizens Have Been Held by Immigration Agents. They’ve Been Kicked, Dragged and Detained for Days. by Nicole Foy & photography by Sarahbeth Maney, October 16, 2025, ProPublica
•. Trump open to invoking the Insurrection Act, by Irie Sentner, October 6, 2025, Politico
• FAQ on Refusing Illegal Orders, by JMB, June 18, 2025, Military Law Task Force
Full Episode Notes are located HERE.
Music Credit: 'Thrum of Soil' by Bluedot Sessions, and original sound design by Jeannie Hopper
Support Laura Flanders and Friends by becoming a member at https://www.patreon.com/c/lauraflandersandfriends
Chapters:
Upholding Constitutional Values Against Authoritarian Threats
00:00:00
Trump's Government Overreach and ICE's Militarization
00:06:35
Distinguishing Military Roles and Resisting Escalation
00:13:21
Courts, Congress, and Citizens as Democratic Guardrails
00:20:40
Immigrant Courage and the Fight for Democracy's Future
00:29:38
Help Sustain Independent Media: Donate Today
00:33:29
The 'Personal Army' of ICE and Election Interference
00:34:13
War Game, Nonpartisanship, and Trump's Disrespect for Service
00:40:19
Building an Empathetic Future Through Collective Action
00:46:34
123 While our weekly shows are edited at a time for broadcast on Public TV and community radio, we offered to our members and podcast subscribers the full, uncut conversation.
These audio exclusives are made possible thanks to our members supporters.
When the Supreme Court declared that immigration agents could consider race during deportation sweeps, Justice Brett Kavanaugh said that citizens shouldn't worry.
When House Speaker Mike Johnson described no King's protest participants as pro Hamas, GOP media saw no problem with that.
With President Donald Trump threatening repeatedly to invoke the Insurrection Act if federal courts continue to bar him from sending National Guard troops to Democrat run cities, White House officials continue to tell reporters that they don't think he'll do it.
But others see those steps as a prelude to dictatorship.
Invoking the Insurrection Act would federalize the National Guard and permit the president to use the US military to put down what he deemed to be unrest.
Or as the president put it recently, there's no more court cases.
There's no more anything.
Well, that's just not true.
But it hints at what the president might like is Trump's next move invoking the Insurrection Act.
Our guests are taking Trump's threats absolutely seriously.
Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal is the ranking member of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Integrity, Security, and Enforcement and represents Washington State's 7th Congressional District.
She's been at the forefront of congressional oversight and opposition to the Trump administration's immigration policies.
Marine Captain Janessa Goldbeck is a veteran and CEO of Vet Voice, a national nonprofit that mobilizes veterans and military families to help shape American democracy and defend the values they swore to uphold.
His Representative Jayapal.
That's Seattle's recent No Kings protest.
We are the people's movement that will save our democracy.
Look, you all are here today because we are up against a serious choice in our country.
At the 1787 Constitutional Convention, Benjamin Franklin was asked what kind of a government they were establishing, A monarchy or a Republic, to which he famously answered a Republic if you can keep it, Seattle, we are at that if you can keep it moment.
Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal addressing the crowd at the No Kings rally in Seattle recently.
I'm very happy to welcome the Congresswoman and Janessa Goldbeck to Laura Flanders and friends.
Let's start with you, Congressman.
Why Ben Franklin?
What did he mean and what was your point by raising that quote?
My point by raising that was really to remind people that keeping a democracy is not easy.
Our founders didn't think it was easy.
They put in some things that they thought were checks and balances, but those checks and balances are failing us in this moment.
Not entirely.
We still have a lot of hope for a few of the things that are happening.
But the most important thing is that people really do not disengage, that they stand up and that they think of themselves as the protectors of our democracy.
And that is true whether it's no kings or whether it is everyday in between with what's happening in Chicago, what's happening in LA, what's happening in DC around the country.
For people to really understand how far away what is happening now is from the principles that Ben Franklin that the founders of our country were trying to go away from.
And so it was important for me to read the Declaration of Independence because if you actually go through that list that follows right after the quote that I gave, it goes through corruption, it goes through the use of the military, it goes through the use of the federal government for partisan political purposes.
It goes through many of the things that we are seeing happen right now.
Very frightening.
While we're talking about our foundational documents coming to you, Janessa, as a Marine, you took an oath to do certain things and defend that Constitution was one of them as you understood it at that moment.
What was your role and what do you think as you watch the what military members are being asked to do today?
Yeah, well, every member of the military takes an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the values enshrined within it.
We don't take an oath to a man, to a political party, certainly not to a king.
And our Constitution is very clear.
As Americans, we have the freedom of speech, we have the freedom of assembly.
We have the right to dissent, we have the right to debate, and we have the right to believe in things that are different from our political leaders.
And that is what makes America a free and fair country.
Those are the values we are always seeking to expand upon and to enshrine and to ensure others around the world have access to those very same rights and freedoms.
And what we're seeing now is the president attempting to reshape the US military into a tool of his own domestic political control, to present the military as something that belongs to him through shows of force, like the the parade in Washington, DC, or in San Diego recently, the military demonstration here that was ostensibly for the Marine Corps birthday, but not on the Marine Corps birthday, which is actually in November.
And, you know, at great expense to taxpayers and the time and training of our troops in uniform and then to deploy uniformed service members in the National Guard across the country against the wishes of local elected leaders, local police, who've said this is inflammatory, this is actually not making us safer, It's doing the opposite.
So we're in a really tenuous time in terms of civil military relation relations in this country.
I feel a lot of sadness and and frustration on behalf of those who are serving in uniform today, who are being put into this very partisan political position by the United States president.
Congressman, you recently held a shadow hearing called Kidnapped and Disappeared, one of a series, I think, on Trump's assault on families and communities.
Janessa participated.
When I actually read the transcripts and saw what was said there, it was shocking to me, and I thought I'd been following what's been going on.
What was the most shocking thing to come out of that as far as you're concerned, Congresswoman?
It's very difficult to pick one thing, Laura, because I think across the board, we are seeing Trump use the levers of the US government to crack down on people who live in this country, whether it's U.S. citizens, whether it's undocumented immigrants, whether it is people with legal visas.
And, and I think part of what we were trying to do in that hearing and Janessa was magnificent in bringing that very important voice of our troops, who we all value and who we all believe should exist to protect the security and the safety of a nation, not to be at the whim of a political leader.
But from the individual stories of, you know, directly impacted individuals, one of whom had had to move to Mexico because she's AUS citizen.
Her husband was picked up and, you know, it was coerced essentially into moving to Mexico.
She had to move her kids who have many issues, medical issues that she was also dealing with, another U.S. citizen who is looking after four U.S. citizen children who were separated from their parents to the economic effects.
You know, having somebody who just did a study that shows that none of this is in the interest of the American people or the American economy.
Mass deportations is a bad strategy no matter who looks at it.
And then, of course, all of the immigration attorneys who are dealing with these cases on the ground, everybody making the case that if this can happen to anyone, group of people, it can happen to anyone.
If it can be used in the context of the National Guard being deployed, in the context of immigration, they can be deployed to crack down on peaceful protesters.
And they are, in fact, in different ways, still at the edges.
But they can be deployed for any reason.
There are very clear reasons why these protections that Janessa mentioned are in place.
And I think the horror of the violence may be the thing that is most shocking to people.
When you see in Chicago a raid on an apartment building that in the South Side of Chicago where you have helicopters, U.S. military helicopters, people rappelling down onto the roof, everybody being pulled out, people being pulled out naked, zip tied, children, children being pulled out in that way and separated.
And finding out that amongst all of those people are people of all legal statuses.
So now apparently in the United States of America, you have to continue to prove over and over again that you, you are somebody that belongs here in this country.
And I think all of that is perhaps, you know, the thing that is shocking the conscience the most.
But the pieces of how we get this information out is really important, which is why I've been doing these shadow hearings and why we'll be in Chicago later this week for a field hearing in Chicago with members of Congress.
Well, I'm excited, and we'll be excited to hear more about that.
I mean, one of the things that comes out to me is the way that this threat of deportation is being used to frighten people, to manipulate people, and as you point out, force people to, as they say, self deport and being used against U.S. citizens in all of this.
We're talking about ICE, Although I do want to come back to what you just said about enforcing crackdowns on protesters at the margins in just a minute.
But first, I do think it's important for our audience and me to understand where ICE functions in our kind of structure of enforcement agencies.
It's not our stance, it's not a member of the military, it's not the National Guard, it's not police.
It's something else.
Can you explain it?
You want to start Congress, Congressman?
Yeah, ICE stands for Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
It is a division of the Department of Homeland Security, or DHS.
It has traditionally immigration until after, you know, until just after 911, immigration sort of was more about services and the DHS structure kind of took a bunch of different components and put them all in together.
What ICE is now doing, what DHS Secretary Christy Gnome is now doing, is she is actually taking law enforcement from just about every agency within the US government and assigning those people to conduct immigration enforcement, most of who have no training whatsoever.
And in doing that, she is doing two things.
One, she's taking very important resources away from real public safety, crime, national security, intelligence, all of those things.
We know, for example, at the FBI, that 20% of the FBI's officers have now been deployed to do immigration work, which means they're not doing the important work that the FBI needs to do.
Second, ICE does not.
Being undocumented in the United States is not a crime.
And I think it's very important that all of our listeners understand that it is a civil system.
And So what she is now doing is turning a civil system into a massive criminal justice system in the bad, big, bad betrayal bills, what I call it, that the Republicans passed earlier this summer.
One of the little known facts is that an enormous amount of money went into immigration enforcement.
Both the detention of people, $42 billion spent on immigrant incarceration now overtaking the amount of money that's spent on the Bureau of Prisons.
But then in addition, lots of other money that is to private contractors for deportation, for crackdowns on immigrants.
So she's really militarizing the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which is an enforcement arm of a civil system.
Not and this is on top of the what, $900 billion military appropriations in this administration's sites in the next year?
Coming to you, Janessa, How do you In the military, you go through famously strenuous training.
Most of you think about all of this.
Well, I think it's important to to really delineate between the National Guard, the active duty military and federal law enforcement in particular.
ICE Congresswoman Jai apologist named how Secretary Nob is taking officers who are not trained in immigration enforcement and putting them into these roles.
They're also recruiting off the streets and out of local police departments.
So you're getting beat cops sometimes who are now no longer working their jobs in their communities, but are now going out in masks and kidnapping folks off the streets.
But they don't have the same training that the National Guard or the military has.
We don't know what their rules of engagement are.
We've seen all kinds of things that should never be happening, you know, firing of rubber bullets and pepper bullets at onto peaceful protesters, people being taken away, zip tied with no identification, no badge number.
And on top of that, they're wearing military fatigues.
They they look to a civilian who might not have a lot of experience with the military or various branches of law enforcement.
They look like they're members of the military.
And this is something that really concerns me a lot because right now the National Guard have only been allowed by courts to be in places where they're protecting federal property.
That is an authority the president has.
Whether or not he's using it in the right way, it's certainly up for debate.
I don't think that any of this is necessary.
And many retired generals and senior officers also agree with that.
There's no, there's no reason for it.
But they are trained and they do have rules of engagement they have to follow.
They, they have the the responsibility to refuse an illegal order.
That's part of their oath.
And to the average American citizen who is looking at these militarized federal agents in military fatigues who don't have that training, we don't know what their roles of engagement are.
You know, we don't know what they've been ordered to do.
They think they're military.
And what concerns me about that, beyond the inhumane treatment of people living in America, citizens or not citizens, is that the military has a a lot of respect from a lot of different people of all political stripes right now.
That wasn't always the case.
After Vietnam, veterans were spit on, they were turned away.
They were denigrated for for being drafted in my era at the post 911 generation.
We are thanked for our service.
People respect our service even if they disagree with the reasons why we served overseas and what this risks doing.
What the president risks doing and Christy Noem risks doing is Americans think they're watching the military conduct these raids.
A lot of people think that and it's they're indistinguishable because of the uniforms they're wearing.
And that risks really stretching and creating tension between the military and our society.
It risks, you know, how we take care of veterans going forward, whether or not people will want to join the military because they think that they're going to have to be doing immigration enforcement.
So it really stands to do generational harm to the integrity It's.
Really important that you point that you're mentioning when you say it stands to increase tensions, because I do think increasing tensions is part of the point.
And, and I'm sure you like, I was super impressed with the No Kings Day protests that you could have 7 million people or maybe more or on the streets in the United States, one of the most heavily armed countries in the world, if not the most heavily armed.
And as far as I could see, virtually no violence, a lot of good humor, levity, even people in frog suits.
But that threat of provoking tension seems to be part of the dictator playbook.
And, and I just want to come back to you, Congresswoman Jayapal, when you talked about what's happening at the margins of the protests, what do we need to be paying attention to?
And are you worried about an escalation of violence?
Yes, of course, because you know, we have been doing a lot of work across the country, groups across the country around peaceful protest, around how to engage and push back nonviolently against authoritarian type actions against authoritarian leaders.
And one of the clearest tools in a authoritarian's playbook is to actually try and escalate rather than de escalate.
And So what we see is with a lot of the National Guard being brought in, you know, and these are all being contested.
As Janessa said, there's no authority as yet to actually deploy National Guard troops.
But I think what we are seeing is when you have a military presence, I'm going to use that term broadly because ICE is acting as a military presence right now in our streets, this militarization in our streets, what law enforcement should be doing of any kind, whether it's ICE, whether it's National Guard, whoever is trying to deescalate.
But what we clearly see this set of military actors doing is escalate, right?
So when you crack down brutally, when you shoot a rubber bullet at a faith leader in Chicago or when you, you know, violently push someone down to the ground who, by the way, happens to be the father of three U.S.
Marines When you are, you know, sort of hunting people in front of schools in front of neighborhood centers, all of these things, the violent videos that we've seen, I think that is really an attempt to suppress any kind of dissent and and to make it clear that anyone who protests peacefully is going to be in trouble.
Now this is also true if you look at the way the immigration system is being used against people who are speaking out for Palestinian rights.
The way that you know all these different institutions are sort of being Co opted into obedience to one person.
And so I think all of that, we have to keep connecting the dots.
And I know in my speech for No Kings, I said these might all seem like disconnected things, but they are actually all about consolidating power behind one person and anyone who bends the knee to that one person.
And in some of the examples.
Around who refused to bend the knee right.
Exactly.
And some of the examples around the world that have been most inspiring to me have been where people in these forces, whether it's, you know, whether it's in the military, in the net, in, in the National Guard, in the whatever it is when they say our oath is to the Constitution, our oath is to these values.
That is one of the most powerful things that I have seen happen.
But I think we have to be very careful.
And it's why it's it's also important that we all train on nonviolent resistance because.
Violence is not just what we inflict on others.
We have to make sure we don't do that, but it is also being able to resist nonviolently in the same way the civil rights leaders did when violence is inflicted on us.
And that requires training, discipline.
As Doctor King said, it is a an aggressive spiritual, mental and physical practice to really engage in nonviolent resistance.
And the question of division that you raised earlier, Janessa, is very important.
It seems to me as it resonates in my mind, I'm thinking about how there is or there isn't dissent within the military, like where the the the fissures might be with inside the military right now and how that could change if military leaders start seeing protesters targeting armed forces.
What is the level of dissent that you're seeing at this point?
You've been travelling the country with a gaggle of generals as far as I can see.
Well, retired generals have the ability to speak where active duty military do not.
You know, they're restricted by the Hatch Act.
They can't speak politically in any partisan way.
So it's really important that these senior officers, retired generals and Admirals are speaking out and voicing their dissent to the way the military is being used, in particular the National Guard.
And, you know, these people are still in touch with folks who are in.
But at this point, you know, the legality of the National Guard deployments has been questioned.
You know, not whether or not the president can federalize the Guard, but whether or not the situation actually warrants it.
The fact of the matter is that the executive in this country, because of the Insurrection Act, has a lot of latitude for what he can do with the military domestically.
I call these lawful but awful deployments where it's a long standing norm that we don't police our own cities using the National Guard unless it's absolutely necessary.
And part of the reason we do that is because the National Guard is not a, you know, aside from the fact that we don't want to live in a militarized society.
The National Guard is not just like an endless resource.
They are a trained standing force to be used in cases an emergency.
And over the last two decades that America has had our misadventures in the Middle East, they have been operationally part of that deployment cycle just as often, in some cases more often than active duty military forces.
So it's not that we can just take guardsmen and women from one place and send them into Chicago and we're not incurring a cost.
We are.
We're incurring a cost to our readiness in terms of our ability to respond to threats both at home and overseas.
And we're also those families are incurring a cost.
You know, many of these soldiers and airmen are, they are all citizen soldiers.
They have full time jobs or and families back at home.
Many of them serve in local law enforcement as EMT's, as nurses, as teachers.
And so when you take them out of their communities and send them into a city for a partisan political stunt, you're not only are you taking those resources out of a community, you're also taking those people away from their families.
And they are incurring a cost personally to morale, to their some cases financially.
Many of them make less when they're on active guard duty than they do in their full time jobs.
So it really isn't just this bottomless pit of resources that the president can deploy Willy nilly.
They have real jobs, they have real lives, and many of them have real objections to how they're being used.
As you've pointed out, the court said for the most part, I mean, just look at Chicago, 5 to 1 defeat, you know, opposed Trump's effort to deploy the National Guard.
He has come back time after time, threatening with increasing frequency and clarity, kind of to invoke the Insurrection Act.
Now, it may give him, he may think it gives him more powers than it does.
There will be trials.
There are still courts, but what does that change about this picture, Congresswoman?
And are you afraid that he will make that move?
Well, I think we have to be on guard for anything because it's clear that this is not a president that values norms.
Many of the things in the past have been norms.
I am concerned that the Supreme Court, it seems to be doing more and more of overturning of lower court decisions, sometimes as part of a shadow docket with just one line, not even a real but, you know, not even a real opinion.
And that some of the things that we never would have imagined possible are seemed apparently seem to be possible now.
So, yes, I think we have to be on guard.
I don't think we should give up hope.
And I think these lower court decisions, the federal judges are really for the most part doing what they need to do.
Trump appointees, you know, Obama, George W Bush appointees, you know, we have appointees across the political spectrum who are actually standing up for the Constitution.
I think about the the ruling out of Judge Immigut in Portland.
This is a Trump appointee who said that we are, you know, we are.
She prevented the National Guard from coming in from anywhere.
But I think we are country of constitutional law, not martial law.
I think it's exactly what she said.
That, of course, has now been overturned or is in the process of being overturned by the appeals court in the 9th Circuit.
But we'll see where that goes.
And I think we've got to be ready, vigilant, prepared.
Would Donald Trump invoking the Insurrection Act take things to a whole new level?
Or is the threat really enough?
I think the threat's enough.
I mean, listen, he, he, he hasn't needed the Insurrection Act to militarize Los Angeles, to militarize Chicago, to militarize, you know, and now he's threatening San Francisco next like that.
This administration does not care about norms.
They don't care about laws.
They're and they're stretching the interpretation of many laws to the point of disbelief.
The fact that we have a Supreme Court willing to give the president even more authority over the last year is deeply concerning.
So I think the Insurrection Act, politically, it's perhaps more incendiary, More people kind of understand, well, that's a pretty dramatic step.
But understanding that the Insurrection Act is whether it's invoked or not, when you see a service member in fatigues with a long gun walking towards you on a civilian St.
On a Tuesday in Washington, DCI think that that feels just as just as big of a deal and just as threatening as the indication of the Insurrection Act.
Yeah, I heard Karen Bass say that she felt that we were being dosed as a nation with appearances here and appearances there, like troops here.
Troops there are being dosed, as in made sort of accustomed to something that should really never be seen as normal.
So how do we prepare?
I mean, you in Congress are one of the guardrails.
Your fellows, some of them have been under serious critique from people in the streets who feel like you don't have strong enough spine.
Not you.
But there are other guardrails in civil society that you talked about in your speech there in Seattle.
What?
What difference does the civil society protest make and and what other guardrails exist there in case Trump gets the wrong idea about martial law in this country?
Well, there's really three, right?
There's there's Congress, but in order to have Congress be able to really step up, members of Congress, including of the majority party of the president's party, have to be willing to stand up for their constituents in the Constitution and not for their own personal gain.
I still have hope that if we mobilize the people that more and more Republicans will stand up and we'll do the right thing.
We can't give up on that.
And we certainly as Democrats have to use every piece of leverage that we have to not treat this like some other moment in history and stand up and stiffen our spines.
The second is the courts.
And I think that those discussions are still ongoing.
And I think that the fact that federal judges are getting upset, even if it's not openly, you know, but privately are getting upset at what the Supreme Court is doing is very important.
And we need to continue to push things through the courts and force these judges to stand up for what they swore an oath to.
But the third and most important thing, Lauren, is why I do my resistance lab trainings.
We've trained over 18,000 people across the country.
We just did one on immigration resistance, immigration justice, and we had over 1000 people from 44 different states.
People need to understand how they can plug in.
We have a lot of Americans across the country, 7 million at minimum, who showed up in the streets for no kings, but many, many more who are our allies for democracy?
Who are our allies for immigration?
Who are our allies for a military that is actually used for the benefit of the the people, not for the benefit of a king?
And so those are all of the people that we need to bring in and build a very powerful people's movement.
Because at the end of the day, my belief is that that's the only thing that's ever saved democracies from falling is the people.
When you talk about the people, it is no surprise to me that some of the strongest voices in Congress are our immigrant leaders and our most recently elected cohorts.
And I'm coming to you, Pramila, as somebody who has herself experienced some of the xenophobia of this country.
And I remember you talking about that after 911.
Where do you get your courage from and your strength from?
Because we hear from so many congressmen.
Well, they're afraid for their families and their and their kids if they, if they get out, if they step out of line.
I get it from this country.
I get it from the people that I've organized with.
I get it from the fact that a 16 year old like me, immigrant, could come to this country with nobody and nothing and become a member of Congress.
And to me, that responsibility is so strong.
And the organizing that I've done with immigrant families makes the everything that we're doing urgent.
And so for me, it is really about if I'm not going to, if I'm not able to do the job because I'm too afraid, then I should step back and somebody else should do it.
Because these are moments where courage is is the ultimate thing that is needed in in any of our leaders, elected or non elected.
It takes a lot of courage from I had somebody who is active duty now who, you know, came to tell me what was happening because he's a conscientious objector.
It takes a lot of courage for people even within the institutions that are being Co opted to stand up.
And I think we have to do everything we can to make sure that we amplify that courage.
For me, it's not worth being where I am if I can't really fight for the things that I am supposed to represent.
When I take that oath of office, it's not, it's not just words.
It actually means something.
And it makes me deeply moved every time I do that.
Every two years, I take that oath, and I know what that means.
It means that I, as an immigrant, one of less than two dozen naturalized citizens to serve in Congress, can talk about what it means for immigrants, what it means for people on valid visas, what it means for U.S. citizens, what it means for people whose parents and grandparents came here from somewhere else, What it means for enslaved Black Americans whose parents and grandparents, you know, came from somewhere else or were brought over many generations ago.
So I, I just think it's, we have to tie it back to our own reasons for why we do what we do and what this country stands for.
And then we have to step up because some of this is not comfortable.
It is not does not feel safe and it is not comfortable, but it is what courage is made of.
Well, it is part, part of what we stand up for is the future.
I'd love to keep you longer, but I know you have to go.
And so my, my last question to you is what do you think is the story the future will tell of this moment of us looking forward?
I know 2550 years.
Well, I wanted to tell the story of how we had to fight back against some horrific attacks on our democracy and that we were able as a country to come together over party over rural, urban, over race, over religion, over or any other factor.
Come together as Americans, as people who care about this grace great nation and save it and make sure we made sure this is the story I want to tell.
We made sure that we kept our Republic, as Ben Franklin told us so many, so many years ago that we would have to do.
Congressman Pramila Jayapal, thank you so much for joining us.
Thank you, Laura, and thank you, Janessa.
So powerful.
Yeah, great to see.
You all right?
Good to see you.
We'll be in touch.
And I have lots of more questions for you, Janessa.
Hi, it's Laura.
Independent Media is a collaborative project and you play a critical part in it.
This show is made possible by our viewers and listeners, not corporations or advertisers.
So join our member supporter on a roll by going to lauraflanders.org/donate to contribute.
That's lauraflanders.org/donate and please stay kind, stay curious and commit to supporting this.
No ads, no gimmicks, Not all about profit.
Show again or for the very first time.
Thank you.
And a reminder to hit that subscribe button wherever you get your podcasts.
And thank you.
Now back to our full uncut conversation.
So we've been talking about ice and one of my questions to you, Janessa, is, you know, you hear from anti fascist scholars that dictators need like their own personal army.
Is ice in a sense functioning as that, or do you fear that it could?
I'm really concerned about this, Laura.
I mean, look at the budget the congresswoman mentioned the the big ugly bill, whatever we're calling it, that the funding bill that passed included enough resources to grow ICE to be larger than the United States Marine Corps.
They basically, I think, understood that the political cost of deploying the military domestically was going to be too damaging, at least to start.
And so they needed to build their own army, for lack of a better word, that was under the control of DHS and that didn't necessarily have to abide by the same constitutional guardrails and rules that the military has to in our society.
So absolutely.
I mean, the fact that these guys are running around in fatigues, the fact they're dressing like the military, but they're they don't have enough.
They don't have the training of the US military, but they're dressing like them.
You know, they're imitating military.
They have like militarized vehicles on the streets.
All of that is an attempt to intimidate and control.
What are you hearing from the people you're in touch with about how they're preparing or what they're anticipating as Donald Trump threatens to send more US force to cities like New York City and Baltimore?
Well, I've been hearing from a lot of military families, National Guard families, that they're really concerned about their guardsmen or women being sent into a really fraught and dangerous situation where they're unnecessarily, you know, placed between protesters potentially and an ICE facility.
You know, there's so many opportunities with so many federal law enforcement officers on the ground who really are there to escalate.
There are many opportunities where things could go wrong that could devolve into violence that that.
So they're they're worried about their, the physical safety of their their family member.
They're also worried about how they might be used next.
And I think this is something that every American needs to be thinking really hard about.
Why is the president of the United States trying to acclimate us to the National Guard in our cities?
What greater purpose is there to test the legality of his authority to do so?
And for me, that answer is quite clear.
It's the 2026 and 2028 elections.
And there is a very high possibility, and I say that with a lot of confidence because the president tried to do it the first time he was in office.
And it's been spoken about on the right for many years through Project 2025 and other documents.
But this notion of a rigged election, of election fraud and some sort of national emergency that the president then uses to deploy National Guard around the election to depress turnout, to intimidate people, particularly in in swing districts or states or places where there are, you know, heavily immigrant communities where people might fear going out and voting would lead to deportation or detainment.
That I think is the ball game.
And we all need to be thinking about how we we can resist both legally, both by pushing on our members of Congress and in the streets peacefully.
So how do we resist?
What is your message to people and people in local government in those Democratic run cities?
I I was at an event not long ago with New York Attorney General Letitia James where she says she was in connection conversation with attorneys general from across the states.
Who else is in conversation with whom and who?
Needs elected leaders at every level, especially, I would say county administration officials, many of whom admit who administer elections locally.
Folks need to be thinking about this possibility.
I would encourage people to do some scenario planning That Voice Foundation does this with a lot of different groups have been doing it for several years in anticipation of a second Trump administration.
But but to figure out what might happen and to discuss who in your office will respond.
What's the what's the strategy legally?
What's the strategy from a communications perspective?
How do we reduce the likelihood of violence should something like this occur?
All of those things that are questions that elected leaders and decision makers should be asking themselves well ahead of the next election and.
I mean, I'm not even just talking about the claim that the election's been rigged.
I'm talking about troops arriving on the streets or National Guard being deployed.
I live in New York.
And we're very nice.
I think you should be.
I mean, the president has made a lot of comments about the, the direction of the New York City mayoral contest and how he's going to send in National Guard to clean up the streets regardless, you know, I think Americans in every city, especially Democratic cities, should be concerned that this is coming to them next.
And the, the guard, the, the, the mere presence of the Guard is a deterrent.
Turn out, you know, a lot of people would fear getting caught up in something heading to a polling place.
And for the president of the United States to take the thing that truly makes America, America, our our right to vote in a free and fair election, to militarize that, to threaten and intimidate.
It's the, it's the most unamerican thing I can think of.
And I think as individuals, we need to be thinking about what are where can we find the courage to resist in a moment like that?
Will you still be willing to go out and cross, you know, across the street where the National Guard are posted to cast your ballot?
How will you help friends who might have brown skin and are legal citizens, but still fear of being detained and taken away from their job and their families for days at a time, as we've already seen happen with American citizens across the country getting caught up in ICE raids?
So I just think we need to all be prepared for this reality, to find that courage within ourselves to think how we can provide support to our neighbors, especially people who might be in a more marginalized position in society, and be ready for the next thing so that we're not caught flat footed and that we've already steeled ourselves for the next assault on our freedoms.
I only have a couple of questions left, but one of them has to do with the last time we had you on the program.
We were talking about the film War Game, which kind of scenario plant, you know, scenario imagined a Democratic administration deciding whether or not to invoke the Insurrection Act because there was a January 6 type insurrection.
All of us are here today because we are increasingly concerned by the rise of domestic extremism and radicalization in this country, specifically within the active duty military forces.
I don't need to tell you that the alarms are flashing red.
Most of you have at one point sworn Underoath to protect and defend the Constitution.
Today, we'll examine a frightening scenario.
What happens when those in uniform break that oath?
I think what brought us all together is a need to be better prepared and the exercise is introduction to.
Coup.
Prevention one O 1.
I'm a retired Lieutenant General.
I spent 37 years in the Army.
I'm pretty adamantly nonpartisan.
In fact, that was one of my conditions for participation, that it was not a partisan exercise, because this should.
Not.
Be.
About politics.
This is about security.
That's the trailer for War Game.
You'll find a link in the podcast description to that episode that features Janessa and other team members behind War Game released prior to the 2024 elections that questions how prepared we are for another post election insurrection.
They pondered and debated and thought carefully and talked about the consequences and how you come back from it.
Do you think there's a room somewhere where that scene is playing out?
It feels very Pollyannaish in retrospect to to think about government officials thinking about ways to de escalate a situation, ways to restore the rights of peaceful protesters and make sure that those rights were protected.
And that was our the intent of the film and the exercise really was to help educate people about the Insurrection Act, what it means, why and how it's been used in the past and how using it or deploying troops domestically would be such a departure from the way we viewed the use of the military since this country was founded.
I do think that there are people who have good intent in government that are doing their best and in the military, certainly who are working to ensure, you know, the fact that we've had National Guard deployed and we've had, you know, no instances of violence with the Guard specifically really speaks to the leadership, the local leadership on the ground and the values they're impressing on the troops in uniform there.
But years go by and we see people getting out of the military or being forced out because they're not sufficiently loyal to the president or he thinks they're a DEI higher or whatever it is.
And we start to see the makeup of the US military change.
I mean, the US military has remained ultimately nonpartisan since its founding under civilian leadership because and that has ensured that we have the most professional and lethal fighting force in the world.
We're not there to serve one person or one party, but the values of the Constitution and to keep America safe.
But what the president is doing by putting troops in these positions and reshaping who and what is promoted and what types of people are sought after to join is, I believe, doing generational harm to the professionalism so the military and might get us to a point where you have officers who are loyal to a man and not the values in the Constitution.
There's what he does and then there's the imagery he puts out.
And nothing to me was really more horrible after the No Kings protest than to see that AI generated video that the White House, the I think the president himself approved the distribution of it on social media depicting him in a kind of Top Gun plane literally defecating on the people.
I can only imagine you and your colleagues.
I know you're a Marine, no air, no Air Force, but I mean, what how did people respond to that?
And.
Yeah.
What can we do about that?
If you haven't seen that video, don't go find it.
Don't spare your brain cells.
Look, I was at the new Kings protest in San Diego over the weekend.
I was marching alongside friends who are federal workers who are, you know, currently not getting paid.
I'm not a park Ranger whose park is closed.
A veteran was marching right beside us wearing his VFW cover.
I saw a number of veteran.
I always, whenever I see veterans wearing, you know, veteran paraphernalia, I always like to go and say hello and shake their hand and thank them for their service and thank them for being out there.
Those are the people that that Trump was jumping on that he was making fun of that he was saying these are UN American people.
These are people who serve our country everyday, who have served our country, who are working in their communities to make the world a better place for for all people.
And he has no respect for for that.
I mean, to him service and he's asked in the past, you know, like what what's in it for them?
He doesn't understand the concept of service.
He doesn't understand the concept of making a community better for everyone makes it better for you too.
Like he is a he is a fundamentally selfish person and the people who have surrounded him are sycophants and grifters who are also fundamentally selfish and greedy people who want to just take whatever they can for themselves.
They truly do not understand that the thing that makes America stand out, the thing that makes this country great is that we have worked to make it a place and are working to make it a place where everyone succeeds and everyone thrives.
To them that they don't understand, that they can never understand it because it's they're always just about themselves.
And that I think is the real fundamental divide in this country is people who believe that collectively, when we succeed, we all succeed, and people who just want to take for themselves.
Same question to you, what do you think the story will be that the future tells of this moment?
I hope that 25 years from now we'll look back and we will see people banding together, putting aside differences of opinions, sometimes on things that are small and sometimes things on things that are very big, and focusing on the big picture, which is what is the kind of world we want to live in?
What is the lesson we want to teach our children?
Do we want to live in a place where everyone is scrapping for the tiniest morsels against each other, you know, fighting for clean air and water and the right to speak their their peace and practice their religion?
Or do we wanna live in a society where we are constantly striving to do better, Where we are constantly trying to lift each other up, even if we disagree on things big and small?
And I hope that they will look back and see that people were able to see that big picture and come together and work towards a more empathetic world.
I really hope that's the case.
I do believe in people.
I believe in the power of collective action.
I have seen it for myself.
I know there are people generations ahead of mine who fought for rights that seemed impossible when they were fighting for them.
So it can be done.
And the greatest lie that the president wants us to believe is that we are powerless and that cynicism is the only way forward.
I I fundamentally disagree with that.
I have hope.
If people can find the courage within themselves and share it with others, that will inspire more courage and more collective action for change.
Well, you are both, you are both great examples of exactly that kind of courage.
So thank you for being with us on Laura Fernandez and friends.
Thank you.
Thank you, Laura.
Thanks for taking the time to listen to the full conversation.
These audio exclusives are made possible thanks to our members supporters.
Please join our members now by making a one time donation or by making it monthly.
Go to patreon.com/laura Flanders and Friends That's also where you'll find our episode notes For more information on this conversation.
That's patreon.com/laura Flanders and Friends, And thanks again to all our member supporters.