The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell - May 4 | Audio Only

0:00 Well, on day 65 of Donald Trump's illegal war,

0:03 Donald Trump threatened another war crime.

0:05 This time telling a Fox reporter in a telephone

0:09 interview that Iran will be quote blown off the face of the earth if Iran

0:16 attacks United States Navy ships in the region.

0:19 Donald Trump's war became fully illegal last week.

0:24 And Donald Trump seems to know that.

0:28 what they call a military operation.

0:31 You know, they don't like the word war and they call

0:36 it a military operation because that way you don't have a war,

0:41 you don't have legal problems.

0:43 Legal problems.

0:44 That was day 62 of Donald Trump's war.

0:48 And he had a legal problem.

0:50 By the time Donald Trump said that, even Donald Trump seemed to know

0:56 that the War Powers Act passed in 1973

0:59 made Donald Trump's war illegal last week.

1:02 The War Powers Act says that the president can

1:05 launch military operations for a maximum of 60 days, quote,

1:11 unless the Congress has declared war or has enacted

1:16 a specific authorization for such use of United States armed forces.

1:23 And today, on the 65th day of Donald Trump's illegal war,

1:29 he chose this childish language to continue his violation of the War Powers Act.

1:35 Our country is booming now despite the fact

1:39 that we're in a I call it a mini war.

1:43 A mini war.

1:44 On Friday, Donald Trump described his defiance of the War

1:49 Powers Act without ever specifically mentioning the War Powers Act.

1:54 But uh you ever hear a situation where we're knocking

1:59 the hell out of somebody and we have a Congress,

2:01 please, you've only got three days left.

2:03 We spent 19 years in Vietnam.

2:06 We spent 12 years in Iraq.

2:08 We spent seven years in another place.

2:11 Two years in another one.

2:13 Seven years in another one.

2:15 We had another one for 14 years and we're in there for six weeks.

2:22 What's taking so long?

2:25 Congress learned its lesson with Vietnam.

2:29 The war that Donald Trump refused to participate

2:31 in when offered a chance by his local draft board,

2:34 whereupon he presented a letter from a doctor saying

2:39 that Donald Trump's feet just couldn't take a day.

2:43 in army boots anywhere in the world.

2:46 The Gulf of Tonkan resolution passed the House

2:50 of Representatives and the Senate in 1964.

2:53 The vote was unanimous in the House and only two senators voted no.

2:58 Both bodies voted on the same day.

3:02 They literally did not know what they were voting for.

3:06 They thought they did.

3:07 They thought they knew why they were voting and what they were voting for.

3:12 They voted for the president to use military force against what the resolution

3:18 called quote the communist regime in Vietnam and quote because President Linda

3:24 Johnson told Congress that North Vietnamese

3:27 forces as the resolution put it quote

3:31 deliberately and repeatedly attacked United States

3:34 naval vessels lawfully present in international waters.

3:38 History would prove that was a wild exaggeration

3:43 of a very minor incident in the Gulf of Tonkan.

3:48 But the Congress immediately passed that resolution, saying, quote,

3:53 "The Congress approves and supports the determination of the president

3:57 as commander-in-chief to take all necessary measures to repel any armed attack

4:04 against the forces of the United States and to prevent further

4:08 aggression." It was a one-page resolution and the final sentence said,

4:14 quote, "This resolution shall expire when the president shall determine

4:20 that the peace and security of the area is reasonably assured.

4:26 In other words, there was no expiration date and the re

4:32 the resolution put no limit on what the president could do.

4:38 And so, President Lyndon Johnson took a minor military engagement at sea

4:46 and turned it into America's biggest war since World War II.

4:52 Four years later, in the deadliest year

4:55 of the Vietnam War in 1968 for American forces,

4:59 the United States Army had 500,000 soldiers in Vietnam.

5:04 Republican President Richard Nixon won the presidential

5:07 election that year and continued Lyndon Johnson's

5:10 war in Vietnam without limit and expanded

5:13 that war across borders into other neighboring countries.

5:16 Members of Congress came to regret their vote

5:19 for the Gulf of Tonkan resolution and during the Nixon

5:23 presidency began doing everything they possibly could to cut

5:27 off funding for what had become Richard Nixon's war.

5:31 The concept of the illegal war in American politics was born in Vietnam.

5:39 Prosecutors of the illegal war concept held that the reporting

5:44 of the Gulf of Tonkan incident in the first

5:48 place by the president was false in describing

5:51 a minor encounter at sea as an act of war.

5:54 Therefore, the Gulf of Tonkan resolution as passed

5:58 was based on a fraud and that the Gulf

6:01 of Tonkan resolution could not have reasonably been

6:06 taken as an authorization for an unlimited forever war.

6:10 By 1973, Congress was no longer content to reduce funding for the Vietnam War.

6:16 They wanted to prevent the next Vietnam

6:20 by writing into American law an unambiguous

6:24 60-day limit on the kind of war making that President Lyndon Johnson created.

6:31 After years of Lyndon Johnson's war, which had become Richard Nixon's war,

6:36 members of Congress were insisting that what the president

6:40 was doing without a declaration of war was illegal.

6:45 Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon never pretended that it wasn't a war.

6:51 They never called it a little detour as Donald Trump did recently.

6:54 They never called it an excursion as Donald Trump has called it.

6:59 And they never pretended that it was just a military operation.

7:03 And they never claimed that it would be over next week.

7:09 President Johnson, President Nixon did not spend

7:12 every week of their war in Vietnam

7:16 claiming that it would end tomorrow or the next day or the next week.

7:22 And they never said we could leave right now.

7:26 We could leave right now.

7:28 Right now.

7:28 If we left right now, it would take them 20 years,

7:32 25 years to rebuild the place.

7:35 No American president acting as commander-in-chief

7:37 in wartime has ever said that he could end that war right now because every

7:44 previous president serving as commander-in-chief knew that it

7:47 was his moral and legal responsibility

7:50 and constitutional responsibility to end that war

7:53 on the first day possible and not extend

7:57 it one day beyond what was absolutely necessary.

8:00 not risk one more life.

8:03 Quote, it would take them 20 20 years 25 years to rebuild that place.

8:14 The complete complete rebuilding of the first place on planet

8:20 Earth to be hit by an atomic bomb took 10 years.

8:26 Hiroshima was rebuilt in 10 years.

8:29 Nagasaki was rebuilt in 10 years after being

8:32 hit by the second atomic bomb used in war,

8:36 which was the last nuclear weapon used in war.

8:41 Larger Japanese cities like Tokyo had been bombed so

8:45 thoroughly before the United States had a working atomic

8:49 bomb that there weren't enough structures left in Tokyo

8:53 to use it as a target for an atomic bomb.

8:59 But Tokyo was rebuilt in 10 years.

9:02 And Japan led that effort,

9:05 that rebuilding effort across the country without a huge stream

9:10 of oil revenue that Iran could have after Donald Trump's war.

9:17 So no, it won't take 20 years or 25

9:21 years to rebuild what Donald Trump has done to Iran.

9:26 On day 62 of Donald Trump's war, he did this.

9:31 He posted an AI image of himself with no caption to explain such a perverse

9:39 choice of imagery for a president of the United States or for any adult,

9:46 but certainly for a president of the United

9:49 States who is now a wartime president.

9:52 No president has ever taken war less seriously and America does not approve.

9:58 New polling continues to show Donald Trump to be waging

10:02 the most unpopular war in American history on its 65th day.

10:06 65 days after the Gulf of Tonkan resolution in 1964.

10:11 President Johnson had the overwhelming support of Congress in the Vietnam

10:15 War and very strong majority support among voters for the Vietnam War.

10:21 Donald Trump is the first president in history to wage

10:25 a war that a majority of Americans have opposed from day one.

10:31 The New York Times reports, quote,

10:34 "The Middle East troops faltered on Monday as the United Arab Emirates

10:38 said it had been attacked by Iran while the US military said

10:42 that it had destroyed six Iranian military boats and that Iran had

10:47 fired on American ships in the Straight of Hormuz." Admiral Brad Cooper,

10:52 the head of the military central command,

10:54 said that US warships shot down cruise missiles and drones that Iran fired

10:59 at the ships and commercial vessels the Navy

11:02 was guiding through the Straight of Hormuz.

11:05 And today, Donald Trump,

11:07 who has spent every day of his war trying to oversimplify his war,

11:14 finally seems to be learning.

11:18 It's tricky out there.

11:21 We have a war right now and went to like what six weeks.

11:27 They said, "What's taking so long?" We were in Vietnam 19 years.

11:32 We're in Iraq for many years, 10 years, 12 years.

11:37 We're in all these different wars.

11:40 Korea seven years.

11:41 Uh I won't even mention World War II.

11:43 That's a big baby.

11:44 But you had the wrong person up here.

11:46 You'll be in You'll be in World War II.

11:49 As sure as you're sitting there, you have the wrong person up there.

11:53 It's nasty and tricky.

11:56 It's tricky out there.

11:58 It's tricky out there.

12:00 Lieutenant General, retired Lieutenant General Mark

12:06 Hurtling will join us after this break.

12:13 On Friday, Donald Trump said this.

12:16 Frankly, maybe we're better off not making a deal at all.

12:21 The next day, Donald Trump denied that he said that.

12:25 Last night, you said you might be better off not making him deal with.

12:31 Well, I wouldn't have to.

12:33 I didn't say that.

12:34 Joining us now is Lieutenant General Mark Hurtling,

12:37 retired, former commander of the US Army in Europe.

12:40 He's now an MS now military analyst.

12:43 Uh, General Hurtling, I'd like to begin with this phenomenon.

12:47 Donald Trump from day to day, uh, reversing himself on statements like that, uh,

12:52 which confuse the mission, I would I would expect,

12:56 uh, for troops serving in this arena, uh,

12:59 when a president says, u, we don't need to make a deal, and then says,

13:03 I didn't say we don't need to make a deal,

13:05 or then says, we do need to make a deal.

13:07 Uh, and he's and he's done that on a bunch

13:10 of other issues involving involved with this war.

13:12 What does that do uh to the forces who are out there

13:16 trying to understand the mission and wondering when they might be going home?

13:21 It's interesting, Lawrence,

13:23 because one of the things they teach at the war colleges,

13:27 which Secretary Hegath has kind of uh dis disrespected,

13:31 is that words are important.

13:33 So, you have to be precise.

13:35 Uh and that's especially true in the orders that you

13:38 give military personnel because based on the orders from any commander,

13:43 they start executing things.

13:45 They start planning new things.

13:47 They adjust to the situation.

13:48 So when you have this kind of back

13:51 and forth that we've seen from the president and others,

13:55 it just confuses your operational planning.

13:57 You know, as a as a commander in both peace time and combat,

14:01 I would look for clear, concise orders for what I had to do.

14:06 And when those orders didn't come, what I would look for the commander's intent.

14:11 What do you want me to do so that I can adjust my operations,

14:15 my tactics to try and meet your commander's intent?

14:19 But truthfully, in watching the first

14:21 eight weeks of this operation against Iran,

14:24 I've been confused in terms of what the intent is or what

14:29 the precision is of the orders that that the units have been given.

14:33 Now, you know, that's not to say

14:35 that the military has not conducted operations extremely well,

14:38 and I'll be the first to say that.

14:40 That the Navy and the Air Force and others who have been operating

14:43 in the theater of Iran have been executing what they think are their orders.

14:49 But truthfully, when you don't when you don't have precision

14:52 in your orders and you don't know what the objective is,

14:55 the end state as we call it, it makes your job very difficult and you have to be

15:00 uh adjusting to a wind sock as we sometimes call

15:03 it in the military where the flags are moving back

15:06 and forth and you're not sure what your next move is.

15:09 So, Donald Trump does seem to be mindful of the existence of the War Powers Act,

15:15 at least the way he's been talking lately.

15:17 uh you can you can definitely see it.

15:19 Uh and I and I know that when the War Powers Act was passed,

15:23 it was welcomed uh on the left side of our politics and on the anti-war

15:28 side of our politics as a limiter uh on future actions of this sort,

15:33 although the anti-war movement was so uh outraged by that time

15:37 that it wasn't a very satisfactory outcome in those years.

15:40 But I I I know that it was also welcomed certainly

15:44 among some within the military that there would be a definition.

15:47 There would be a limitation.

15:49 The American military would know that they would not be subject to any

15:54 random president of the United States sending

15:56 them off into another Vietnam for years, years, years, and years.

16:00 That there was a 60-day time frame where the Congress would have to be involved.

16:06 Yeah.

16:07 You mentioned the Nixon administration earlier

16:09 in your in your opening statements about

16:12 what they did and why they did it and how Congress reacted to that.

16:17 And that's specifically designed because wars are

16:19 very easy to get into, but everyone

16:22 who's been in one knows they're a whole lot harder to get out of.

16:26 And I'll use the Claus Witsyian term

16:28 of in war the the everything in war is simple,

16:32 but the simplest things are difficult.

16:35 And your comment about President Trump oversimplifying this action

16:39 when he first got into it is critical.

16:42 Um, you know, I I was a young cadet at West Point when the wars war

16:47 powers act was signed by Congress and we

16:49 had a lot of debates about that as cadetses.

16:52 We also saw as I was an older soldier the authorization

16:55 and use of military force in the alleged global war on terrorism.

16:59 And it was mostly the military that was saying, "Hey,

17:03 what are you doing to uh authorize the military

17:07 to do different actions as opposed to just lumping it under

17:12 the AUMF?" We're in the same situation right now

17:16 that the president is playing very loosely with the definition of war,

17:20 as you showed that clip earlier.

17:22 And you know, special military operations, by the way,

17:26 that sounds hauntingly familiar to something

17:28 that President Putin called the invasion of Ukraine,

17:31 the special military operations.

17:33 So, I think uh you know,

17:35 we're we're in dangerous territory and we have to define as a country what we

17:40 want our soldiers to do when we send America's young men and women into battle.

17:45 We better have a good reason for it.

17:47 We better have clear and concise orders and we better understand how difficult

17:52 those actions are when you put uh American sons and daughters in harm's way.

17:58 General, I'm fascinated by 1973 uh at West Point.

18:02 Uh difficult time uh to be in in the American military,

18:06 certainly America, the American army.

18:07 Uh West Point had become had lost the attraction

18:10 that it had had in the early 1960s.

18:13 I remember any kid who could possibly get to West Point wanted to get there.

18:19 Vietnam shifted uh some of the enthusiasm about that.

18:21 But take us into what it was like there when the War

18:24 Powers Act was being debated and and what how did it

18:28 come into your classes and how did it come into your thinking

18:32 and and other students uh thinking at the time at West Point?

18:36 Well, I'm smiling, Lawrence,

18:37 because I entered the academy in 1971 as a poor kid from St.

18:41 Louis and it was one of those kind of things

18:43 that I entered because we didn't have a whole lot of money

18:46 and I couldn't get on into another college and it was

18:49 relatively easy to get into West Point during the Vietnam War.

18:52 I don't think I could get in there now.

18:55 The kids are so so uh educated and well-rounded.

18:58 I don't think I could compete with them.

19:00 But in terms of the war going on, you know,

19:03 I was a swimmer at the academy and I distinctly remember one day at lunchtime,

19:08 they used to announce the casualties off of something called the poop deck

19:12 and they would tell who was who what classmates or uh what seniors when

19:17 we were freshman were killed in Vietnam and the captain of our swim

19:21 team was killed in Vietnam and they announced it as a young second lieutenant.

19:25 that brings things home when you understand the cost of combat.

19:30 So when the War Powers Act was being uh initially debated in Congress,

19:35 uh you know, all of the cadetses were interested in it.

19:39 We talked about it in our social sciences classes about the politics of it all.

19:43 We were looking more at the processes

19:46 than the typical reaction to it by Congress.

19:49 But it also was important for us to understand

19:52 the dynamics of what causes a nation to go

19:55 to war and the kinds of things that really

19:58 lead to combat uh that we were asked to execute.

20:02 So yeah, it was it was pretty serious business.

20:04 It's not the same kind of discussions you would have

20:07 at Harvard or Yale or some of those other private schools,

20:10 but at West Point it was a pretty big deal back in the 70s.

20:13 General Mark Hurtling,

20:14 thank you very much for starting off our coverage tonight.

20:18 Pleasure, Lawrence.

20:19 Thank you.

20:20 Thank you.

20:21 Coming up, the Trump White House is preparing

20:23 for the Democrats to win control of the House of Representatives.

20:27 That's next with Congressman Robert Garcia,

20:30 who will become chairman of the House

20:36 Oversight Committee when the Democrats take over Congress.

20:56 The Washington Post has new reporting on private

20:59 briefings the White House Council's office is giving

21:03 Trump administration staff to prepare them for Democrats

21:08 winning control of Congress and gaining oversight authority.

21:12 The Washington Post reports staff from the council's office

21:16 have encouraged political appointees to be careful about what

21:19 they put in writing and provided guidance for how

21:23 to respond to congressional inquiries in a timely manner.

21:26 According to two people who spoke on the condition of anonymity

21:29 because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.

21:32 At least some staff members have considered the briefings

21:36 preparatory given the growing sense across the Trump administration

21:40 that the Republican party is in trouble

21:43 and that the time has come to prepare for worstcase scenarios.

21:48 Joining us now is one of those worst case scenarios,

21:52 Democratic Congressman Robert Garcia of California.

21:54 He is the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee on his way

21:57 to being chairman of that committee if

21:59 Democrats win control of the House of Representatives.

22:02 Congressman, thank you very much for joining us.

22:05 Uh, what would you tell White House staff to prepare

22:08 for when the Democrats have control of the House of Representatives?

22:13 Well, they should save their documents and be

22:16 prepar prepared for aggressive and serious investigations.

22:19 I mean, they are participating

22:22 in the most corrupt administration in modern history.

22:26 The president continues to enrich himself and his family.

22:29 They continue to cover up the Epstein files.

22:33 They're going around and their kids

22:36 and Jared Kusher are infinitely infinitely enriching themselves,

22:39 their family, their donors, the largest corporations in this country.

22:42 And so, I'm glad those staffers are concerned.

22:45 I'm glad they're going through trainings because we are going

22:48 to be relentless with our ability to subpoena, get documents,

22:53 bring administration officials in front of the committee and investigate

22:57 the serious corruption that is happening

22:59 across the administration and multiple agencies.

23:02 The uh the report says administration officials.

23:06 So that certainly includes uh White House as well as uh cabinet secretaries,

23:11 departments, some of the people who do routinely testify to Congress.

23:15 They they all seem to have been trained in some kind of uh shoutfest uh

23:21 seminar about how to yell back at members

23:25 of Congress or yell at members of Congress.

23:28 Uh do you expect that to change when Democrats are in control of these hearings?

23:35 Look, they can yell all they want.

23:37 Uh they can try to uh divert attention or distract all they want,

23:41 but they're going to be in front of our committee and we're going to ask

23:43 the tough questions and we are going

23:45 to be relentless in our pursuit of the truth.

23:47 And look, whether they're in office or not, like Christine Nome, for example,

23:51 who may not be anymore the secretary in DH in in Homeland Security,

23:55 but she's still out there.

23:57 There's still likely corruption.

23:58 She's out there staying at a at a home owned by the Coast Guard still.

24:03 There's tons of reports about Cord Luendowski and contracts

24:05 and media reports about who's actually gaining off the system.

24:09 And so, look, whether it's Christine Owen,

24:11 whether it's Pam Bondi, whether it's Jared Kushner, whether it's Steven Miller,

24:15 we're going to take on every single instance of corruption and accountability.

24:19 The American public want to know why ICE is out there terrorizing communities.

24:23 They want to know why billionaires are being protected,

24:26 why people have raped women and children with no accountability.

24:29 And those are the questions we're going to get answers to.

24:33 And it sounds like the investigative process spreads

24:36 across pretty much every House committee, not just oversight.

24:39 Homeland Security would have their own investigative interest here.

24:42 Uh Ways and Means would have its own investigative

24:45 interest over what's going on and certainly commerce uh committee

24:49 th the those kinds of interests spread especially on the corruption

24:53 question all across the committee structure of the House.

24:58 I expect every committee to be engaged

25:00 in oversight and and we all should and look

25:03 what's great about the oversight committee is

25:05 as you know our jurisdiction is every agency.

25:07 So we'll be able to launch investigations anywhere at any time

25:11 in any agency against against any

25:14 organization that's harming the American public.

25:16 And so we are preparing, we're not waiting, by the way.

25:19 We are preparing a robust list of subpoenas of documents of what

25:22 we want to actually get justice for the survivors in the Epstein files

25:27 of the horrors that folks like Steven Miller and Christristen Elm and Pam

25:31 Bondi and Todd Blanch are causing across our government and RFK Jr.

25:35 and so the list is long, but we're going to have to have accountability.

25:39 It it we we will have a forward-looking agenda.

25:41 And I've told folks, look, we need a forward-looking agenda,

25:43 but that doesn't mean that we're not going to hold people accountable.

25:46 We need to show the next generation of people,

25:48 we need to show our students and our children

25:51 and our community that what's happening right now is wrong.

25:55 And that means oversight and accountability.

25:57 Uh the Democrats uh have announced uh something

26:01 for next week in Florida involving uh the Epstein survivors.

26:06 Uh what do you have planned?

26:10 Look, we have planned the oversight committee

26:12 is hosting a hearing in Palm Beach, Florida.

26:15 Obviously, uh Donald Trump's backyard and we're inviting and haven't

26:18 had survivors that are joining us at this hearing.

26:21 It's going to be the first opportunity since

26:24 this investigation has started where survivors will come forward,

26:28 answer questions from committee members,

26:31 share their stories in a way that's done

26:33 for the congressional record and within a hearing format.

26:36 We'll have other of course information that we'll be presenting.

26:40 And what's important is people need to understand

26:42 that Palm Beach is at the center of this investigation.

26:45 There have been numerous reports about Mara Lago being a place

26:48 where women were recruited oftentimes to go work at Jeffrey Epstein's home.

26:52 We know that Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epste were incredibly close.

26:57 Jeffrey Epste had his home in Palm Beach,

27:00 including of course in New York, including the island.

27:02 And so so much happened around Palm Beach,

27:05 including Alex Aosta and his horrific investigation and eventually

27:10 him dismissing dismissing so many prosecutors from Florida that tried

27:14 to go after Epstein that try to go after co-conspirators

27:17 and he instead decided to give Epstein a sweetheart deal.

27:21 So all of that will be front and center as we and the oversight committee,

27:26 Democrats, go into Palm Beach,

27:27 host this hearing, and I think put together a really

27:31 strong case of where this investigation is going next.

27:34 And you have uh the the Pam Bondi

27:37 uh questioning scheduled for the end of the month,

27:40 but that seems to have taken a very strange turn with the uh Republican

27:45 chairman of the committee giving her a special

27:47 process that we haven't seen before.

27:51 Right.

27:51 Look, James Comr as chair of the committee

27:53 has the ability to make this a videotape deposition,

27:56 making it a more a transcribed interview without videotape.

27:59 And that's the power of the of the committee chairman,

28:01 which is why we have to win the majority.

28:03 But what we have said has been very clear.

28:05 This is an important interview.

28:06 She she will have to of course be truthful,

28:08 but that also means we need to have that recording.

28:11 There needs to be a videotape of the interview

28:13 and needs to be released to the American public.

28:15 If James Comr thinks we're going to have a transcribe interview

28:19 with no videotape and no release of that transcript to the public,

28:23 we are not going to allow that.

28:25 So, we've been very clear.

28:26 It is our decision and it's our demand that this videotape.

28:30 In addition to that, right now we know that a DOJ attorney, Miss Dylan,

28:34 who actually runs a bunch of civil rights operations

28:37 at the DOJ and has now been elevated at the DOJ, that she is also going to be

28:42 the private counsel for the former attorney general.

28:45 Yet, she works for the DOJ.

28:47 And so, it's an incredibly strange setup that Mr.

28:49 Comr is allowing.

28:50 So, we're we're calling it out, and hopefully this will get resolved before

28:53 the actual hearing at the end of the month.

28:55 Congressman Robert Garcia, thank you very much for joining us tonight.

29:02 And coming up, when law professor Kimberly Krenshaw watched

29:05 Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas be confirmed, she said,

29:09 "This is going to change the rest of our lives." Professor Krenshaw will join us

29:15 next on the Supreme Court's latest attack

29:18 on the Voting Rights Act and her new book, Back Talker, an American Memoir.

29:26 That's next.

29:33 Wall Street Journal editorial board started its Sunday editorial,

29:38 The Triumph of Clarence Thomas, with a milestone.

29:42 Congratulations to Clarence Thomas, who this week will become the second

29:47 longest serving Supreme Court justice in history.

29:51 This wasn't what most legal experts

29:54 expected when President George HW Bush elevated

29:57 Judge Thomas from the DC Circuit Court of Appeals at age 43 in 1991.

30:03 Clarence Thomas voted with the Republican

30:06 majority on the Supreme Court last week,

30:09 in effect repealing part of the Voting Rights Act.

30:13 As Justice Elena Kagan wrote in her descent,

30:16 "This decision renders section two all but a dead letter.

30:19 In the states where that law continues to matter,

30:23 the states still marked by residential

30:26 segregation and racially polarized voting.

30:28 Minority voters can now be cracked out of the electoral process.

30:33 The latest chapter in the majority's now

30:37 completed demolition of the Voting Rights Act.

30:41 Professor Kibbley Credshaw is not surprised.

30:44 She worked to defeat Clarence Thomas nomination to the Supreme

30:47 Court as a member of Anita Hills legal team in 1991.

30:52 In her wonderful new book, Backtalker,

30:54 an American memoir, Professor Krenshaw writes,

30:56 "The hopes that several black leaders

30:59 placed in Clarence Thomas's upbringing as black and poor did little to stop him

31:05 from repeatedly ruling against black and poor people.

31:08 his deep south roots where for decades

31:11 African-American voters had been disenfranchised and worse

31:15 did nothing to discourage Thomas from helping to gut the Voting Rights Act.

31:20 Widely regarded as the crown jewel of the Civil Rights era,

31:24 his vote in Citizens United helped put our republic on a fire sail,

31:29 eventually making it possible for an autocrat to rule

31:33 over the most powerful democracy in the world.

31:36 And Professor Krenshaw writes this about what she expected

31:40 on the day Clarence Thomas was confirmed in 1991.

31:45 When at last Thomas was confirmed, I whispered,

31:48 "This is going to change the rest

31:51 of our lives." Joining us now is Professor Kimberly Cruncher.

31:55 She's distinguished professor of law and the at the then the Promise Institute

32:00 chair in human rights at UCLA and professor of law at Columbia Law School.

32:05 She is the co-founder and executive

32:07 director of the African-American Policy Forum.

32:10 Her new book is Backtalker, an American memoir,

32:14 and it is available everywhere at midnight tonight and going forward.

32:19 Uh Kimberly, so glad you're back.

32:21 So glad you're here with this book.

32:24 This is just a remarkable story.

32:26 Um I've always known you're remarkable.

32:28 Now I know so much more.

32:30 Um, we're focusing on Clarence Thomas because

32:32 of the Voting Rights Act uh last week,

32:34 but there's so much more in this book and I

32:36 and I hope we get to so much more in this book.

32:38 But that quote, that line of yours on the day that he was confirmed,

32:42 there was still hope.

32:44 I was working.

32:45 No, no, I wasn't by that time,

32:47 but working in the Senate, I know there was still hope.

32:50 Yeah.

32:51 That maybe when this guy gets on the court,

32:54 maybe he won't be like like one of those reactionary Republicans.

32:57 Turns out he's the leader of the pack.

33:00 Well, absolutely.

33:01 One of the most powerful Supreme Court justices ever.

33:04 Um, and you know, folks were not alone in in being hopeful.

33:09 A lot of very famous and respected people believed that if

33:13 we just leave the lights on, Clarence Thomas will come home.

33:16 Maya Angelou wrote an op-ed in the New

33:19 York Times around that time saying, you know,

33:22 because he was black and because he grew up poor in the South,

33:26 there's something deep inside him that he will rediscover.

33:30 The SCC, which was Martin Luther King's organization,

33:34 they supported Clarence Thomas.

33:36 He had support from across the black

33:39 political uh spectrum and also within uh some

33:42 of the traditional civil rights groups because they

33:45 thought that there was something deeply embedded in him.

33:49 I was not optimistic at all.

33:52 I remembered what he had done at the EEOC.

33:55 I remembered how he had slowed enforcement.

33:57 I remembered how he talked about civil rights leaders.

34:00 I remembered how he talked about his own sister.

34:03 I saw this person as a died in the wool,

34:07 deeply conservative individual who was not going to somehow rediscover some deep

34:12 uh connection to community and most

34:14 importantly about everything you just described.

34:17 Yes.

34:17 All policy, all an opposite.

34:19 You were opposed to his nomination before Anita Hill revelations.

34:24 Everything you just cited was before.

34:26 All that was true.

34:28 All that was already well known.

34:30 But you know the the line that I uh say

34:32 in the book that our lives are going to be

34:35 changed forever was followed by a line by the person

34:39 who ended ended up co-ounding the African-American policy forum with me.

34:43 And what he said is all because we refused to believe a black woman.

34:49 So what we got from Clarence Thomas from the failure to credit what

34:53 Anita Hill had to say is the end of meaningful campaign finance reform.

34:57 What we got was the gutting of the voting rights act.

35:01 What we got was undermining other kind of protections

35:05 that people bled for, some people died for.

35:08 He was that fifth vote that undermined

35:12 the structure of civil rights enforcement.

35:14 So, it's a story about the failure to understand black women's experiences.

35:20 And I call it a huge intersectional failure.

35:23 You had anti-racist groups really responding to this high-tech lynching idea.

35:30 And Anita Hill didn't have anything that she could have

35:34 said that would have rallied the forces in the same way.

35:37 So th this is a memoir about much more

35:41 than just that crusade uh and many other crusades.

35:45 What what you know one of the things that interests me right now

35:48 as a subject for with people are talking about how difficult it is

35:51 coming out of college now starting off in the world now what made

35:55 you start in the direction you started and how did you get your start?

35:59 Oh well my story is one in which my family my mother

36:03 my father they were called race men of the 20th century.

36:07 They were people who fought against the barriers, the obstacles,

36:10 but also thought it was important to make sure that we

36:14 were prepared to walk through those doors when they finally opened.

36:18 I was that generation that was not born into a state of freedom.

36:21 I was born before the Voting Rights Act,

36:24 before the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 65.

36:27 So that was just an imagination, a possibility that they were preparing us for.

36:32 But one of the ways that my family did prepare me

36:36 for that was to make sure that I had something to say.

36:39 That I wasn't just living life.

36:41 I just wasn't letting it pass me by.

36:43 That I observed what my life was.

36:45 That I had something to say about it.

36:48 And I actually had to come to the dinner

36:51 table every night with something to offer to the conversation.

36:54 So I was always the person who was observing.

36:57 I was asking questions.

36:58 If it didn't make sense to me, I would keep asking questions.

37:02 And that's more or less what led me

37:04 to some of the observations about how race was functioning

37:07 in my life and then how gender was also functioning

37:11 uh to shape and and delimit some of the possibilities.

37:14 How and how did you expect progress when it was achieved to work.

37:20 I mean a lot of people I think before the age of Trump thought progress

37:24 goes straight ahead and you never really

37:26 go backwards but and you might slow down,

37:27 you might get stuck for a while but you don't go backwards.

37:30 Yeah, we have experienced what it feels like to go backwards.

37:34 Was that a surprise to you that there was a possibility?

37:37 You know, it wasn't a surprise because one

37:39 of the things that happened in my household,

37:41 um, and I talk about this in the book,

37:43 in a lot of black households, there's a picture of uh the Kennedys,

37:47 there's a picture perhaps of uh Martin Luther King and a picture of Jesus.

37:52 In my home, there was also a picture

37:55 of the black congre uh congressmen from the 19th century,

37:59 the black election elected officials at the House

38:01 of Representatives and and the Senate.

38:04 So, I grew up knowing that there was a time earlier in our history

38:08 when we had more that we had political power and it had been lost.

38:13 So, the idea of forward momentum and backward

38:16 trajectory was always part of my awareness.

38:19 My first law reviewview article was called race reform and retrenchment.

38:23 So I always knew retrenchment was possible.

38:27 I think uh this last retrenchment after 2020,

38:30 it happened so quickly and it happened so profoundly and it happened after

38:37 the the the the most um uh powerful

38:40 mass movement that this country has ever known.

38:43 Every state in the union had protests, multi-racial, crossgenerations,

38:49 people being uh activated by injustice

38:52 and and knowing that when people see something,

38:56 they can feel something and demand something.

38:59 I think it was that that actually activated those who decided,

39:03 you know what, we're going to take these ideas away from them.

39:06 We're going to take this history away from them.

39:08 We're going to take the ability to protest away from them because it's too

39:12 scary to see what's possible in this country

39:15 when people are activated by injustice.

39:17 Kimberly Krenshaw, I could not be happier that you're here

39:21 on your first night of having this book out in the world.

39:25 Thank you very much for joining us tonight.

39:27 Professor Kimberly Krenshaw's new book is Backt Talker, an American memoir.

39:32 It is an important new book and it is

39:35 available in an hour online and at your bookstore tomorrow.

39:39 Thank you so much for joining us.

39:43 Thank you, Lauren.

39:44 Professor Kimberly Williams Crenshaw's new book is called Backtalker.

39:51 And that is tonight's last word, Backtalker.