'BradCast' 11/28/2025 (Encore: President of United States Calls for Killing Democratic Officials)

Today's broadcast was originally recorded on November 20th, 2025. You can refuse illegal orders. You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders. No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our Constitution. Wow. That sounds controversial. Well, I don't know why I came here tonight. That's why. I'm so scared in case I fall off my chair. And I'm wondering how I'll get down the stairs. Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right, here I am. From Pacifica Radio in Los Angeles, this is the broadcast, as heard on KPFK, 90.7 FM in LA. Also in California, in Red Bluff and Reading on KFOI and Round Mountains, KKRN, up in Oregon on the Central Coast, on KYAQ, Cottage Groves, Koso. Eugene's KEPW, Lancaster, Pennsylvania's W News, Maui, Hawaii's K-A-K-U, and Columbus, Ohio on WGRN, Palinville, New York's WLP, Rochester, New York's WRFZ, down in New Orleans, on WHIV, out in Gallup, New Mexico, on K-N-I-Z, Concord, New Hampshire's WN, H.N, Fayetteville, Arkansas, K-P-SQ, and Seattle on K-O-D-X, Richmond, Virginia's W-R-W-K, Fairmont, West Virginia's, W.EFR. Jamesville, Wisconsin's, W.A.D.R.M., Minneapolis, St. Paul's, AM 950, KTNF. We also stream coast to coast and around the globe every day on our excellent internet affiliates, including the Progressive Voices Channel, Netroots Radio, Radio for Humans, Nicole Sandler.com, Radio Free Brooklyn, No Lies, Radio, Detour, Talk, Del Marva, FM. And most of your favorite podcast sites, Blanketing Planet Earth with great thankfulness to all of our affiliates. I'm Brad Friedman, your friendly investigative blogger, journalist, troublemaker, muckraker, and all around, swell fellow, says me from brandblog.com. Thank you all for joining us for another thrilling edition of the brandcast. Okay, then. I guess we are now at the part in this horrible movie where the president of the United States calls for the murder of members of Congress that he disagrees with. It started a week or so ago, in truth, with staunch Maga Republican, Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, who disagreed with him on the release of the Epstein files. She didn't believe that the Epstein files, purportedly detailing the monstrous sex crimes of one of the nation's most prolific child sex criminals in history, Jeffrey Epstein, should be covered up.

Even if they contain thousands of references to Donald Trump himself, who she had been a very big supporter of. Donald Trump, of course, disagreed with Marjorie Taylor Greene. He thought those records should be kept covered up from the American people. So he issued a post on his failing social media side calling her Marjorie Taylor Greene. Get it? He disagreed with her, so she was a traitor. Super clever. That's our president. A crime punishable by death, by the way. Hi, Desi Doyan. Hi. But O'Brand, he didn't mean it that way. He didn't want to kill her. He wasn't calling for her death by calling her a traitor, which is actually punishable by death. He wasn't saying that. He was just coming up with one of his very clever nicknames for her. Get it, Marjorie Taylor Greene. Well, that wasn't how Marjorie Taylor Greene saw it, who reported an uptick in death threats against her after Trump called her that, and somewhat of an admission of guilty then tried a few other nicknames thereafter, since clearly calling her a traitor while pretending that he is opposed, pretending that he is opposed to political violence. in the wake of the assassination of Charlie Kirk a few months back. Well, that probably wasn't going over all that well. So he pretended otherwise, at least for a few minutes. But if there was any doubt that he didn't want calling someone a traitor, what that actually means. If he didn't want people to misunderstand it, well, yeah, it was all cleared up on Thursday morning when he posted to his same failing social media site, in all caps, seditious behavior. Punishable by death. He wasn't referring to Marjorie Taylor Greene in that post. He was referring to several Democratic senators and representatives, six of them, who served in the armed forces or intelligence agencies, who on Wednesday had released a video in which they hoped to remind members of the U.S. armed forces that they had the right. And in fact, it is the law of the land that they are not allowed to obey. unlawful orders given by their superiors. I'm Senator Elissa Slotkin. Senator Mark Kelly. Representative Chris Deluzio. Congressman Maggie Goodlander. Representative Chrissy Hulahan. Congressman Jason Crow. I was a captain in the United States Navy. Former CIA officer. Former Navy. Former paratrooper and Army Ranger. Former intelligence officer. Former Air Force. We want to speak directly to members of the military and the intelligence community who take risks each day to keep Americans safe. We know you are under enormous stress and pressure right now. Americans trust their military. But that trust is at risk. This administration is pitting our uniform military. And intelligence community professionals against American citizens. Like us, you all swore an oath. To protect and defend this Constitution. And right now, the threats to our Constitution aren't just coming from abroad, but from right here at home. Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders.

You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders. No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our Constitution. We know this is hard and that it's a difficult time to be a public servant. But whether you're serving in the CIA, the Army, or Navy, the Air Force, your vigilance is critical. And know that we have your back. Because now, more than ever. The American people need you. We need you to stand up for our laws. Our Constitution and who we are as Americans. Don't. Give up. Don't give up. Don't give up. Don't give up. Don't give up the ship. So that's what Donald Trump was responding to in his tweet or his post on his social media site when he said, seditious behavior. Punishable by death. Those remarks you just heard. According to the President of the United States is seditious behavior punishable by death. The idea that it is unlawful for members of the military to follow unlawful orders by their superiors is hardly a new idea. You likely recall most famously perhaps the rejection of the I was only following orders defense at Nuremberg. When the world put Nazis on trial for their atrocities and many of the Nazis attempted to use that defense that they were just following orders. It didn't fly then for soldiers in Nazi Germany. It does not fly now in the U.S. for members of the American military, though apparently the president of the United States feels differently about it. In fact, he seems to believe that anyone who even reminds members of the military that they are not legally required to follow unlawful orders, even if those people are veterans themselves and elected officials, well, that those people should be put to death for having done so. That what you just heard, those elected members of Congress and members of the military and the intelligence agencies remind current members of the military about is itself as the president of the United States posted today, quote, seditious behavior punishable by death. Quote, seditious behavior at the highest level, he shouted in a separate post just before that one, adding, each one of these traitors of our country should be arrested and put on trial. He continued, quote, their words cannot be allowed to stand. We won't have a country anymore. Any example, an example must be set. It must be set. Remember, their words were that members of the military are not allowed to obey unlawful orders. In other words, they were restating U.S. law.

But Donald Trump, he clearly disagrees. He believes that military officials must follow any orders, even if they are unlawful ones. And anyone who even says otherwise veteran or elected official or both, well, they must be put to death for saying as much or we don't have a country anymore. That an example must be set with these people by presumably killing anyone who says such a thing because they're traitor. It's treasonous, punishable, as he noted, by death. Well, Brad, surely he didn't mean that. Really? Are you sure? Because just before those posts that I mentioned, that he reposted a comment from someone else who said, quote, in all caps, hang them. George Washington would. So Donald Trump reposted that. California Governor Gavin Newsom sharing the hang them post that Trump elevated to millions of his followers noted in response, quote, Trump just reposted this. It is a call to hang Democratic lawmakers who spoke out against Trump. Not that Trump actually cares about either actual sedition or calls to hang politicians for that matter. You'll recall that he pardoned all of the insurrectionists that he personally incited to violently try and overthrow the U.S. government itself on January 6, 2021. Many of them found guilty of actual sedition. Yes, treason, actual seditious conspiracy to overthrow the federal government. Trump pardoned or gave them clemency for their actual sedition. So please don't tell me he actually cares about seditious behavior. Even or perhaps especially, he pardoned the ones who chanted hang Mike Pence and tried to hunt down and kill both Mike Pence and the Democratic Speaker of the House of Representatives at the time, Nancy Pelosi. A man would later try and hunt down Nancy Pelosi in her own house using the same Where's Nancy chant of the seditious conspirators on January 6th, only to find that she wasn't home. So he bashed her husband's skull in with a hammer instead, which Trump would go on to make jokes about for years thereafter. Has he pardoned that guy yet? Trump is all for sedition and treason, at least by those who support him. But veterans and elected officials who courageously stand up for the rule of law and the Constitution, they apparently should be put to death. Now, this is one of the stories that I saw and had some inclination initially to sort of set aside, you know, to focus on other things.

I actually saw it bubbling up late last night when Trump's twisted henchmen and top advisor Stephen Miller first posted a link to that video of those patriotic elected officials along with the text that he added, quote, Democratic lawmakers are now openly calling for insurrection. Yes, he said insurrection. It apparently is now insurrection to call for obeying the law. He, Miller, Steve Miller, later went on Fox News where he said, and I quote, rather than playing his audio, which he also posted on his Twitter account, quote, it is insurrection plainly, directly without question. It's a general call for rebellion from the CIA and the armed services of the United States by Democrat lawmakers. Good Lord. It is a rebellion. That is, of course, treason, again, punishable by death to remind members of the military and our intelligence services that it is unlawful to follow unlawful orders. Even Mike Johnson, the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives. Trump's quizzling in Congress. He decided he would play along with the dangerous fiction being amplified by the president of the United States. Even Mike Johnson pretended to be outraged. by American service members and Congress members citing the law of the land at a perilous moment in the nation's history. We encourage young troops to disobey orders. I mean, think of what the threat that is to our national security and what it means to our institutions. I just, we have got to raise the bar in Congress. This is out of control and is wildly inappropriate. And for a senator like Mark Kelly or any member of Congress in a House or Senate to be engaged in that kind of talk is. It's to me just so beyond the pale. To behave, engage in what type of talk? To, as Johnson, to encourage young troops to disobey orders. Did Mike Johnson conveniently forget a word there? Yes. Did he forget the word unlawful? The part of, you know, do not obey unlawful orders? That the young troops. We're being warned about by these elected officials. Apparently he forgot that. To encourage young troops to disobey orders. No, he was not encouraging them to disobey orders. They were not encouraging them to disobey orders. They were encouraging them to obey only lawful orders. Are you suggesting Mike Johnson that they should obey unlawful orders? Really? That it is beyond the pale to remind people to follow the rule of law? That's a threat.

to our national security and our institutions if they follow the rule of law, really? So, yeah, as much as I might like to, frankly, I do not think that any of us should turn away from this, from what is becoming of our Republican leaders at this point who clearly feel that they are now up against it. As we head into an election year, after being blown out of the water, pardon the pun, at the recent off-year elections, and like caged animals, I guess, they are now fighting tooth and nail against what seems to be happening to them, and they are beginning to violently and dangerously lash out and essentially order their minions to, you know, do the same. to lash out violently against their perceived political foes. Andrew Weinstein, a DNC attorney, wrote on social media, quote, when a president calls for the death of lawmakers protecting the oath military members take to the Constitution, not the president, you are watching a full-blown constitutional crisis. He says, this is the ultimate test of our democracy. We cannot look away. David Rothkopf, a Daily Beast columnist, noted quote, so apparently to our president, upholding your oath and calling for the military to support and obey the Constitution is seditious behavior. But calling for members of Congress who are also honored veterans to be hanged because they are honoring the Constitution, well, that is just fine. Adam Surwer, the author and journalist, wrote, quote, service members are supposed to disobey illegal orders. It's why they swear an oath to the Constitution and not the President. House Democratic leadership, including Leader Hakeem Jeffries in the House, Democratic Whip, Catherine Clark, and Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar, released the following statement in response to all of this, quote, political violence has no place in America.

and rationalization of political violence in this country. This is a very slippery slope that we are on. This is a moment for people to step up, for Republicans to step up, for business leaders to step up. Anybody who has a voice or a soapbox in this country, needs to draw a line in the sand and say that it is not acceptable for the President of the United States to call on the murder of his political opposition. Oh, well, I have a voice and a soapbox. I'm happy to say that it is not acceptable for the President of the United States to call for the murder of his political opposition, who, as Chris Murphy apparently bravely has to state, As to Chris Murphy's note there that this has never happened before, to his knowledge, well, in the history of the U.S. Actually, apparently it has. President Andrew Johnson criticized by historians as one of the worst U.S. presidents for, among other things, having enabled white supremacy after the Civil War, obstructing reconstruction, failing to protect the rights of newly freed African Americans after the war. Well, little wonder then that Donald Trump has expressed admiration for President Andrew Johnson in the past. But as historian Heather Cox Richardson notes today in response to all of this, quote, before the midterms of 1866, President Andrew Johnson called his congressional opponents traitors and said they should be hanged. Voters were so profoundly moved by his words at the time that they gave his opponents. A supermajority in Congress, and the nation subsequently got the 14th Amendment, which, by the way, granted citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the U.S., including former enslaved people, which Donald Trump has now appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court to try and essentially overturn. 14th Amendment also guaranteed equal protection under the law, which Donald Trump has long ago killed under his administration. Don't give up the ship. I suspect there is a good reason for those Democrats to end their video with that specific phrase. As NBC News reported last night, the senior military lawyer for the combatant command overseeing lethal strikes on alleged drug smuggling boats near Venezuela disagreed with the Trump administration's position. that the operations are lawful and his views were sidelined, that according to six sources with knowledge of the legal advice. The lawyer who serves as the senior judge advocate general or JAG at U.S. Southern Command in Miami raised his legal concern back in August before the strikes began in September, according to two senior U.S. officials, two senior congressional aides and two former senior U.S. officials.

His opinion was ultimately overruled by more senior government officials, including officials at the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel. Those would be political appointees, that according to the six sources. Other jags and military lawyers at various levels of seniority weighed in on the boat strikes as well. Some of the military lawyers, including civilians and those in uniform, also expressed concerns to senior officials in their commands and at the Defense Department about the legality of the strikes. The JAG at Southern Command specifically expressed concern that strikes against people on boats in the Caribbean Sea and the eastern Pacific Ocean, whom administration officials call narco-terrorists, could amount to extrajudicial killings and therefore legally expose service members involved in the operations. The opinion of the top lawyer for the command overseeing a military operation is typically critical to whether or not the operation moves forward. While higher officials can overrule such lawyers, it is very rare, reports NBC, for operations to move forward without incorporating their advice. The opinion of the Southern Command JAG, which has not yet been previously reported, adds a new dimension to concerns that lawmakers, retired military officers, and legal experts have raised about the administration's legal justifications for striking alleged boats and whether the strikes violate international and U.S. law. Since September 2, the administration has killed now 82 people in 21 strikes on small vessels that it says were transporting drugs bound for the U.S., but administration officials have not put forward any evidence backing up their claims. There have been other signs of disagreement within the administration over these strikes. The head of Southern Command, Admiral Alvin Holsey, is stepping down after less than a year and the job, a job that typically lasts about three years. In addition to concerns about the legality of the strikes, Democrats, and some Republicans on Capitol Hill have complained that the administration has not provided them enough information about the legal rationale or the intelligence used to target the vessels and people that the administration purports are bringing drugs into the United States. Quote, there is no world where this is legal, unquote. That according to a current JAG who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to speak publicly.

Congress has not declared war or authorized the use of military force against the drug traffickers, and U.S. law allows the president to take military action without lawmakers' approval, but only if there is a national emergency due to an attack on the country or on American forces. There has been neither of those things. There is nothing lawful about what service members are being asked to do in these attacks. Dan Marr, an associate professor at Ohio Northern University and a former Army JAG himself, argued that the drug cartels narcotics smuggling and other actions are crimes, but they do not qualify as an armed attack on the U.S. as defined by U.S. and international law. He and other former military lawyers and experts believe the Trump administration's legal rationale for the strikes is so tenuous it could put commanders and troops in legal peril after Trump leaves office in 2029. And one more point for now on this story. NBC notes that the internal differences between career military lawyers and political appointees at the DOJ who have reportedly in a secret memo declared that this extrajudicial killing is somehow perfectly legal based on the president of the United States feelings that these boats present some sort of direct threat to the U.S. somehow. Those echo a similar debate. From more than 20 years ago, during President George W. Bush's administration, you may recall that senior military lawyers for the Army, the Air Force, and the Marines raised objections over proposed so-called enhanced interrogation techniques at the time back in 2003. And they later testified to Congress about their concerns. They warned that the U.S. courts could find those techniques amounted to torture and that they were, in fact, illegal. Never mind that we recently reported on the findings by two human rights groups that the Venezuelan migrants that Donald Trump illegally sent to a gulag in El Salvador were repeatedly tortured and sexually abused there while in custody. As you know, thanks to the ridiculous ruling last year by Donald Trump's corrupted U.S. Supreme Court majority, the president of the United States no longer has to follow any laws. including, as his attorneys argued at the time, even if a president orders the military to assassinate his personal political foes, much less calls for them to be killed by his supporters on social media. But I digress. John U. Remember that name? John U. Of all people, the legal architect of George W. Bush's War on Terror after the September 11 attacks, who authored all sorts of justifications in favor of torture by that administration. That John Yu now argues that the Trump administration's boat strikes risk crossing the line between, quote, crime fighting and war. Yes, even John Yu was worried about it.

Quote, Americans have died in car wrecks at an annual rate of about 40,000 in recent years. The nation does not wage war on auto companies, John Yoo wrote recently at the Washington Post. American law instead relies upon the criminal justice or civil tort systems to respond to broad, persistent social harms. if, in fact, these boats coming out of Venezuela are actually some sort of social harm. As to political harms, while the president of the United States now responds with tweets calling for violence against people that he doesn't like. So no, please don't look away. By the way, none of this is a sign of strength by this administration and by this president. It is, in fact, a sign of weakness, and they know it. And even he knows it. And even his thugs at the Department of Homeland Security know it as they are retreating from their tough guy act, though they will still pretend otherwise. But never mind what they say. Look at what they are actually doing when they are forced to follow the law. Josh Kovinsky at Talking Points Memo reports today that federal prosecutors are beating a broad retreat. from cases that they had brought against people protesting the surge of CBP and ICE agents into Chicago. It is, Kovensky notes, a stunning come-down. Prosecutors there had moved to abandon on Thursday three cases brought against protesters, two of which DHS described as being brought against, quote, domestic terrorists as part of a national media campaign to portray the situation in Chicago as demanding a military deployment. Remember, narco-terrorists in the Caribbean and domestic terrorists here at home. Why not kill them all? It's all justified. Just the word terrorists included there apparently seems to justify it now. Whether it has any connection to reality or not, it doesn't matter as an excuse to arrest and charge and even kill these people. Why not? Thus, that video by those six Democrats on Wednesday. Now, the cases in Chicago, which DHS had touted with great fanfare previously, well, now those have come to nothing amid increasing scrutiny from the courts. In the case of Marimar Martinez, a 30-year-old Chicagoan, shot five times in October by a Border Patrol officer, remember this case? Oh, yes.

DHS officials accused her of being part of a convoy of, quote, 10 cars that, quote, rammed and, quote, boxed agents in. They were fighting for their lives. Well, it turns out those allegations were contradicted by an affidavit filed by federal agents in the case and by evidence that was introduced later. She did not ram them or boxed them in, but she was shot five times by one of Trump's thugs. And then she was charged for that incident. The motion to drop the charges against Martinez and Anthony Ian Santos Ruiz, another protester, comes at a critical time in the case. Kovinsky reports text messages from the Border Patrol officer involved in that shooting, a guy by the name of Charles Exum. appeared to show him bragging about the incident, writing, quote, I fired five shots and she had seven holes. Put that in your book, boys. Quote, we are happy that the U.S. Attorney's Office made the right decision here to drop the case, said Martinez's attorney. Spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Illinois told TPM in a statement that prosecutors were, quote, constantly evaluating new facts and information relating to cases and investigations arising out of Operation Midway Blitz, the name they gave to that Chicago operation. It helps ensure that the interests of justice are served in each and every case and that those cases that are charged are appropriately adjudicated through our federal court system. In other words, they had no evidence. In other words, the evidence that they had was contrary to the actual case that they were bringing. DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin struck a completely different tone. She doubled down by calling Martinez a domestic terrorist and accusing her of participating in an ambush because she, like her boss, this Tricia McLaughlin, lies about absolutely everything. Federal prosecutors in Chicago also moved to dismiss a case on Thursday against Dana Briggs, a 70-year-old Air Force veteran who was initially charged with felony assault over in October 4 incident. According to the charging documents, Briggs brushed against a Border Patrol officer as he tried to hand his phone off to another protester while he was being placed under arrest. That's felony assault now, apparently. Prosecutors first downgraded that case to a misdemeanor. But on Thursday, they moved to dismiss the matter entirely. The dismissals come after CBP commander and mass deportation hype man, Gregory Bovino, left Chicago for an operation in Charlotte, North Carolina, where apparently they are now pulling out from as well.

Bovino was accused multiple times of violating a court order barring him and other federal officials from using tear gas unless absolutely necessary. But according to a report in the South Side Weekly, federal agents in Chicago used tear gas and pepper spray more times in one day in October than Chicago police did all year long. And of course, despite the court order to not do so. Cases against several other protesters, including a man accused of injuring Bovino's groin, have been dropped by prosecutors or no billed by grand juries in recent weeks. No bill means that prosecutors brought the case to the grand jury, which refused to agree to the charges. No bills used to be very, very extremely rare, thus the old phrase that you could get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich, but they are not so rare anymore. We are seeing them now all the time in response to cases being brought to those grand jurors by Trump's federal prosecutors as they see Trump's thugs actually. disobeying the law not the people who are being charged with crimes These guys break a lot of laws every day, everywhere. So, yeah, elected officials and military veterans who served with honor and distinction instructing those in the military that they are not required, in fact, are barred from following illegal orders, that is, yes, definitely a threat to Donald Trump's entire, corrupt, unlawful, failing. He knows it. He is scared, so he is lashing out, so you can expect more of this to come. Nobody said it was going to be easy, taking on an attempted authoritarian takeover of the United States by the president of the United States and his lackeys. No one said it would be easy. But it is possible to take it on. It is happening, and that defense of our nation and our Constitution is in fact working. Don't give up the ship. Quick break and more straight ahead, including Desi Doyen's latest green news report. I'm Brad Friedman. You are listening to the Bradcast.

The Bradcast and the Green News Report are 100% independent, 100% listener supported. But we can't do it alone. We need you. Please help us bring real facts to listeners at independent stations around the nation. Please drop by Bradblog.com slash donate. That's bradblog.com slash donate. And thanks. Hey, this is Brad. You're listening to an encore presentation of the Bradcast. Welcome back to the Bradcast, Bradfredman from brandblog.com. Yes, that's our Green News Report music, but we're not going yet. Not straight to the Green News report. There's so much going on now kind of every single day. Just a few of the things that we will not be able to cover today. A federal judge has ordered the Trump administration to end its months-long deployment of National Guard troops. in D.C. because, as it turns out, that was unlawful. As well. What do you know? Yeah, go figure. The stock market has been tankin over the last week, along, by the way, with Donald Trump's dumb media company, which is one of the reasons I always call it his failing social media site because it actually, his company actually is failing. He's lost about $5 billion in recent months. Sad. I'll try to get the details on that at some point. The CDC is now in turmoil because the agency has backpedaled on its, on Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s promise to not. link vaccines to autism. Apparently the CDC is now doing that. So as we are all getting ready here to stand down for breather over Thanksgiving week, I'd actually hope to catch up on a bunch of stories today that I had been trying to get to over the past week or so, but I keep needing to push them off because of other breaking news. Unfortunately, due to the President of the United States calling for the murder of Democrats. in Congress today. I won't be able to get to most of those things today either, unfortunately. But one story that I have been meaning to get to. is actually one that Desi covered a week or so ago in our Green News report and exclusive at the time from Washington Post regarding a draft plan at the time by the Trump administration to open up a whole bunch of new offshore oil drilling off the coasts of California, Florida, and even Alaska. So you covered it, Des. Yes. But we never have enough time for some of the juicy details, as you know, in the six-minute green news reports. So there was actually more on that draft memo that I had been wanting to highlight for the past week, but I didn't have time to. Well, now, guess what? That draft as of Thursday is reportedly official policy of the Trump administration. It's no longer in a draft format. It's now the policy.

It has been officially proposed. As CNN reported on Thursday afternoon, the Trump administration is proposing to open federal waters off the entire coastline of California to drilling as well as an area off the coast of Florida. Neither state's waters have been open to new drilling for decades. In fact, the eastern Gulf. off the west coast of Florida has actually been closed to offshore drilling since 1995. No new drilling has been allowed off the coast of California, where we've had quite a few oil spills over the years. No new drilling has been allowed since the late 1960s after a particularly horrible spill near Santa Barbara where oil and tarballs still wash up on the beaches. Yep. Donald Trump's Interior Department released a five-year offshore drilling plan on Thursday that would open up vast parts of California's coastline to drilling. The department is also proposing new oil drilling 100 nautical miles off Florida's West Coast, a decision opposed by Florida's Republican leadership. Of course, please take note, as California Governor Gavin Newsom did when he responded to this story as it originally broke last week by the Washington Post when the plan was still in draft form. He described the project at that time for California as the proposed project as, quote, dead on arrival. And he also noted that Trump is not proposing drilling off of Florida on the Atlantic side of the state for some reason, where you may have already figured out by now. That is where Mar-a-Lago is located. The Trump administration's proposal would open the Eastern Gulf. Two federal oil drilling auctions starting in 2029. It would open auctions for drilling in Central and Southern California in 2027 and Northern California in 2009. The oil industry has been advocating for opening up parts of the Eastern Gulf that are adjacent to areas where oil production has been happening for decades in the Central Gulf. Gavin Newsom called the plan idiotic in a statement today and vowed that the state, quote, will use every tool at our disposal to protect our coastline. It's interesting, he said, that Donald Trump's proposal does not include the waters off Mara Lago. As to the California coast, the tools at our disposal here are actually pretty vast, especially since the state controls the waters immediately off the coast, as I understand it. Correct me if I'm wrong on any of this does, but it seems that any plan to, in this case, would be to drill hundreds of miles off the coast in federal waters? Yes, that's the idea.

So that might work just fine, I guess, to drill way out there in the federal waters. But then there's the question of how you actually get that oil back to shore because it would then have to come through California waters, which I believe would violate state law. Correct. I mean, it would have to get approval for any pipelines and so on and so forth. It would have to go through an entire system. There is no infrastructure to support any kind of expansion of offshore drilling off the coast of California. There are a few grandfathered in oil platforms still in existence, but that's it. There's no new infrastructure. The state is adamant. State regulators, state lawmakers, adamant about not. And state law, too. But I'm just saying that, you know, that basically that there are many, many hurdles that I don't know that they would be able to overcome to build the infrastructure, the pipelines, onshore terminals. Yeah, that's not going to happen. And it may not go any better for him off the coast of Florida. During his first term, Trump's first term, Florida's congressional delegation, including Republicans, repeatedly pushed back against attempts at the time to open the eastern Gulf of Mexico, as CNN calls. it to drilling because they were concerned that one oil spill could wipe up billions of dollars in tourist revenue for Florida's beaches. Yeah, most of Florida's economy is kind of based on real estate and tourism. This new Gulf Action, CNN, according to CNN, has similarly rankled Florida Republicans now. They have memories still of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon spill. Molly Best, the spokesperson for Florida Governor Ron DeSantis's office, said the governor's office still supports the ban on drilling in the area from Trump's first term. The Ron DeSantis administration, quote, urges the Department of Interior to reconsider. So it's not just those lefties from California. No. And a letter from several Florida Republican congressmen to the president urged the administration to withdraw the eastern Gulf parcel, saying oil exploration there was, quote, incompatible with military operations and recreational uses. Among the signes on that letter is Congressman Byron Donalds's, the Trump endorsed candidate for governor in 26. Quote, this plan is an oil spill nightmare, said Oceania campaign director Joseph Gordon. The last thing America needs now is a massive expansion of offshore drilling that could shut down our shores with catastrophic oil spills. The latest move follows other steps. The Trump administration has taken in recent days and weeks to expand oil drilling around the country and to rollback protections enacted by the Trump administration, as well as roll back billions of dollars in clean energy projects.

enacted by the Biden administration. The Trump Interior Department this week announced that it was rolling back a Biden-era rule that banned fossil fuel drilling on nearly half of the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, over 13 million acres. And this proposal by the administration also calls for proposed auctioning off federal waters along almost all of Alaska's pristine coastline. So the last time a Republican administration tried to do that, it did not work out so well. Few companies actually had the money at the time or the interest in exploring, much less drilling in those pristine and very dangerous waters that are hundreds and hundreds of miles away from any sort of existing infrastructure whatsoever to help support the rigs, you know, or the people on them in the event of a spill or another deepwater horizon type disaster. And there is no way to clean up an oil spill in the high Arctic. The high Arctic region is extremely remote. It has never been drilled before. Quote, it is basically impossible to clean up, said Valerie Cleland, a senior manager for ocean energy at the Natural Resources Defense Council. Moreover, there is also the question of who actually wants to bid on any of these parcels with oil now at just $60 a barrel and Trump's tariffs depressing the entire market. Time and again, President Trump has shown that his interests lie with his big oil friends profiting at the expense of our environment and public health, said Christine Lee, a spokesperson for California Attorney General Rob Bonta, quote, we won't stand for this and are exploring our legal options. Quote, the public deserves the right to have a say on what happens on these critically important lands in the Western Arctic. Earth Justice Attorney Ian Dooley said in a statement, seismic and drilling activities can cause impacts on this sensitive ecosystem that lasts decades. As I said, still tarballs washing up on our beaches right now out here in California following oil spills from decades ago. By the way, both CNN today and Washington Post in its exclusive a week or so ago, both referred to the Gulf as the Gulf of Mexico instead of America. I guess they'll now have to be locked out of the White House just like AP. All right, let's get to it. Our latest Green News Report. Any deal without a clear plan to phase out fossil fuels would mark the end of the credibility of this process. Crunch time in the final days of the UN COP 30 climate summit in Brazil. What started as a slow burning problem has now turned into a full-blown crisis. Iran faces historic, unprecedented water shortages. Plus, the developing world is turning to China for clean energy technology. Really? Yep. All of those stories and more straight... Ahead from bradblog.com. I'm Bradfredman. And I'm Desi Doyen. Stand by for six minutes of independent green news, politics, analysis, and snarky comment. The windmills are a disaster. Quiet, piggy. This is your Green News report. I'm going to soak up the sun.

Okay, Desi Doyen, I know that America's not there, so maybe we're actually getting something done done in Brazil. Where are we as the COP 30 summit begins to wrap up? Yes, it is the final days of the UN COP 30 climate summit in Brazil. And there are some big developments. A coalition of more than 80 nations, both rich and poor, released a detailed roadmap for the world to commit to fully phase out the use of fossil fuels, fossil fuels that cause dangerous man-made climate change. A roadmap to commit to... Someday, okay, got it. Okay, it would be a heavy lift to achieve at the climate meeting where reportedly one in every 25 participants is a fossil fuel lobbyist. But several new analyses indicate the necessity. Current emissions cutting plans would allow global temperatures to rise to 2.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels by the end of the century, which scientists warn would have dire consequences for humans. society, not just accelerating extreme weather impacts, but also impacting important things like our ability to grow food. Oh, that. Here's IPCC climate scientist Tim McPherson. We're definitely on a pathway to two and a half to three degrees if we don't phase out fossil fuels and develop the energy transition in a way that can really bring down emissions. Worse, according to Potsdam Climate Institute senior scientist Johann Rockstrom. What is worrying us even more right now is also that the rates of warming... is showing signs of accelerating. Yikes, indeed. Yep. And over in the Middle East, Iran is grappling with its worst water crisis in decades. Its capital, Tehran and other major cities are approaching day zero, the point at which taps run dry. And officials say that if rainfall doesn't arrive in December, the government must start rationing water in Tehran and the city of 10 million people may even have to... be evacuated. Climate change intensified, prolonged drought is the biggest driver of Iran's water crisis. Groundwater resources have been over-exploited. Experts also blame aging water infrastructure, mismanagement of water resources, and inefficient use by the agriculture sector. Climate and international security experts warn that water shortages threaten food security and fuel migration and conflict around the world, particularly desta...

in volatile regions like the Middle East. Here in the U.S., the Environmental Protection Agency this week proposed new rules to dramatically scale back the scope of the Clean Water Act, the nation's bedrock clean water law, and would leave at least 80% of the nation's wetlands and streams unprotected and vulnerable to pollution. That's my trump. Critics say the water rule is a giveaway to industry and developers. No kidding. In Pennsylvania, Democratic Governor Josh Shapiro has signed legislation withdrawing the state from a landmark regional cap and trade system called the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative to end a long-standing budget standoff with Republican state lawmakers. Josh Shapiro is the first governor of any party to sign a law quitting the initiative. It has raised billions of dollars in carbon pollution fees from fossil-fueled power plants in nearly a dozen states. pity. But there is some good news. Thank you. The New York Times reports that China is stepping into the void left by the U.S. under Donald Trump and is equipping other countries to fight climate change. China is exporting solar panels, wind turbines, batteries, and electric vehicles all over the developing world. And China is investing billions of dollars to build factories within those countries, particularly on the continent of Africa, which is allowing developing... countries to generate a larger percentage of their energy from clean sources, reducing their reliance on imported fuel and helping to develop their economies. And this is exactly what Donald Trump has decided the U.S. does not wish to be a player in. Yep. Brilliant. For much more on all of these stories and the ones we couldn't get to today, check out our website at greennews.bradblog.com. We are off until after the Thanksgiving holiday. We hope you have a safe and warm one. Until then, I'm Brad Friedman. And I'm Desi Doyen. And this has been your Green News Report. Thank you for being a friend. Travel down the road and back again. Your heart is true. You're a paler. Yes, indeed. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Desi Doyen. And thanks to all of you, all of our listeners, all of our affiliates for helping us out all year long, being there for us. It is greatly appreciated. As you heard that very handsome man say just now, we will be off for the next week for Thanksgiving. I will offer you our thanks in advance if you want to stop by Bradblog.com. slash donate to put a few dollars in the tip jar to help us fill up our Prius over the next week or so. It would be greatly appreciated as well as helping us stay on your public airwaves. If you missed any portion of today's show or any other we have ever done since the beginning of time, it is all free for you over at bradblog.com. Thanks to those of you who do hit one of those.

Donate buttons. You can drop me email while I'm gone. I am Bradcast at Bradblog.com on the social medias. I am the Bradblog. And Desi Doyen, who's on the social media is much more frequently than I, is Green News Report. Say hello to her there, will you? Yes, and please have a safe and happy Thanksgiving. Yes. Please do. Yes. Until we meet again in a week or so, I'm Brad Friedman. Good luck world. Thank you for being a friend. Thank you for being a friend. I want you. Thank you. Thank you for being a friend. I want to. You're listening to the Bradcast. We are 100% listener supported thanks to listeners like you, who stopped by bradblog.com slash donate.