American Experiment Podcast
Why are so many Minnesota high school graduates unable to read or do math at grade level? Does Tim Walz actually think he's going to be the next president of the United States? And why does he keep swearing so much?
These are the kinds of hard-hitting questions we get into every week on the American Experiment Podcast, where we unpack the week's biggest stories, interview Minnesota's movers and shakers, and "stop the tape" on clips of our state's most ridiculous elected officials.
New episodes drop every Tuesday afternoon and are available on every major podcasting platform.
American Experiment Podcast
Episode 135 - Why Walz & Ellison PARDONED an Illegal Immigrant RAPIST
Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.
Walz says he can "find no reason how Minnesota will be safer" by deporting an illegal immigrant rapist
Check out the American Experiment Podcast 👉 https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLz1z23cVlKYPY43JU7rp7T1krrd_pzX1L&si=AqY0W6EERgPpJ-My
Why did Walz and Ellison pardon the illegal immigrant rapist deported by the Trump administration? Is Minnesota actually one of the best states for businesses? And will your taxes get hiked because the Paid Leave program is already out of money? Plus, hear the breaking news about how the Upper Midwest Law Center is going up against rogue prosecutor Mary Moriarty.
QOTW: Unlike Walz, can YOU find any reason Minnesota might be safer with one less rapist on the streets?
Remember to LIKE, SHARE, COMMENT, and SUBSCRIBE so you never miss an episode of the American Experiment Podcast. We’ll see you next Tuesday afternoon!
Find the full audio show wherever you get your podcasts including:
Apple Podcasts, and Spotify!
Check out our NEW legal podcast: The rationally Based Podcast
Follow The American Experiment on: Twitter/X, Instagram, Facebook, and TikTok
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#minneapolis #governorwalz #walz #minnesota #legislature #capitol #mn #republicans #democrats #politics #gop #dfl #stpaul #culture #politics #fraud #corruption #hearing #taxes #schools #education
Welcome back to the American Experiment Podcast. Catherine, what do we have on the docket today? Well, this week we've got new news on the illegal immigrant rapist being deported by the Trump administration. We'll give you the truth about those new CNBC rankings, Walls is touting, and then an update on the paid family medical leave program that you won't want to miss. On the back half, we've got Rachel Paulos from the Upper Midwest Law Center, who gives us a look into their new case where they're going up against rogue prosecutor Mary Moriarty.
SPEAKER_03Let's dive in.
SPEAKER_02And today's audience question uh is would you have pardoned to Lu Vang? He's, of course, the illegal immigrant from Laos who was convicted of raping a 10-year-old girl multiple times and has now been deported by the Trump administration. Well, we'll get into the story. There's some new news there, but what would you have done? Uh let us know in the comments of the YouTube video if you're listening on Spotify or Apple. Thank you so much. Consider hopping over to the YouTube just because we love hearing from you guys.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, there were some um, there's been there have been some pretty crazy uh conversations in the comment sections on the last few episodes. And uh, we do love hearing from you guys. I personally, you know, if I was sitting on that that board of pardon, the clemency review commission, uh, I would not have pardoned uh this man. That's just, you know, I mean, I know I'm crazy like that, but uh, I don't think so either.
SPEAKER_02I think that it's interesting that it was kind of so overwhelming. Um, that it was a four-to-two decision on the clemency review board, and then the board of pardons unanimously, the three of them, pardoned him. So I find it interesting. I must, I mean, there must be some people out there who think he should have been pardoned. Who are you? Uh, give us your case in the comments because I don't get it. Uh, but let's get into it because you all know this story by now. But I'll give some brief background before we get into the new uh aspect of it. Tulu Vang is an illegal immigrant from Laos. In 2006, he was convicted of repeatedly raping a 10-year-old girl. At the time, police recorded him saying, quote, I made a mistake, but this is a minor thing. It's a cultural thing. Vang ultimately took a plea deal to plead guilty to the offense of first-degree criminal sexual conduct. He served no prison time as part of that deal. Since that time, uh, Vang has had a deportation order for a while now, but the order had gone unexecuted for 20 years because Laos is a we recalcatrant country. Okay, so they they refuse to accept returns of deported nationals from the United States, according to the Center for Immigration Studies. What? Basically, they're like, No, we don't want those people back. Yeah. Which is kind of fair. I mean, I don't know. But we don't want them either. Like what? That's absurd. So I don't know where he went, honestly. I'm not sure if they've said what country he went to, but he got deported somewhere.
SPEAKER_03Any other country. Any other country. You are no longer welcome here, in my opinion. Not my problem where you go.
SPEAKER_02Well, last month, Vang was pardoned for the offense by the Minnesota Board of Pardons, which, as you all will remember, is made up of Governor Walls, Attorney General Keith Ellison, and the Chief Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court, Natalie Hudson. Many speculated that the pardon was really an attempt to thwart the plans of the Trump administration to possibly deport Vang, now that we've stepped up deportations in the country. Well, now we actually know the answer to this, okay?
SPEAKER_03This is exactly what this pardon was about. Even though Walls was denying it. I mean he was saying, Oh, that's not why. We just thought he should be pardoned. It had nothing to do with the, you know, impending deportation order.
SPEAKER_02Well, according to Fox News Digital, who got to review some of the documents from the Minnesota Clemency Review Commission, which voted for two to grant this pardon, um, they found that the the board, the commission, uh actually cited immigration as a reason for him to receive the pardon. One commissioner, Zach Lindstrom, who voted in favor of granting the pardon, wrote in his recommendation very tough case, but the kids not having a father is not in the best interest of society, referring to his six children and the possibility that he would be deported. Artica Roller, another commissioner who voted in favor of the pardon, wrote, the applicant stated the need for clemency related to immigration issues. And then there were two other people on this board who also cited his immigration status as a factor for granting a pardon as well. I mean, this is so crazy to me. Essentially, illegal immigrants are being given special privileges in the American justice system. The fact that he was facing deportation because he committed a crime, coming here illegally, gave him a leg up on receiving this pardon. I mean this is seriously weird and sinister stuff.
SPEAKER_03And it's so, it's so extra frustrating because I feel like this is a textbook example of the kind of person that most Americans want to see deported. Like if you're here illegally and you're a criminal and you're a child rapist, get out. I mean, what, 95% of Americans would agree that that person should no longer be here in this country? But Minnesota's Board of Pardons completely disagreed. They said, actually, that guy should stay here because he's an illegal immigrant and would be deported otherwise. That is sick. So sick.
SPEAKER_02And what is it about the people on this board that gives them the um credentials to do this? I looked into Zach Lindstrom a little bit. He's just a mayor in the town of Moundsview. Um, it seems that he has a background that is um personal to this mission. He was a criminal um when he was younger and was pardoned of some of those crimes. And so now he's basically an advocate for pardoning people. To which I think we would ask is there a victim advocate on this board? Is there an advocate there for the victims of crime? I'm not sure. Are these people all advocates for criminals that are sitting on this board? Because I think there should be someone there who's maybe experienced and been the victim of a crime like this to advocate for the people who have been hurt, not just to advocate for the criminals. Otherwise, this seems completely stacked and unfair, as we already assumed and now we now know is true.
SPEAKER_03And yeah, and when once again, I mean, thank God we have a federal administration that is taking cases like these seriously. Because if we didn't, this pardon would have gone through, this man would still be living here in Minnesota, never having paid for his crimes, which he was allowed to do for two decades. That in and of itself is absolutely infuriating to me and heartbreaking. It should not have gone on as long as it did.
SPEAKER_02Meanwhile, Walls did comment on this um after the fact. He was asked about it, and uh back in June, here is what he said.
SPEAKER_00In Mr. Vang's case, I I would state this that I can find no reason how Minnesota will be safer or better if Mr. Vang is deported to a country he has not been to since he was a child.
SPEAKER_03Cry me a freaking river. Are you serious? Oh, my heart bleeds for the man who entered my country illegally, raped a 10-year-old girl repeatedly, and was allowed to stay in oh, oh, now he has to go back to a country he hasn't lived in. Not my freaking problem. Get out!
SPEAKER_02This is the most absurd statement, truly ever. He can't imagine how it's going to be safer here if we deport our pedophile? I mean, this man's a pedophile. I'm sorry. When did the Democrats become this like pedophile protecting party? Is this really their new platform? Is this popular? Is this working for them? I don't think so. And I hope not. I hope we can all agree. Pedophiles don't need them, especially if they're illegal immigrants. Get them out. I don't care if they don't know anyone where they're from, get them out. This is an absurd freaking statement by Governor Walls, and I think this whole thing is just frankly disgusting.
SPEAKER_03Wow. Um on that note, should we see how Minnesota's being viewed by such uh such well-respected and established outlets as CNBC? I mean, I mean, surely, surely on every possible ranking list uh of states, we're at the bottom, right? Our governor and attorney general are out there pardoning child rapists because they don't think that they make our state less safe. You would think that would not be good for our rankings in the pocket wallet surface. Yeah, uh, fans of the John Justice show, by the way, are probably gonna get a kick out of this story. If you've ever listened to Freedom Friday, if you know, you know. Um this is this is gonna tickle your fancy, I think I would say. And by the way, if you do want to hear uh what is coming next for John Justice, what he's gonna be doing, you need to be at our America 250 block party on Saturday, July 25th, on the steps of the Minnesota Capitol. That is where John is gonna make his huge exclusive announcement as to what he is doing next. You can get all the details at americanexperiment.org/slash events. You don't want to miss that announcement, and you don't want to miss that party either. It's gonna be a great time.
SPEAKER_02Oh, I can't wait. There is free ice cream, a bouncy house, all kinds of fun stuff. I'm really focused on the bouncy house because I think I'm hopefully going to be running it, and that's always my favorite part of any block party. But carrying on. So, okay, you all know how I love these rankings. CNBC released its annual Top States for Business, and you guys are never gonna believe, honestly, where Minnesota ranks. We came in fifth.
SPEAKER_03CNBC on a list of the best states in the country for business.
SPEAKER_02Yeah. CNBC thinks Minnesota is the fifth best state for business in the entire country.
SPEAKER_03Do they do they know that we tax small businesses more than any other state, harder than any other state? Did that factor into their ranking, I hope? Such an interesting point. Well, you know, we'll get to their methodology. I'm sure they took that into account. Yeah.
SPEAKER_02I mean, it's obviously laughable, but it didn't take long for our political elite to jump on this new pocket wallet survey. And if you're not a just John Justice listener yet, pocket wallet is what I like to call all these stupid articles that uh rank states that usually come from some website you've never heard of and cite like how many miles of bike lanes we have as a reason that Minnesota is a great place to live. Um We got a lot of child rapists, but you know, a lot of bike lanes too. So a lot of bike lanes. Governor Walls tweeted this one and said businesses in top industries from healthcare to renewable energy and manufacturing understand the benefits of investing and growing in Minnesota. Proud to be ranked a top five state for business. I mean, these surveys are basically churned out for our left-wing politicians to be able to put out there because as John Phelan noted in his piece at americanexperiment.org, the data often isn't on their side. So they have to come up with something a little bit different. So the next question is how did they come to this conclusion? They have to have some kind of methodology, right? Um, well, the number one thing they weigh as a factor in their methodology methodology is infrastructure, which let me just summarize for the audience. I read through it. It basically uh means how easy is it for a data center to pop up in your state? And look, like data centers, like they have their pros and cons, okay?
SPEAKER_03We can we should maybe have a discussion about it on the podcast. Let us know in the comments. Are you pro-data center? Are you anti-data center? I'm dying to know. Please let me know. I would love to hear. That's such a good point.
SPEAKER_02Um, but like, is this a good measure of businesses in your state and how they're doing? I mean, does a data center even have employees? Like, how how is this a good measure? And that's their number one thing they're taking into account. They claim to also take the state's economy into account, but that's a bit confusing since Minnesota is a below average state economically. They also claim to take workforce into account, but our workforce is fleeing the state. In fact, John Phelan ran the net migration numbers comparing the top and bottom states that appeared on this list. He found that the top-ranked states lost a total of 57,000 plus residents, while the bottom-ranked states gained a total of 211,000, nearly four times as many.
SPEAKER_03So, so the worse you do on CNBC's ranking of the best states, you know, to do business in, the worse you do on that list in their eyes, the more people want to move to your state. Am I getting that right? Precisely.
SPEAKER_02People are fleeing CNBC's top-ranked states for their lower-ranked ones. Okay, so so Grace, how did they possibly end up with Minnesota as the fifth best state for business on their list?
SPEAKER_03Yeah, well, this is so funny. So again, John Phelan did kind of a deep dive into this whole ranking system. So CNBC strips out one component of that broader, you know, best states for business. Ranking, uh, quality of life is one of the factors that they look at. And then they put that out as its own separate list, you know, as a ranking of the best states to live in. Okay, these states ranked higher in terms of quality of life. These are the best states to live in. Okay, so I mean, maybe you've guessed. Uh, the factors that they put into the quality of life ranking aren't like the best, I would say. So here's here's how they're determining it. As more companies mandate that their employees return to the office, they are also looking for locations that offer the best quality of life. This is CNBC. We rate the states on livability factors like, you know, per capita crime rates, environmental quality, health care. With studies showing that childcare is one of the main obstacles to employees entering or re-entering the workforce. We consider the availability and affordability of qualified child care facilities. Well, we're struggling there. So, I mean, already a few items on this list. I'm like, really, Minnesota was in the top several? Okay, okay, okay. Well, we're not done yet. We look at worker protections, including livable wage policies, paid leave, rights to organize. We look at inclusiveness in state laws, including protections against discrimination of all kinds, as well as voting rights and secure election systems. And the cherry on top, with surveys showing a sizable percentage of younger workers would not live in a state that bans abortion. We factor reproductive rights in this category as well. So you can see how Minnesota was floating to the top in that ranking. We got abortion, we got paid leave, uh, livable wage policies. I mean, whatever that means when we fight for 15 or whatever.
SPEAKER_02Oh funny. We're just sinking on every business metric, but then you can actually abort in a baby when it's like post-being born in Minnesota.
SPEAKER_03So that shot us up to the top. Great. And that's how they're ranking this entire list. The more progressive and more liberal cities, in their minds, have the better quality of life, which makes it even funnier that you're seeing this mass exodus from states with these policies that are at the top of CNBC's ranking list. John Phelan has this incredible chart posted at americanexperiment.org where he plotted out the CNBC ranking of best states to live in and the states that people are actually moving to and away from. It's a negative correlation, just like you said earlier, Catherine. The people, people don't want to live in states with these policies. That CNBC, you know, the great authority on this, and that Governor Walls is touting, sees as, you know, the ultimate factors in a you know high quality of life. It's just a joke.
SPEAKER_02I mean, that's the actual data we should be looking at is where people are moving. People move with their feet. Where are they going? They're going to red states with better policy. I mean, it's very clear. And so the idea that they keep churning out these fake rankings is just so funny to me. And they have to goose it with things like, you know, uh abortion access and yeah, the right to unionize and things like that, that of course um are not really mattering in people's movements right now. I mean, they're looking for places where um they can live more affordably, and Minnesota is really struggling in that regard.
SPEAKER_03And I'm sure that all of this is part of why like 58% of our state's residents think that Minnesota's on the wrong track. Because they see a ranking like this and they say, that's not my lived experience. Half of our kids can't read or do math at grade level. Our small businesses are struggling because they are taxed more heavily here than in every other state. And so it's so upsetting to see a ranking like this. It's so upsetting to see our leaders, like Governor Walls, gaslighting us, basically, and saying, no, things are going great. We are one of the best states in the country. Then why are people leaving? And why are people struggling? And why are people saying that Minnesota's on the right, on the wrong track?
SPEAKER_02Yeah, that is such a good point. I mean, it's just we every day you realize like you talk to people who say it's just so hard in Minnesota right now. And then we have people at the top who are completely denying that there's any problem whatsoever. Um, so we'll see. I hope with the coming election, it does put some pressure on our leaders to really think critically about the state of Minnesota and how we can improve, because it's been a long time since we've had leaders who actually want to improve this state because they love it. It's not because we're being just endlessly critical of Minnesota, it's that this state can be better. And I'm so sick of having people in positions of leadership who don't care about the state.
SPEAKER_03They just care about their own success. If you are one of the people, one of the 58%, you know, who think that Minnesota's on the wrong track, first of all, let us know in the comments. Um, second of all, I've got some rough news for you. Uh, Minnesota's budget, Minnesota's state budget, has been in pretty rough shape the last few years, and it's about to get even worse. According to Martha and Joel Mole, our economist at American Experiment. Uh, the, you know, just a quick little recap. Uh you know, we're headed for a crash, basically. It's the long and short of it. Minnesota's budget is headed for a crash. You might remember the real downer of an episode we've got for today. I'm so sorry. I don't think the back half's gonna be any more cheerful, by the way. I am still and on a happy note.
SPEAKER_02Okay, we'll f we'll find one.
SPEAKER_03Yes. Uh you might remember back in 2023 there was this huge, you know, $18 billion surplus at the legislature. Um, they blew through it, of course. We ended up with a structural deficit right after that. But that enabled the legislature back then. This is part of the off-the-cliff DFL trifecta session. They raised general fund spending from $27 billion to $35 billion in one year. That's a 26% increase after adjusting for inflation.
SPEAKER_02That's also when they established that um commission, the commutation commission that we were just talking about, that gives out those um recommendations for the commutations and pardons. That was part of the Democrats' push to try and get more people's sentences commuted and pardoned.
SPEAKER_03And as a result of that reckless spending in 2024, Minnesota spent four and a half billion dollars more than it collected in revenue. And so you have this drastic structural imbalance, structural deficit that starts then. Now, over the current forecast period from 2026 to 2029, spending has continued to outpace revenue by an average of one and a half billion dollars a year. So we're spending more than we take in every single year. Health and human services is kind of the catch-all budget category for programs like Medicaid, and that has driven the majority of this budget growth. If you have not read Martha's incredible report, Ticking Time Bomb, that's available at AmericanExperiment.org/slash reports. She dives into what was really driving this growth. By 2026, due to permanent spending increases enacted in 2023, the health and human services budget had climbed to almost $13 billion. That is more than a 50% nominal increase in just three years.
SPEAKER_02It's crazy when you think about how much we're taxed to. I mean, we're one of the more heavily taxed states, and yet we are spending way more than we bring in in revenue. I mean, how does that even happen? What are you spending this money on? It's crazy. I mean, we know to some degree, look at our Golden Turkey Award every Thanksgiving. Um, we're spending it like crazy on things we don't have the money for. And the only solution you have to imagine is to, as they like to say at the Capitol, raise revenue, which just means raise our taxes, as if they weren't high enough already.
SPEAKER_03Exactly. And so this huge explosion that is happening in sort of these welfare programs like Medicaid in the health and human services category, it's so interesting because this is the first time in state history that a budget category has overtaken education, E through 12 education, not higher education. Education has always been the largest budget category. We've spent more on that than anything else. We can debate that, we can talk about that. But that's no longer the case. Another way of looking at it, in 2000, in the year 2000, health and human services spending accounted for less than a quarter of all state spending. Between 2026 and 29, it will consume over a third of the entire general fund. This is a explosive growth that we're seeing.
SPEAKER_02That's one of those things that the governor brags about as well. How many people are on welfare in the state of Minnesota? Not something that I would consider a bragging point, something I would consider needs to be fixed.
SPEAKER_03Um why do we have so many families struggling? Why do so many families need to be on welfare and get those services? That's not a good thing. Yeah. Now, so while all that's going on, we're facing this insane structural deficit. It's getting worse every single year. It's about to get a lot worse, and I'll tell you why in a moment. In the midst of all of that, from the brilliant mind of the state of Minnesota, they say we need to make sure that every employee in the state has access to paid family and medical leave. Now, we of course have been chronicling this so carefully at American Experiment a couple weeks ago. We noted and talked about on this show that the state had suddenly, and I would say suspiciously, gone completely silent on updating the number of approvals that that program was seeing.
SPEAKER_02And we did threaten that we would go FOIA for these numbers if that was even a thing we could do. And then they came out with the numbers. So I don't know, maybe it's the power of the American Experiment Podcast. I'm just saying.
SPEAKER_03Now, here are the updated numbers. So just remember so back in February 2024, when this program was getting passed, the firm that recommended the 0.88% payroll tax that this program launched with had estimated an average of 361 applicants would be approved every single day. We are past that. Last week, the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development, or DEED, announced that in the first six months of successful operations, about 75,000 Minnesotans have been approved to receive benefit payments. That means on average, 419 Minnesotans have been approved every day, or 16% more than they planned for. And now, of course, the moment you've all been waiting for, the state is already looking at potentially raising that payroll tax just to keep up with demand. Who could have seen this coming? I wonder. And that's exactly what's so frustrating. Like you were saying, Catherine, they are gonna see this as a good thing. Oh, you know, more Minnesotans needed help than we expected, and we were able to help them. I disagree personally.
SPEAKER_02The vast majority of people already had access to these benefits because it was something that people wanted, and it was something that the private market had responded to really well. I mean, all kinds, I mean, all kinds of people had benefits that they worked out individually with their um with their company or their their employer. And now that the government stepped in and taken over this whole thing, often people are getting worse benefits. People are paying way more than they're getting in return. It's not a good trade-off, and it almost never is when you turn over these negotiations to the government.
SPEAKER_03And on top of that, you've got, you know, small businesses who are struggling to keep up with this new tax. Yeah. And you've got, you know, school districts sounding the alarm and the extra administrative burden that this is creating for them. It's not good for anyone. And I don't know what kind of a lifespan this program's gonna have. So, with all of that in mind, the question that was on my mind that I'm very glad Martha answered at AmericanExperiment.org is you know, how has the state been staying afloat then at the last few years? If we're running a structural deficit consistently and we keep adding new things, if the health and service health and human services budget keeps growing, how are we not having an absolute crash? Yeah. Basically, so far for the last few years, the state has relied on tapping into the billions of dollars that were unspent from previous fiscal years. Yeah, believe it or not, there was at one point some money that the government hadn't spent. Uh, don't worry, they've spent it now. Martha says, excluding money deposited in the Rainy Day Fund, the 2026-27 biennium is expected to end with a $3 billion balance. Now, the leftover cash is what closes part of the spending and revenue gap in the 28-29 biennium. We are already looking to use those extra extra funds. However, because the structural gap exceeds $3.1 billion, MMB projects a baseline deficit of $55 million at the end of 2029. With an accounting for inflation, that projected shortfall balloons to a billion dollars. Now, so when MMB extends the official budget forecast in this coming November, Minnesota is likely gonna see that these remaining balances have been completely wiped out, which will create an official budget deficit every year beginning in 2029 and beyond. And at that point, we're not gonna have this cushion of cash to fall back on, and the state's fiscal disastrous situation is gonna become way harder to ignore. And unfortunately, because lawmakers have been tapping into these, you know, cash reserves rather than actually cutting back on spending and balancing the budget that way, the deficit is gonna be way harder to fix because the budget has continued to balloon. So unfortunately, again, if you are one of the 58% of Minnesotans who think that our state is on the wrong track, things are about to get worse before they get better.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, I mean, here's what this means is that we are going to have increases in taxes. We have to down the road, unless we have people in office who are going to cut spending. So that is what you need to focus on. You need to make sure people who are representing you are willing to cut spending. It is the only answer unless they are to raise taxes. And there is simply no way. I know it, you know it, listeners know it. Our families cannot support more and more tax increases from the government to support their various pet projects. We know best how to support our families, how to spend our own money on our families, and we should be allowed to do that, not have that money taken from the government. So ask the people representing you will you commit to cutting spending and making sure we do not increase taxes on Minnesotans in the upcoming years? Because as it stands right now, no doubt about it, we're getting tax increases in the next few years.
SPEAKER_03On that very cheerful note.
SPEAKER_02Okay, one optimistic note. Have you been following like LeBron gate at all? Just a little bit. Okay, so like maybe LeBron's coming to Minnesota. That's right. I heard the chances were like 2%. Okay, that's what producer Isaac said. I feel like maybe there's a chance, okay? He hasn't decided yet. How much time does he have?
unknownA lot.
SPEAKER_02Oh, he has a lot of time. A lot. Okay, I thought that's a good minute. Producer Isaac says he has a lot of time, but I don't know. I think this could be really fun for Minnesota. I feel like our the people running the Timberwolves are clearly like wanting to win. And we need a sports team that's gonna win in this state, okay? And I don't care what team it is, okay? Because I don't even really care that much about sports. But I like when these things, when they do well, because they never do well in Minnesota. And listen, we need some optimism in this state. And so if LeBron's watching the American Experiment podcast, I just want to encourage you to check out Minnesota seriously, okay? I think you'll love it here.
SPEAKER_03Wow, I admire your optimism. We just talk about what a sad trajectory the state is on. How many five minutes are the worst taxes ever? LeBron's gonna look at the taxes here and be like, yeah, I'll pass.
SPEAKER_02Thank you.
SPEAKER_03Well, now we are going to sit down with Rachel Paulos from the Upper Midwest Law Center, who is gonna share with us some pretty exciting breaking news about a new case that they are working on that you have probably already heard about in the headlines and you didn't even know about it. Stick with us. American Experiment is supported by thousands of individuals like you. To join the movement, go to www.americanexperiment.org and click the yellow donate button. From all of us here, thank you. We are so happy to welcome to the show now Rachel Paulos from the Upper Midwest Law Center. Rachel is managing attorney at UMLC. She served as U.S. attorney for the District of Minnesota from 2006 to 2008. And her career includes time with the DOJ and the SEC and some time in private practice as well. Rachel, it is so good to have you back on the show. It's great to be here. Thank you for inviting me. Now, we called you in today because we've heard there's some breaking news happening over at the Upper Midwest Law Center involving a very potentially high-profile case. What can you tell us about it?
SPEAKER_01Uh, breaking news, and uh you ladies at the CA podcast are the first to know. Love to hear that. Thank you, Rachel.
SPEAKER_02Rachel is like our favorite podcast guest for this reason, among many others. Sorry to interrupt.
SPEAKER_01Well, I love being on this podcast, and so you are my favorite podcast host. Um, as of yesterday, UMLC has joined the defense team in the federal case involving ICE agent Gregory uh Donald Morgan, a federal officer employed by immigration and customs enforcement, a component of the Department of Homeland Security. And we're working with his uh counsel, Ryan Pesiga, um, as well as a team of people who are attempting to help him uh in the case that has been charged by Mary Moriarty out of Hennepin County, charging him with second-degree assault, which uh I'm happy to discuss further details of. I'm not actually happy to discuss it, but um I'm um happy to be able to join a fantastic team on a righteous case and uh a righteous defense, I should say. Umlc is proud to stand with Agent Morgan on this case, and we believe it's important to support law enforcement who are simply trying to do their job under very difficult circumstances. We believe it's important to respect the sovereign borders of the United States, and we believe it's important to enforce constitutional principles when all of those things are under relentless attack, particularly in Minnesota.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, no kidding. So this case made a lot of news when the um when Mary Mori dropped these charges. Um, but I'd love to hear the story of what actually happened from your perspective and um from the officer's perspective. Because I think I read about it in the news and in other places, which you can never you can never trust, right? So I'd love to hear the perspective of what actually happened and why uh this ICE officer is getting charged with assault.
SPEAKER_01Uh the charges are completely backwards. Um, and so yes, I would like to correct the narrative that has thus far been framed by uh a prosecutor who is at war with um the the president's national uh enforcement priorities. And that's really what this case is is about. And Agent Morgan, unfortunately, has been caught in the crossfire. He did not assault anyone. And so I think that's one of the important takeaways from this case is that no one was killed, no one was injured. In fact, if anyone was assaulted, it was Agent Morgan, um, not the alleged victims in this case. And so that's why I say uh it's important to really know the facts in this case. So Agent Morgan is a federal officer employed by ICE. Um, he's based out of the Washington, D.C. area. He was deployed to the Twin Cities as part of Operation Metro Surge in February of this year as part of the national initiative, which, as you may recall, was the largest immigration enforcement action in the history of our country. Uh and um, so he came um in the in the dead of winter, um, facing a very hostile home environment here in the Twin Cities. Oh, yeah. Interestingly. Understatement. Understatement. Yes, yes. Interestingly, he was not permitted to bring his law enforcement vehicle with him. So he was driving a rented SUV with out-of-state plates and no identifying law enforcement insignia. He was in uniform at all times, he was um badged up, and he was carrying a service weapon. But from day one, he was warned of the very adverse conditions that he would be facing from very hostile crowds, politicians, and even um uh local prosecutors. So he was ordered to protect himself, his team members, and his partner. And those were his marching orders while he attempted to enforce immigration law. Um on Thursday, February 5th, 2026, Agent Morgan found himself um under relentless attack after days of being attacked by crowds who called him the N-word, who pelted him, his teammates, and other members of the force with projectiles, um, some of them including rocks. They these agents faced um their tires being slashed on their vehicles, windows being smashed in, being called all kinds of slurs and epitests. Um, Agent Morgan had never been called the N-word before in his life. And so this was this was just a really shocking, jarring, and very stressful experience from a from a human perspective.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, until he came to Minnesota and the far-leftist protesters were the ones to throw racial slurs. Racial slurs. Exactly.
SPEAKER_01Exactly. So you can just imagine the mindset at this point. You're on your guard constantly, I would imagine. Constantly feeling under attack. Yeah. And so then they got word from their supervisor to extract from a hostile neighborhood. And unfortunately, as they were trying to extract from this hostile neighborhood, Agent Morgan and his partner, who were still in this rented black SUV, were separated from the rest of their team. So this just ramps up the stress. And as they're driving, they see that they're tailed by two Subarus. Um, Subaru. I like that detail.
unknownOkay.
SPEAKER_01And they also um were then nearly front-ended by a Cadillac who swerved in front of them as they were accidentally driving on the shoulder of a highway. This happened twice. They believed they were under attack um by this Cadillac that they also believed had tinted out windows. And um the driver later told police that he had made the quote, not so bright um decision to try and stop um uh the person who, of course, was Agent Morgan from driving on the shoulder of the road. And so he took it upon himself to exercise this vigilante action and and swerve in front of him and nearly caused an accident.
SPEAKER_02So he knew it was an ice agent in the car.
SPEAKER_01So that is a contested point. Okay. Um now remember there was no identifying insignia on the vehicle, but at this point, Agent Morgan believed that that the driver knew or could know who he was because all of these individuals were researching their vehicles, right? Their life it was not out of the realm of possibility that they knew that this was an ICE officer in the vehicle. Exactly. And they also knew that they were they had been tailed by these two Subarus and um you know they had been doxxed, various members of the of the team, and so they were afraid. Um, and so in an effort to de-escalate the situation, ensure that they identified themselves and attempt to stop the provocative behavior, um, which they viewed as assault, um, Agent Morgan brandaged his weapon and yelled words, something to the effect of police, stop, back off. Sure. Uh and so um the driver then reported this um to the police. Uh the driver of the Cadillac reported um this encounter to the police. Agent Morgan, for his part, peacefully merged into traffic, eventually was able to rejoin his team back at the Air Force reserve base and stayed on the clock for another couple of hours and continued operations. Um, unfortunately, for his actions in trying to defend himself and his partner from what they perceived as an attack, Agent Morgan found himself charged with second-degree assault by Hennepin County attorney, Mary Moriarty, um, and um faced two counts of assault with a dangerous weapon um based on the presence of not just the driver, but the passenger in the Cadillac, who, by the way, uh continued to uh to follow Agent Morgan and his and his passenger in the vehicle for um some time and um um uh gave them the middle finger at at various points. So all right. Um the driver of the Cadillac, interestingly, was not charged with any crime. Really?
SPEAKER_02Oh, but that was gonna be my next question. Yeah, what were I mean, I assume they were also charged with assault if you're driving and someone is trying to like cut you off intentionally in front of you to cause an incident. I mean, I think there's even video of this that I recall. There is video that I've seen, and it's clear that this person is trying to cause something to happen with the car, the ICE officer's car driving. I mean, it seems like clearly that is some sort of assault and intentional interference with law enforcement, but they didn't get charged with anything.
SPEAKER_01They were charged with nothing.
SPEAKER_03It's so interesting because it does seem so clear to me that, you know, this agent is is very much being used as, you know, like a sacrificial lamb or a scapegoat in some way. It seems very much that he's just being caught in the crossfire, so to speak, of this battle be going on between, you know, left-wing protesters, basically, including Harry Moriarty and, you know, the federal government trying to enforce immigration law. I think that you can, you know, you can very much understand what went through his mind and why he acted the way he did. This case seems completely frivolous to me.
SPEAKER_01I'm afraid that it's even worse than frivolous. Um, because for Agent Morgan, this is his life, this is his freedom, this is his career. And he sacrificed so much to become a law enforcement officer and pull himself up by his own bootstraps and make something of his life and create a career for himself, for his daughter, be somebody that his family could be proud of. Uh, and and now he finds himself being accused of all sorts of terrible things that he never intended, that were never in his mind, um, that were never in his heart. Uh, and and you're you're right, Grace. This this is um very much about something else. It's not about Agent Morgan. Right. Um, it's about a battle between this presidential administration that was elected in part to enforce our national borders, something with which the vast majority of Americans agree. And um, Soros uh supported DAs and local prosecutors who want to erase uh borders and live in a world without borders, and and furthermore um establish and ramp up the status of sanctuary cities, including Minneapolis and St. Paul, that not only want to ignore federal law, but want to thwart it at every turn.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, it's kind of ironic to me because I keep seeing Keith Ellison, our attorney general, accuse Trump of going after him, the Trump administration for going after him for politically motivated purposes. You know, the Trump administration would like our voter rules, the Trump administration would like to look at our SNAP data, things like that, because we have a huge fraud problem in this state, so it makes sense. And what he accuses them of is uh political retribution. And that just seems clearly absurd when we have a huge problem with fraud in our state. But he seems to think that that's a viable legal defense somehow. Is that a legal defense here? I mean, clearly it seems like Mary Moriarty is going after this officer for political retribution against Trump and what his administration is trying to do. Is that a legal defense?
SPEAKER_01It's certainly something that we intend to bring to the to the conversation and to the debate. Um, if you're asking if it's a formal legal defense, um, I do think that it's that it's part of due process and um denial of due process when a prosecutor's motives are not based on the law and the facts, when they're based on on um political motives and retribution.
SPEAKER_03So there's another element to this case beyond just the facts of what went down and why these charges were filed, which is that you have, you know, a Hennepin County prosecutor charging a federal agent. And that is, I mean, unprecedented. Is has this ever happened before?
SPEAKER_01So in Minnesota, um, we're not aware of that this has happened before. Um and it's an interesting question because Congress foresaw this problem where there could be battles between the state and the federal government.
SPEAKER_02Well, that's a historical battle, right? Between the state and the federal government. But yeah, I feel like we kind of solved this, didn't we? Or clearly not.
SPEAKER_01I thought we solved it with the Civil War, as I've said before. Yes, yes, yes. But some people don't agree. So, as a matter of public policy, Congress actually passed a law that said that federal agents should not be terrorized for carrying out their duties and acting within the scope of their lawful law enforcement roles. And they codified this value into law, which is their job. Um, and so there's a statute 28 USC 1442 that says that if an officer is working within the scope of his federal law enforcement duties and he's charged with a state crime, that he can remove that proceeding from the state court, which may be biased or vindictive or have political um motives and move it into federal court. And so, step one for Agent Morgan is to try to remove this proceeding to federal court. Um, and that is what his defense team, including UMS Lee, is trying to do in the initial part of his defense. And so um basically it's a it's a three-factor test. If if Agent Morgan can show that he's a federal officer, that he was acting under color of his office, and that he has a colorable federal defense, um, then he can remove his case to federal court. At that point, then there will be a second battle over whether he has supremacy clause immunity under the United States Constitution and whether this case should be dismissed because of his immunity as a federal officer working within the scope of his responsibilities.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, it seems to me, and I don't know if you can comment on this or not, Rachel, but it seems to me um from a practical sp a practical perspective. It would be better for the officer to be in federal court if he's appearing in Minnesota, right? If you're appearing in state court, he would be appearing in Hennepin County, right? The source of where all of this went down. The jury would likely be made up of people who were out there protesting ice. To me, that seems like completely unfair. And I think we saw that a little bit with maybe the Chauvin trial and things like that, where it was like, how is this fair? You know, they're putting him in the middle of where this all happened. Um, if it is in federal court, it would draw a jury from the entire state. Is that correct? Which to me seems a little more fair anyway.
SPEAKER_01Correct, correct. And so um the charges against him are not fair to begin with. Let's be clear. Yeah. Um but to the extent that um the case can be heard in federal court as opposed to state court, the points that you're making are exactly right, um, Catherine, that um there are serious concerns about whether or not Agent Morgan can receive a fair trial in Hennepin County or whether this jury pool is hopelessly tainted against him.
SPEAKER_03Regardless of where the trial is held, because that that will impact this question, but do you anticipate this trial getting much publicity protests? Is that a concern that you guys are discussing?
SPEAKER_01It has already received international publicity. Um and so um there is definitely concern about Agent Morgan receiving a fair trial. And um, you know, he's at a disadvantage in that there have there has there has been this steady drumbeat of false and in some cases really hurtful um information being and misinformation being spread about him and the and the actions of that day. Um and he's he's not had the opportunity to be able to tell his side of the story. Um and so um we're really anticipating that that at some point there will be a fair and impartial forum for him to be able to do that.
SPEAKER_02What happens when um Mary Moriarty um is no longer the county attorney when it um, you know, and she's not running again. So come January, it will be someone else. Obviously, as we've discussed, she's particularly anti-law enforcement and has gone after um law enforcement time and time again instead of violent criminals. That the Ryan Londregan case comes to mind, of course. Um, what happens when she's no longer the attorney? Is it possible that the next person in this office is a little bit more fair and this case gets dropped, or is that not how it works?
SPEAKER_01That's an excellent question. Um, and the answers to your questions are yes and yes. Um is it possible that the next person could be more fair? Absolutely. And is it possible that the case could be dismissed? Absolutely. Um, and we think this is uh a very good example of prosecute abuse of prosecutorial discretion. Um, and so prosecutors have far more um cases than they can possibly charge um brought to their attention. We think um the wrong person was was charged. If anyone was going to be charged here, the wrong person was charged. But is it possible that uh the next Hennepin County attorney could dismiss these charges? Yes. And um, would we actively seek that outcome? Absolutely. That would be um a fair and and and just um resolution to this case. But frankly, it's already taken a lot of emotion, time, and resources from Agent Morgan and and the people who support him.
SPEAKER_03What is at risk here, do you think, in terms of the precedent that may be set if the courts go against, you know, Agent Morgan? You know, how will federal law enforcement officers respond? Will they go into the line of duty, have, you know, being afraid of acting in a certain way and defending the rest of their team?
SPEAKER_01Do you have concerns about that? That's a really great question because I think the consequences of this case could be so severe. Yeah. It's not even just about federal agents being able to do their job. It's about agents being able to protect themselves and their team when under attack. And so it's almost as if people who disagree with the law enforcement priorities of a particular administration. Today it's the Trump administration, tomorrow it could be a different administration, want to rip that badge off the federal officer and say, it's as if you're not an officer. We're stripping you of any authority that you have as a federal agent, and we're gonna treat you as if you're less than even a citizen, where you don't have the right to defend yourself. There's something fundamentally wrong with that.
SPEAKER_02Well, that's that's such a good point. And I I think a good place to um to end. I mean, where can listeners go though? If they want to follow this case, they want to make sure they're they know what's going on. What's the best way to follow along with uh developments?
SPEAKER_01So um the UMLC website, www.umlc.org, will carry updates. And as well, our co-counsel Ryan Basega of Basega Trial Lawyers will also be carrying updates. Um there is a great deal of information about this case that is public, and so the public can read about it through the court's website as well. But we'll do our best to keep um um truthful information conveyed on attorney websites.
SPEAKER_03Well, we'll, of course, be following this case very, very closely. And thank you for coming in today, Rachel, and sharing this with us first. Thank you for giving us the opportunity and allowing us to share the facts. Thank you so much to everyone who made it all the way to the end of this week's episode of the American Experiment Podcast.
SPEAKER_02Remember to drop your thoughts in the comments below. Would you have pardoned the illegal immigrant rapist? Let us know. I mean, some people think it's a good idea, so there must be someone out there who can give us their reasoning for why they would have done it. We also asked a bunch of other questions as we went through this episode, including should LeBron come to Minnesota? Um, so drop any of your answers to the responses in the YouTube. Thank you guys so much for listening on whatever platform you're on. Seriously, we really appreciate it.
SPEAKER_03And as always, stay sane, stay safe out there, and we will see you next week.
