Listen:
Check out all episodes on the My Favorite Mistake main page.
My guest for Episode #252 of the My Favorite Mistake podcast is Russell K. Jack. He’s a retired US Senior Federal Air Marshal, working in that role from 2002 to 2022. Russell previously served five years as a Federal Police Officer. And previously served five years in the Colorado Army National Guard and was deployed in Saudi Arabia (Desert Storm).
He is also a first-time author — his book is titled, Is MAGA a Terrorist Movement?— available now. He hopes this book will promote critical thinking about protecting our democracy and just how precariously close we are to losing it forever. He writes this book out of a sense of duty to the American people.
In today's episode, Russell shares his favorite mistake story from his time working as a security officer for a major health system. Why did a Black man think he was being racially profiled by Russell? And what did Russell learn about that interaction?
We also dive into important topics from his book — the lessons learned and the implications for 2024 and beyond.
Questions and Topics:
- Did you get to share that lesson with others in law enforcement?
- How often do you think racial profiling does occur?
- What’s the definition of “terrorist”?
- Death threats are an example of terrorism?
- Fascist? What does that mean and what’s the implication if MAGA wins in 2024?
- It’s a mistake that we don’t have a clear definition of “Insurrectionist”?
- Who is the audience for the book? The already convinced, or the convincible?? Your hope for the book?
- You write you’ve never convinced anybody to stop being MAGA. Do you expect this book to help?
- Do you run across people who now think it was a mistake to previously support or vote for Trump?
- Does MAGA think they made mistakes in early 2021 that they wouldn’t make again in early 2029??
- If Trump were to die tomorrow, what happens to MAGA movement?
Scroll down to find:
- Video version of the episode
- How to subscribe
- Quotes
- Full transcript
Find Russell on social media:
Video of the Episode:
Quotes:
Click on an image for a larger view
![“That mistake helped me learn that when time allows for it.. if you stop someone in official capacity [as an officer], it's important for them to understand why.” Russell Jack](https://www.markgraban.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Russell-Jack-My-Favorite-Mistake-Quotes-1.jpg)
Subscribe, Follow, Support, Rate, and Review!
Please follow, rate, and review via Apple Podcasts, Podchaser, or your favorite app — that helps others find this content, and you'll be sure to get future episodes as they are released weekly. You can also financially support the show through Spotify.
You can now sign up to get new episodes via email, to make sure you don't miss an episode.
This podcast is part of the Lean Communicators network.
Other Ways to Subscribe or Follow — Apps & Email
Episode Summary
Building Trust with Transparent Communication
One decisive factor in cultivating community trust is transparent dialogue. Transparency in law enforcement isn't just about honesty; it captures the notion of explaining one's actions to maintain clarity and create understanding. Russell learned from experience that when officers take the time to inform individuals about the reasons behind their actions, it not only defuses potential misunderstandings but also fosters respect and improves interactions.
For instance, in an encounter where a person is detained based on a suspect description that matches their appearance, explaining the specific details of this match can alleviate any personal offense or accusations of racial profiling. It’s a practice that helps the public understand that actions are based on behavior and evidence rather than personal attributes.
The Ripple Effect of Communication in Law Enforcement
Officers' willingness to communicate resonates beyond individual encounters. These actions become educational moments both for the public and for law enforcement peers. They demonstrate the ability to reflect on practice and adapt in real-time, a trait crucial for the evolving dynamics of a society.
Russell underscores how important it is to share these experiences with peers. Although not a formal part of training, the practice emphasizes contextual, situational awareness, and crucial soft skills that are instrumental in law enforcement. This focus on transparent communication echoes the principles of leadership where respect must be earned by demonstrating that the safety and welfare of those being served are a priority over authority.
Communication Extends Beyond Law Enforcement
The principles of explaining actions and reasoning are not confined to the battlefield or the streets—they are equally pertinent in the business world. For example, in factory settings, explaining the reasoning behind a directive, like not using certain parts that could cause product failure and result in customer harm, shows respect for employees' intelligence and helps ensure compliance. This communication tactic treats people as aware stakeholders in a process rather than mere executors of orders.
The broader lesson is that whether in uniform, in the office, or rolling out a program, explaining the “why” behind the “what” reinforces a culture of trust, respect, and inclusion. It enhances the potential for positive outcomes and can diffuse tension while correcting misperceptions.
Engaging the Audience in a Political Discourse Through Literature
The publication of works such as “Is MAGA a Terrorist Movement?” aims to inform and enlighten audiences beyond the immediate circle of law enforcement practitioners. Such books engage readers in a wider discourse on pressing issues, including the nature of political movements, their classification, and their impact on society at large.
Russell's aim with his book is twofold: to elevate public awareness about the extent of specific political movements' influence within governmental structures and to clarify the potential dangers they pose to democratic institutions and societal stability.
The hope is that through literature, individuals, whether affiliated with a political movement or not, are encouraged to take an objective step back and critically assess the correlation between leadership rhetoric, the legality of actions taken by supporters, and the alignment of those actions with constitutional virtues.
Automated Transcript (May Contain Mistakes)
Mark Graban:
Hi. Welcome to the podcast. I'm Mark Graban. My guest today is Russell K. Jack. He is a retired U.S. Senior federal air marshal. He worked in that role from 2002 to 2022. Russell previously served five years as a federal police officer, and before that, he served five years in the Colorado Army National Guard and was deployed in Saudi Arabia as part of Desert Storm. Those are a few things about Russell's background and credentials.
Mark Graban:
He is also now a first-time author. We're going to be talking about his book. It's titled Is MAGA a Terrorist Movement? And it is available now. I might have made a mistake.
Mark Graban:
Is MAGA a Terrorist Movement? Better way to pronounce that, Russell?
Russell Jack:
I've heard it said both ways. I always say MAGA, but I've heard it pronounced MAGA, too. Yeah.
Mark Graban:
So that is the least important mistake of anything that we're going to talk about. So before we talk about the book, Russell, as we always do, I'm curious to hear your story. What would you say is your favorite mistake?
Russell Jack:
My favorite mistake actually happened a long time ago. I was actually a security officer at a major hospital and a lot of crime and a lot of problems there. And a man had stolen a purse from a lady who worked there right in front of her, grabbed it right off the counter and ran out. And so we got a call out for it and got a description of the man. So I took detailed notes, and as we were looking for the suspect, I found him.
Russell Jack:
And so I stopped him and detained him. And it's very common, even when you detain someone who is guilty, who really was a person doing it, for them to say, oh, no, that's not me. So he was saying that while I was detaining him, and a call came over the radio, and they said, hey, we got the guy. And I called back and I said, are you sure? I've got a guy here who matches the description almost perfectly.
Russell Jack:
And they said, yes, for sure, we have the guy. I'm like, okay, great. So I went to the guy and I told him, I said, hey, we got the person that was wanted. It wasn't you. But the mistake that happened where I stopped him wasn't really a mistake in that I stopped him because of his description, but it was a mistake because he wasn't the right person.
Russell Jack:
But here's what I learned from that is he had a look on his face that he was Black, I'm white. And he was like, yeah, you stopped the Black guy. And I'm like, do you mind if I show you the description and so he said, yeah, no problem. So I showed it to him. I showed him my notes, and as he read it, he goes, wow.
Russell Jack:
He goes, yeah, that's me. That's why you stopped me? And I said, yeah. I said, I just wanted you to know I didn't just stop you because I was looking for a Black male. You matched height, you matched weight, you matched clothing description.
Russell Jack:
You match pretty much perfectly. And the conversation was much better after that. And I think that mistake helped me learn that when time allows for it, it's huge to, as a uniformed officer, whether it's security, police, an agent, if you stop someone in official capacity, it's important for them to understand why. If I had just said, okay, you're free to go, and left, that guy probably would have gone home and gone, yeah, once again, I'm being racially profiled. So it was really good that I got that opportunity early on to realize how important it is, if time allows, to explain why you're doing something to people.
Mark Graban:
Wow. Well, thank you for sharing that. And it's an interesting story, because when you told him, if these weren't the exact words, you're free to go, he could have just walked away and ended that conversation with you as what is right. Right.
Russell Jack:
And that's why I offered. I said, hey, would you like to look at my description that I had for the person I was looking for? And he said, yeah, sure. And when he looked at it, I could see just a complete change in his demeanor. He's like, oh, my God.
Russell Jack:
Yeah, I totally understand why you stopped me. He said something to that effect. So it was a much better citizen contact after that.
Mark Graban:
Was there a similar situation then that you ran across in the future, or at least a situation where somebody might have thought they were being racially profiled? Was there that extra step to try to help them understand that then?
Russell Jack:
Yeah, many times in one particular situation, I have that happened. I won't go into the details of it, but we had felt there was enough need to stop and make contact while undercover, and one of the people I'd made contact with just by mistake had happened to bump me in a way where it was pretty obvious that I was armed. And I thought he'd done it deliberately. And it just turns out he just did a little twitch and hit it with his elbow, but he didn't react. So when he didn't react, I was like, oh, boy, I got a problem.
Russell Jack:
So he got lumped into the people we were concerned about. But after making contact, official contact, and I explained to him what happened and why he was stopped. He said, okay, that actually makes sense. And we did have some other people that were involved that were a problem, but he wasn't one of them. But he got lumped into it because of his actions, even though he didn't mean to do anything.
Russell Jack:
But once I explained to him what happened and everything else that was going on, he was like, okay, that makes sense. So when we can explain, we won't always have time, but when we can explain as law enforcement or any official position, honestly why we did something, and if the person is receptive to that, it's good to explain it.
Mark Graban:
Yeah. And was that something then? That was a topic of conversation with fellow officers about situations like that. And what you learned was that something that you felt free to share with others?
Russell Jack:
Free to share, yes. But I've noticed that topic really doesn't come up as much as it should. It wasn't really an official part of our training. Hey, if you get the chance, make sure you do this. I think that's more something I learned from actually being an officer.
Russell Jack:
It's important. When I was leading my platoon, in order to have people who are following you, you have to earn the respect to be a leader. It can't be given to you. You can be a supervisor, you can be a manager, you can be in charge. But to actually be a leader that people want to follow, they have to know that you have their back, that the mission and their safety, welfare comes before your own safety and comfort.
Russell Jack:
You put them first. So I think it is important to explain to people when you can what's going on. Like in the military, sometimes an order have just be carried out. It's like, hey, here's your order, go do it. But when time allows and you can explain what that is, it's better on two levels.
Russell Jack:
One, it lets a person know, hey, here's what's going on, and gives them some background. It's more details so they have a better understanding of what they're doing. And then also too, it helps them know, hey, it's not just, hey, go do this, and I'm done with you. It's, hey, I really appreciate you doing this. Just like with the person that we stopped saying, hey, I have enough time.
Russell Jack:
The reason I stopped you was this. So that way later they don't think, hey, I was just being picked on or profiled.
Mark Graban:
And I think there's an important general lesson that applies in business, like what you learned about the power and the importance of explaining why I've seen that apply in one auto factory. Short story. I started my career at general Motors, and there were all kinds of just directive orders given. Like, there might be a box of parts and there would be a sign that said, literally, do not use. And it would be signed by someone's name.
Mark Graban:
It was completely authority based because I said, so don't use these parts. I had a chance to visit a plant in California that was jointly run by Toyota and General Motors, similar situation. And there was a sign that said, again, pretty literally, do not use these parts. Using them in a vehicle could lead to brake failure and injury to customer. That was such a powerful lesson in a totally different circumstance of taking 10 seconds to explain why that's treating people like adults and helping them make, in that case, the good choice.
Russell Jack:
That's great idea. Great idea. And when time allows it, it doesn't harm anything. I've had situations where I've had to tell, like my troops, I was like, this sucks, but we got to do it. It's an order.
Russell Jack:
And they respect that more than if you just tell them, hey, everything's great. They can see through that. People are intelligent. They will figure that out. And it's better if you try to give them as much information as you are allowed to.
Mark Graban:
Yeah. And then, Russell, maybe one last question about your story before we move forward and talk about the know in that very particular story. Like you said, that was not a case of racial profiling. It was based on that very specific description. Would probably be a mistake for someone to listen and take away from your story.
Mark Graban:
Well, see, racial profiling doesn't happen, because how would you answer to that question of how frequently does that happen?
Russell Jack:
I think it does happen often. There's always some bad apples out there who do have a grudge. But a lot of times it can happen subconsciously, and that is what you have to always be vigilant for. And I learned early on in my career to look for criminal behaviors, criminal and terroristic behaviors. The majority of people are good, honest people that aren't looking for trouble.
Russell Jack:
They just want to raise their family, live in peace, and live their life. It's a very small number of people of any group who are bad, and they're the extremists. They're the ones who are willing to engage in illegal or terroristic activity to force their will on others. And generally, that's a big thing I'm fighting for, is in America, you're free to do what you want as long as it's not illegal. And you're not harming anyone else.
Russell Jack:
Do what you want. But that's where we get into this problem is, in any group, whether it be religious or culture, or if they're trying to enforce their ideas on how to behave on someone else, especially in an illegal way, that's where there's a problem. Hope that answers the question. Okay.
Mark Graban:
It did. Yeah. And I think that gives us a segue to the book and the MAGA movement, the Make America Great Again, quote unquote movement, and elements of that movement trying to force their ways onto others, as you document and write about in the book. So the title of the book, again, we're joined by the author, Russell K. Jack, Is MAGA a Terrorist Movement?
Mark Graban:
I guess it's not really a spoiler alert. Your one word answer in the book is yes.
Russell Jack:
Yeah, exactly. I decided it'd be better than just one word. I'd go ahead and write a whole book instead of just saying yes, opening up yes.
Mark Graban:
I'm going to ask you to define some terms, because I think it's important. Mean, you've mentioned this, that you worked in antiterrorism. How do you define terrorism more broadly, and how does that apply to the MAGA movement and Donald Trump, even personally?
Russell Jack:
Okay, well, there's two different ways to kind of two different definitions of terrorism. One is just the method of using intimidation and harm as a method of warfare to force your will on someone else. When you look at the actual definition of terrorism, it's using intimidation, coercion, and force, especially against a civilian population and against the government, in order to illegally enforce your will, your political will. So that's terrorism. And one of the things that I do that helps me, even when I'm talking with somebody who is Maga, is to explain, hey, look, this isn't.
Russell Jack:
I hate Republicans, okay? I generally lean a little more left, but I'm not in one political group. The problem is whenever you have a group of people who are willing to engage in illegal activity, okay, we saw this on January 6. That was a riot, and it was an insurrection, and it did violate the Twelfth Amendment. They did stop the votes from being counted, which is the Twelfth Amendment.
Russell Jack:
So it was an unconstitutional and illegal act and the illegality of it. I don't think anybody who watched what happened on January 6 would argue there was just random chance that it happened to be the day and time that they were ratifying the vote. The intent was clearly to stop the government from ratifying that vote. And if you look up what an insurrection is, that's what it is. It's an attempt to overthrow or to stop a government from its functioning.
Russell Jack:
And that is clearly the intent on January 6, was to stop that ratification of vote. So they were using harm, intimidation, and fear to enforce their political will. So, yeah, that's terrorism.
Mark Graban:
And part of the question know, did Donald Trump directly direct that activity, or was it closer? I've heard a phrase, stochastic terrorism.
Russell Jack:
Not familiar with that one. I'm sorry.
Mark Graban:
Well, and I've heard that term used, that stochastic terrorism is. It's sort of like a mob boss who's not directly doing the things, but is sort of saying things that would cause others. There's that plausible deniability of, like, oh, I didn't mean literally to go storm the Capitol and stop the votes.
Russell Jack:
Gotcha. Yeah. In my book, that's one of the things I cover, is I talk about, you know, there's, in America, you need to be convicted before you're sent to jail. And that's a good thing. That's what we want.
Russell Jack:
I don't want to be sent to jail. You don't want to be sent to jail just because somebody says, yeah, I think he did it, you should go to jail. But Al Capone. Okay, this is one of the examples I given there versus Wesley Snipes. Okay?
Russell Jack:
Al Capone and Wesley Snipes were tax evaders. Now, in no world does anyone think Al Capone was not a gangster. But he wasn't convicted as one. Right? He wasn't.
Russell Jack:
So you can't look at the conviction and say, hey, he wasn't convicted, therefore he didn't do it. Okay, well, if you look at the litany of criminal charges, 91 criminal charges against Donald Trump in four different jurisdictions or in four different cases, I should say it goes against conscience to believe that this is probably someone who has not committed a crime. Now, obviously, as always in America, we always have to say this, guilty until proven innocent. Yes, alleged until you're convicted. But that being said, anyone watching the activities, what happened on January 6, the reason we passed RICO, the Racketeering Influence, corrupt Organization Act, was because of people like Al Capone.
Russell Jack:
Because under that act, there's. I think it was. I can't remember if it's 30 or 35 different crimes that their henchmen carry out, but as long as we can prove that the person or persons in charge are part of that enterprise, even if they don't get their hands dirty, they're still culpable. I talked with a family member who said, hey, wait a minute, just because he wasn't a big believer in conspiracy, he wasn't like, hey, if you're not the one doing it, you shouldn't get in trouble. But here's the problem is if a person in position of power is telling their subordinates or underlings or even just implying to, in this case, MAGA, go commit an illegal activity, they are culpable.
Russell Jack:
That is a crime. Okay? Once RICO came out, now it is a criminal act to tell your underlings to go do a criminal activity. If that nexus can be proven, that's what's going on in Georgia with the RICO crimes there. But again, under our system, until proven guilty, criminally, he's not guilty.
Russell Jack:
But I think anybody watching January 6, there's no way a reasonable person could believe that that wasn't the intent. It happened on the day they're ratifying the vote, they stormed the Capitol. They were saying, hang Mike Pence because he didn't throw the vote. I mean, it's very clear there isn't any reasonable way to say that that was not what happened. Right.
Mark Graban:
And one example of terrorism would be death threats that maybe Donald Trump badmouths somebody and we, we should be rid of them or something. That's kind of vague. And then death threats follow from the MAGA movement. That's not directly, but it's not hard to connect. Well, that happened because of Trump demonizing somebody.
Russell Jack:
Right? Correct. And one thing I learned in my career, there's many instances of things that terrorists and terrorist supporters do that they haven't yet been charged with or may never get charged with. It doesn't mean they're not doing things that are related to or are terrorists. So in this case, if he has millions of followers, which he does, he has a cult of personality.
Russell Jack:
When he tweets something, his followers are listening and they act on it. And the problem is, and this is the problem I've had in discussion with another man that I met that know he was much more pro right. He wasn't really Maga, but he was very, very conservative. And he said, well, I think you're being unfair, picking on them. And I said, well, wait a minute.
Russell Jack:
The problem is, I don't think Joe Biden has a cult of personality where millions of followers are waiting on his next tweet to commit illegal activities. The problem is when you have a powerful person who is pushing for illegal actions to occur and terroristic actions to occur, especially if they're trying to change government by doing it, this is now much more of a threat. And they would be a threat even if it was Democrats doing it. It's not. There isn't a comparable group that I found.
Russell Jack:
And that's one of the things in this discussion with this man, I said is I'm not finding a parallel. If there is a group like MAGA out there in America, I want to know about it. But it would be pretty obvious at this point if there was.
Mark Graban:
Yeah, well, I mean, I think the right and Fox News, their equivalent or their boogeyman is, you say in the book, that's not a direct parallel. That's certainly not part of a quote unquote, cult of Biden.
Russell Jack:
Yeah. And one of the things I find interesting is I actually had that discussion back when I was working and after it happened, you hear some outrageous things from the right. And one thing that's always bothered me is that to me, it seems like if you really listen, shouldn't you see the contradiction? And I explained that. I said, wait a minute, so you're saying it was a false flag operation Antifa got you into trouble?
Russell Jack:
Well, hold on. Antifa stands for antifascism, right? Literally 100% against what you're trying to do. And even though they're not, I think of the term I use in my book was everything they do isn't sunshine and rainbows, but I guarantee you they did not want Donald Trump to remain as president. So it makes no sense.
Russell Jack:
And also, too, they can't have it both ways when he's saying, hey, these are hostages, these are patriots, these are heroes. Well, wait a minute, I thought they were victims of a false flag operation. Are they victims, or are they patriots that deliberately went against the Twelfth Amendment? And the answer is the latter.
Mark Graban:
Yeah, there's a lot that doesn't make sense. And there's sort of this rubber glue, if not projection, I think, as you described in the book of the word fascist, and then it gets thrown back at, oh, Joe Biden and his followers are fascists. It doesn't seem to meet the definition. It's just a word that's being thrown around. But not to try to make you a walking dictionary here, but the definition, and maybe more importantly, the definition of fascist and what that means for the MAGA movement and if they win in 2024.
Russell Jack:
Okay, well, I mean, the simplest way to explain fascism, to paraphrase it, is simply one party rule with a dictator at top. Now, it doesn't have to be a dictator. It can just be a strong president. But once you have the president, the leader in charge, and you have control of the rest of the government, two thirds majority in Congress and in a sympathetic or aiding judicial branch with the Supreme Court. Once you have all those pieces in place, it very quickly, as we discussed, I think at one point, if you have that system, you don't need a single vote from an actual American.
Russell Jack:
We have a representative democracy, not a true democracy. So once we elect those people in, we hope they do what we want, but they don't have to do what we want. So the problem is once they have that kind of control, now they can start doing whatever they want. So a fascism to define it is generally one leader usually has a cult of personality, usually has a lot of people following them, and then they get into the government in control. And then that government then becomes very against anyone who's going to try to talk bad about it or work against it.
Russell Jack:
So that's one of the reasons they attack the First Amendment like they do, is because they don't want people learning the real facts. Because if they did, they would realize, hey, the things we're doing are illegal, they are unconstitutional, they are terroristic. And that's not being a good American.
Mark Graban:
Yeah, I wanted to ask about the 14th Amendment and the clause that says basically, if you participate, I'm paraphrasing, if you participated in insurrection, which doesn't say convicted of, back to your point about the legal standard, participated in insurrection, you are by definition not allowed to be or you're ineligible for office unless Congress votes two thirds to remove that restriction. It's not two thirds of vote to get you off the ballot, for example. So there's a lot of legal battles here, but is a mistake that we don't have a clear legal definition of what it means, insurrection, because I've heard people say, oh, it wasn't an insurrection, it was a riot, or they'll say they were just tourists and whatever. But is there that gray area of, I mean, it looked like an insurrection?
Russell Jack:
Well, if I'm ever a tourist, I don't want it to be like that because that did not look peaceful to me. So one of the problems is, of course, my opinion, the forefathers reason why they did a lot of things they did is you have the concept of originality or the original constitutionalism. You hear a lot from conservative judges. And the problem is if you go back and look at what the forefathers thought, it's even more strongly worded that they made it clear they don't want you holding any office. And office for people who don't know, is a position.
Russell Jack:
I held the office of a federal air marshal. Any office is a job, is a position in the state or federal government. And it makes it very clear in the 14th amendment, section three, that if you engaged in, aided and abetted, gave aid and comfort to rebellion or insurrection in any way, you are not eligible to hold any position in the state or federal governments, any of the states, any federal government position. So I'm pretty sure going off the originality concepts and forefathers didn't say, well, wait, except president. The president can be an insurrectionist.
Russell Jack:
That's okay.
Mark Graban:
There's been this argument that the president is, quote, not an officer of the United States. It just doesn't pass the smell test.
Russell Jack:
Correct. It's the office of the presidency. So. Yes, it is.
Mark Graban:
Yeah, but I'm sorry, go ahead.
Russell Jack:
No, it's okay. And I agree with you. The 14th amendment, section three. One of the problems we have is the reason they didn't go into all this detail is because they thought they made it really clear. If you engaged in it, it says engaged.
Russell Jack:
It doesn't say convicted. It doesn't say, after being formally charged in a court of law and convicted. It says, if you engaged in that activity. And most people would say, well, that's wishy washy. No, it's not.
Russell Jack:
If I applied for my old job and went to get my top secret clearance, I assure you, if I had engaged in resurrect and rebellion or insurrection, I wouldn't have gotten that job or that clearance.
Mark Graban:
And that amendment was passed after the civil war. So there was a pretty clear standard, I imagine, of having served in the Confederate military or having an elected position within the Confederate States. That was all pretty cut and dry.
Russell Jack:
Right?
Mark Graban:
If there was evidence you participated.
Russell Jack:
Yeah. And that's another argument I'd heard, too, is, well, this was a civil warrior one. It was designed to punish people who worked in the Civil war. Yeah, that was part of it, I'm sure. But the other part of it is, if they wanted to just be the Civil war, they would have said, anyone who was involved in the civil war can't do this.
Russell Jack:
They didn't. They said, anybody who does rebellion or insurrection or AIDs and abets or gives aid and comfort to same and engages in that activity cannot work for the federal or state government in any capacity. So when one of the judges in Colorado, when she said, yeah, there's scant direct evidence that the presidency is one of those positions covered, I was just, like, shaking my head. I'm like, it's not scant. It's very direct.
Russell Jack:
It says no position, no office, no employment of any kind for the federal government or state government if you engaged in rebellion or insurrection or helped anyone who did. So I think it's pretty cut and dry. I think any arguments over the interpretation of it probably aren't valid.
Mark Graban:
So I want to ask about the expected audience for the book as you wrote it, and it's available now. Is the audience for the book the people who had already answered yes to that question some sort of convincible middle? And if so, how much of a convincing middle do you think there is?
Russell Jack:
Well, my hope with this book is twofold. One is I want to get the awareness out there. There's a lot of people I've run into who don't have a full understanding of everything that's going on. They're like, yeah, I realize Maggie's problem. I realize they're doing bad things, but they're not aware of how large the problem is, how invasive it is, that it's in our federal government, it's in our state government, it's in the military, and there's some confusion over how dangerous it actually is.
Russell Jack:
So for reaching out to them, I think it gives them the people who are interested in learning more about it and really have a better full understanding of who they are, what they're trying to accomplish and the methods they're using. I think that's where that book is going to really gain ground. And yes, obviously MAGA majority of people are going to be non MAGA. Now, my hope is that some magA, even if they're know, even if they're just looking for, hey, Russ, made a mistake. I want them to look, and I don't want to turn those people know.
Russell Jack:
A lot of people I work with for over two decades are good people, even the ones that were later indoctrinated in the MAGA movement, they think they're doing the right thing. And I really hope that they take an objective step back and take a look and see, hey, your actions don't meet what is patriotic, what is legal and what is constitutional. So I am hopeful that it will convert at least a few. But honestly, yes, 99 plus percent is going to be non MAGA. Unfortunately, I haven't, to my knowledge, convinced anybody yet firsthand to give up on MAGA, no matter what I say.
Russell Jack:
But I do hope that there are people who are going to objectively listen to this, even if they don't like me, even if they're MAGA, and say, wait a minute, is what I'm doing illegal is what I'm doing. Terroristic is what I'm doing unconstitutional? Yeah.
Mark Graban:
So I was going to ask you that. You've already answered the question. Have you convinced anybody? Have you run across people in your travels even if you hadn't convinced them, where at some point they had convinced themselves, like they might now say it was a mistake to have previously supported or voted for him? I mean, other than most of his former cabinet members and his former vice president, there's got to be others.
Russell Jack:
Yeah. Unfortunately, I haven't had any luck with that. One of the things I also covered in that book was that when people are convinced of an idea and you show them direct evidence that shows they're wrong, their more common reaction than not is not to say, hey, I'm going to take a step back and think about that. It's not angry.
Mark Graban:
Right.
Russell Jack:
They lash out. The person saying it, they don't stop and think, sorry, go ahead.
Mark Graban:
No, I mean, that's part of what makes this really difficult. I remember when a person comes to mind, Chris Christie said this was during for what it was the primary here back in 2023 when he was running for the republican nomination, said in pretty plain and clear language, Chris Christie used the word mistake that he realized now it was a mistake. I don't think he was saying that just because he was now running against him any more than Mike Pence decided to not endorse Trump because he had been running against him and also lost. People who have worked with him very closely seem more willing to say, hey, it was a mistake to get into bed with this guy than the broader movement would be to realize that or say that. Are they working off of some idealized version of what they think he is compared to people who actually saw firsthand?
Russell Jack:
This is the disturbing part is I have been talking, obviously, with a lot of people, and this one's hearsay because it was a friend of someone I know, and they are Republican, and they actually work helping with the judges and things like that. And they're very upset over MAGA. A lot of people who are what I call true Republicans. If you look at the republican charter, MAGA is violating it horribly. So anyone who is Republican is very upset at this point that MAGA has taken over their party completely at this point.
Russell Jack:
Now that the nomination is going to be Donald Trump, Donald Trump is MAGA. MAGA is Donald Trump. So therefore, the Republican Party is now the MAGA party. And that's got to be frustrating. I mean, the first country that was taken over by the Nazis was Germany.
Russell Jack:
The first thing that's being taken over by MAGA is the Republican Party. So I can understand why someone who's a true Republican should be very upset over the fact that their party has been destroyed by this movement.
Mark Graban:
In the book, you use the word pseudo a lot. So you could say pseudo-Republican party. A minute ago, you taught that you used the word patriotic. In the book, you kind of break down the difference between patriotism and pseudo-patriotism. Could you maybe share an example of what that means?
Russell Jack:
One of the reasons I chose to use that particular word is because that's a false sham version of something where you're pretending to be something that you really aren't. The German Bund movement that back in, I think it was 1939, it's in my book where they had 20,000 people at Madison Square Garden, and they were doing a Nazi salute as an oversized American flag went by. So this isn't the first time that our patriotic symbols have been usurped. And that's what's happening now is they're saying, hey, if you're a true patriot, then you're a MAGA. Okay, well, no, true patriotism is not that.
Russell Jack:
So I use the word pseudo to say, hey, you know what? Over a billion Christians and Muslims don't believe in this, just like 911. And when you look at groups like al Qaeda or ISIS, the vast majority of religious people are good, moral people, and they don't use terrorism and bigotry and hate and inflict their will on others against those people's wills. Sure, they'll try to convert them. Absolutely.
Russell Jack:
I totally understand that. And they can vote that way if they're like, hey, if you want to have a right-wing vote for it, that's awesome. But when you start doing illegal and terroristic, know, that's where you have a problem. That's why I use the word pseudo, because I don't want people who are part of, say, Islam to be associated directly with ISIS just because they're Muslim. The vast majority of Muslims don't believe that, just like the vast majority of Christians don't believe in a hardcore extremist right version of Christianity where they enforce their will on others.
Russell Jack:
So pseudo, I thought, was the best way to make sure people understand that. And sorry to talk a little bit longer, but one little thing I learned, there's a lot of Islamophobia that went on when I first became an agent after 9/11. I came on in 2002, and a lot of those people who were getting attacked because they looked Muslim. And I may add, they also attacked Sikhs who aren't Muslim, but they just thought they were, so they attacked them anyway. Those weren't the people who did the attack.
Russell Jack:
They weren't the ones who supported the attack. And one thing that dawned on me after a while, a lot of coworkers I had were very bigoted in that way. I hate to say that I shouldn't say a lot. Many, some, I realized something like, wait a minute, if over a billion Muslims really felt that way, we would know. So, no, it's a very small number of any religion or group of people that are willing to use illegal force on others to inflict their will.
Russell Jack:
And those are the extremists. There are a small number of people.
Mark Graban:
And so then when you talk about a government or a party that becomes a government inflicting its will on people, and in the book, you use the word authoritarian. And I'm going to quote you from the book here. You're saying our democracy, I think this is a direct quote, that our democracy will start to end the day he takes office again. What would you expect to start happening in the years 2025 and beyond?
Russell Jack:
Well, here's the reason why I say that. And in the book, I said too as well, especially now, and I used a cutesy little quote, Teflon Don. But it is true. I mean, if he can beat 91 charges over four different cases and secure the presidency, he already was working to get rid of the checks and balances in the government and have one party rule, the Republicans, which is now MAGA. So if he's able to beat everything that's happening to him right now, I mean, owing a half a billion dollars about from a successful lawsuits against him, having 91 felonies, if he can manage to beat all that and become president, it's not going to take, I mean, anybody who can pull that off, it's not going to take long before they, especially when they have people in position of power supporting them.
Russell Jack:
He would have been impeached had the Republican Party stepped up to make that happen. That was when the Republican Party died, in my opinion, is when only ten of them, I think it was actually voted to impeach, and it was something like 57 and they needed 67. If ten more Republicans had done the right thing, and many of them knew that that was the right thing, they turned their back on their duty, in my opinion. If they had done that, he would have been impeached and he would be ineligible to run and this nightmare would have ended. They didn't and in fact, they've done the opposite.
Russell Jack:
They're like, hey, I like power. So if this guy gets in charge, I'm going to have a lot of power. And that's what scares me, is the politics of it. If he gets in after everything that's going on with him, if he manages to secure the presidency, then if he can beat all that, it won't take long. Things will start falling within the year of his first year, and I would imagine by the end of his four year term, his second term before he starts his third, because he will, they'll get rid of the 22nd amendment.
Russell Jack:
No reason to have a two party, two term limit anymore. So these are the kind of things that happen to fascist government. I mean, look at Putin. I mean, how many times has he been reelected and he just got a reelected pseudo election. Yeah, he got reelected like 87%.
Russell Jack:
Okay. No, it's false. It's a dictatorship. So that's my concern, is them getting in power like that and to people who are listening, who are Maga, if you flip the script and this was Democrats doing this, I would still be on the show and I would still be talking badly about them instead, and.
Mark Graban:
I would have had you on the podcast.
Russell Jack:
That may be, but, yeah, that's the problem. The problem is fascism. And the word gets thrown around a lot, but if you just think of it as one powerful person atop one party rule, and then they forcibly stop everybody else from competing with them, that's in a nutshell, fascism. And it doesn't matter which party, which group, once it happens, then you start losing your rights.
Mark Graban:
I mean, I value and appreciate my freedom. I appreciate my ability to vote and not to be overly dramatic about it. I'd probably end up on some sort of list from even having you on the podcast. You're on the list before.
Russell Jack:
Oh, yeah.
Mark Graban:
Of what that means or what that means for our ability to speak out podcasters, unless officially approved, will be the latest enemy of the people.
Russell Jack:
Correct.
Mark Graban:
If we're even still able to do these podcasts. And I don't know if it's a mistake to think there are some. We say, well, look, the first time around, the system of checks and balances and some other factors kept him in line. But I hate to say I'm going to turn this into a question on the podcast. Here we talk about the importance of learning from mistakes.
Mark Graban:
Does MAGA think they've made mistakes in late 2020, early 2021, or even mistakes made in the beginning of his first term? Gosh, they've learned not to repeat those mistakes, it's going to lead to a worse outcome if they're learning from why they weren't able to sort of remain in power that first time.
Russell Jack:
Yeah, I think I understand what you're asking. There's a lot of control already happening, and they have learned from these lessons. I'm not going to say as an overall group that they're going to always do everything right. I mean, nobody does. But they have gotten more power, and they've started to test how to change these checks and balances.
Russell Jack:
I mean, a perfect example is when he got impeached. There isn't any reasonable human being who looked at that and didn't say, yeah, he needs to be impeached. Okay, so what happened is because of power and because of their MAGA base politicians said, well, wait a minute, if I do the right thing, I'm not going to get reelected, but if I do the wrong thing, I'll be the hero of his followers and I'll get reelected over and over again. So what do they do? They do what's in their best interest instead of what they're supposed to do, which is their duty.
Russell Jack:
So, yeah, I have a huge problem with that. Shout out to the Republicans who lost their careers to do the right thing. Thank you.
Mark Graban:
Yeah. And earlier you talked about cult of personality. And ask this carefully, don't want to end up on another, I'm not going to commit a crime here, but if Trump were to die of natural causes tomorrow, what happens to the MAGA movement?
Russell Jack:
That's an interesting question. Cult of personality is huge without him in the picture. Honestly, I think it'll fall apart. I mean, he's that know, it's kind of like the Mussolini and the Hitlers and even the ones that are more peaceful, like Gandhi, they're pivotal in that movement. So I think with him gone, I think that if he died of natural causes, that the movement would fall apart.
Russell Jack:
I don't think the movement would stop as far as lots of people believing in make America great again. But the problem is, I don't think they would have that central figure, that cohesive thing to rally behind. I think they would become more disorganized than they already are, and I think they'd become much less effectual, and I don't think they'd have a chance of winning and taking over the government. So I think without Donald Trump, the MAGA movement will not be as efficient and not have a very good chance of success.
Mark Graban:
It's going to be interesting to see what happens this year. The impact of it is huge. And one other thing came to mind. Maybe before we wrap up here, we think about the projection and the idea of the thing you're accusing your opponents of is the thing that you're know, the other day I think Trump said something like, well, if Biden gets reelected, that'll be the last election that's ever. Like, Biden has his faults, but the idea that he would dismantle our ability to vote seems like the furthest thing from being your, your thoughts on that.
Russell Jack:
One of the things I find funny about projection is when they say things, Magg will say things towards non MAGA people, Democrats or anyone who doesn't agree with them. They'll say things like, oh, you're fascist, and you're going to try to take away our guns and take away our rights. And I would stop them. I'd say, do you know what fascism is? Or say, hey, do you know what this constitutional amendment is?
Russell Jack:
And they would give you this blank look. And they'd be like, oh, I don't know. I'd be like, there are only 27 amendments in there and like six articles. I mean, just read it. I mean, it'll take you a couple of hours to get at least an idea.
Russell Jack:
I mean, I'm not a constitutional expert. You absolutely. If you said, hey, read every single one, I would flub it for sure. But the important ones and all of them are important, but reading through it and kind of learning is important. And when they do that projection, it doesn't work because they say, well, you're a fascist.
Russell Jack:
Well, wait a minute, what's a fascist? Okay, I don't want one party rule. I don't want a dictator in charge. So, no, you can't say, oh, you guys are fascist too. No, I'm not.
Russell Jack:
I'm 100% anti fascist. No matter who they are. I'm against them being in charge of my country.
Mark Graban:
Well, our guest today has been Russell Jack. I think I appreciate the way you said that. That's probably a strong note to close on. Russell K. Jack, author of the book Is MAGA a Terrorist Movement?
Mark Graban:
It's available now. You can find it on Amazon ebook, paperback. You're recording the audiobook, is that right?
Russell Jack:
That's correct. It's actually being produced right now. And hopefully I'll have that out by end of April, beginning of May, as a guess.
Mark Graban:
Okay. Yeah, it's just a chilling topic and book and possibilities of what might happen this year. And goodbye to 30% of my previous listeners who are part of that movement, and they realize that I'm not part of it. And they've long stopped listening to this episode. But, Russell, thank you for trying to bring facts and the compilation of what's happened and what it means in the book.
Mark Graban:
Thank you for taking that on. Thank you for being here with us today.
Russell Jack:
Thanks for having me. Really appreciate it. Thanks, Mark. Thanks.