"A riot is the language of the unheard"

Russia's Wagner Group is leaving Mali, but that doesn't mean Russian mercenaries won't remain there. Why does Mali need to rely on mercenaries? We're also looking at this week's trade talks between the U.S. and China in London and exploring the Los Angeles immigration protests. Trump invoked Title 10 of the U.S. Code to deploy the National Guard to Los Angeles. Will it escalate or de-escalate the situation? We're covering these topics and more in under 15 minutes!

Be sure to follow us on Instagram and TikTok @thefridaybrief and sign up for The Friday Brief newsletter on thefridaybrief.com.

Chapters

• 0:00 Welcome
• 0:17 Mali continues to use Russian mercenaries
• 0:46 U.S.-China trade talks in London
• 2:11 LA immigration protests + a history of USG responses
• 7:05 Until next time!

Transcript

Welcome to The Friday Brief, a news podcast by Girl Friday. I’m Phoenix Ricks, the CEO of Girl Friday and your host. This is your brief for June 9, 2025. 

Last week, I talked about the situation in Mali and the spread of violent Islamist extremism in Africa. Today, France 24 reported that Russia’s Wagner Group is leaving Mali and will be replaced by yet another Russian-connected force called Africa Corps. Though this seems to be rarely acknowledged publicly, Mali relies heavily on mercenaries to combat Islamist extremists and armed groups. At present, we see that those mercenary groups continue to be from Russia. 

Looking to Europe and trade talks, the BBC reported this morning that U.S. and Chinese representatives are in central London this week, trying to work out a trade deal. U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is part of the US delegation. Given each nation’s impact on the world economy, product development, and manufacturing, the trade tensions between the U.S and China will soon have global ramifications. Reuters reported that “China's export growth slowed to a three-month low in May as U.S. tariffs slammed shipments [...].” The U.S. needs China to export rare earth minerals, which are necessary for a number of tech products. China also needs access to American products, including things in the tech industry like computer chips. 

And remember, this trade war is completely artificial, and these political tensions did not exist at this level before Trump took office again in January. Why is the Trump administration doing this? In a February Fact Sheet on tariffs, the White House said, “In response to China’s intellectual property theft, forced technology transfer, and other unreasonable behavior, President Trump acted with conviction to impose tariffs on imports from China, using that leverage to reach a historic bilateral economic agreement.” The BBC added that the U.S. and China had reached a temporary truce, but each side has accused the other of breaking that deal. 

And now, finally, looking back at the U.S., there are immigration protests taking place in Los Angeles. While most protestors have been demonstrating peacefully, there were a handful of concerning incidents, including cars being set on fire. California is no stranger to protests, and Los Angeles has a sizeable law enforcement apparatus. But, against the wishes of state and local officials, CNN said Trump ordered the deployment of 2,000 National Guard troops. Governor Newsom believes that having armed troops will only make the situation more volatile. Thus far during these protests, we’ve seen law enforcement officers spray tear gas, use flash grenades, and fire rubber bullets. There was a viral video yesterday of an Australian journalist being pelted with at least one rubber bullet, even though she was clearly a member of the press and not engaging in any activity other than reporting. 

What’s very interesting here is that Trump used Title 10 of the U.S. Code when sending the National Guard. This means the troops are under federal authority and federal funding. Reuters reported yesterday that Governor Newsom said, “It's unlawful deployment of troops in Los Angeles County.” The last time a U.S. president used that specific power was in 1992 when four white officers were acquitted in the brutal beating of Rodney King. People were upset about that outcome as the horrific beating was caught on camera, and people assumed the officers would be held accountable. Chaos ensued. 

If you don’t remember that incident, or weren’t alive yet, it's worth reading more about that time period, as the horrific Rodney King beating and subsequent riots have created almost a modern framework for how Americans respond to state-sponsored violence and how the U.S. government reacts to those responses. You can see vestiges of 1992 in the Freddie Gray protests in 2015 in Baltimore. And of course, in the George Floyd and Breonna Taylor demonstrations across the nation more recently. No matter how peaceful the majority of demonstrators are, the U.S. government tends to overreact, in my opinion, when there’s any instance of even minor commercial property damage during protests. 

I’ve long believed that if the January 6th insurrection had happened in Downtown DC and the rioters had broken into commercial spaces, like prestigious lobbying firms, instead of government buildings, there would have been zero pardons. Across our two political parties, you’ll see leaders in the U.S. government focus on commercial property over the issues that people are protesting, while claiming the protestors are a distraction from the issue. 

For instance, in 2015, President Obama famously called the young demonstrators in Baltimore “thugs." This didn’t go over well with people or the press, and when asked to explain or reframe those thoughts, Josh Earnest, Obama’s press secretary at the time, doubled down. What we all saw on TV during those 2015 Baltimore protests were lots of very young people, even students with backpacks on, demonstrating about the arrest and unnecessary death of Freddie Gray. Should people have set fires to retailers? No, of course not. But what I often think of when I see riots here or abroad is one quote by Dr. Martin Luther King. Jr. “A riot is the language of the unheard.” 

It doesn’t mean the acts are excusable, good, or just. It doesn’t mean people shouldn’t be held accountable for their actions. But it does strongly imply that someone in a position of power isn’t listening or acting. And perhaps, instead of dismissing protestors or reframing protests as distractions, our leaders, across both parties, should be finding solutions for serious issues before people feel so unheard that they believe rioting is their only method of communication. At the beginning of the 2015 Baltimore protests, I believed a simple visit from the White House to acknowledge people’s feelings could have gone a long way. Perhaps that visit could have even prevented the worst parts of those protests, like the commercial property damage the White House seemed to focus on at the time. 

Back to the present day, what we see in Los Angeles right now is absolutely nothing like the riots after the Rodney King incident. But this immigration debate is a pressure cooker. Across the country, we are all seeing videos of ICE-led deportations, mainly of Latinos. We’re watching ICE officers take moms away from their little kids and homes, simply because they lack documentation. We were all told the focus would be on hardened criminals with serious records, but I never believed that would be the sole focus, because I read the immigration policy plans in Project 2025. The Guardian reported that a Florida state senator, who is one of the cofounders of Latinas for Trump, is upset about this administration’s immigration enforcement and tweeted, “This is not what we voted for.” She might want to read Project 2025. 

Thank you for listening to The Friday Brief. Make sure you and your friends don’t miss an episode! Check out thefridaybrief.com, and follow The Friday Brief on Instagram and TikTok. Until next time, I’m Phoenix Ricks signing off from Washington, DC. Let’s work together for a world of good.