We're back with another edition of The Federalist Radio Hour. I'm Emily Johnski,
culture editor here at the Federalist. As always, you can email the show
at radio at the Federalist dot com, follow us on Twitter at fdr LST.
Make sure to subscribe wherever you download your podcasts as well. Today,
I'm really happy to be joined by my friend Christian Daytok, who was a
White House reporter at the Washington Examiner. I'm going to preface this episode by
saying, like Christian kindly was doing it in the pouring rain, as it
was sort of a remarkable feed. He was standing outside the White House.
You don't get really good service if you're in the White House basement, because
he was waiting for today's briefing, so Friday's briefing with Kurran Jean Pierre,
and it started to just pour halfway through the interview. I don't think you
can hear it. Maybe you can, but just if you hear the sort
of the light sounds of a summer rain, or maybe hopefully just the light
sounds of a gentle summer rain, you'll know that it's the sound of that
rain hitting his umbrella, which he sort of definitely brought and knew just to
be prepared for when he went outside to do this addition of Federalist rain new
hour. I'm also out of the office, so not the usual surist and
seven B set up. That's my favorite microphone, So it's it's was had
the opportunity to talk to Christian this afternoon and wanted to take it and bring
that conversation to all of you. So just if it sounds like I'm out
of the office and out of the studio, that is absolutely correct. But
sometimes the opportunity to talk to guests is just too good to pass up,
and I got to grab the travel mic. So that's what's going on today
as well. I also want to say I think it's not often that we
actually check in on the White House itself, so his insights are super helpful
and interesting towards the dynamics of what's happening behind the closed doors. If you
saw what I saw right now, because we're over zoom, he's actually standing
outside of the side of the White House. So we appreciate you joining Christian,
and it's a big week for your beat. In particular, I want
to start with the President's push for Bidenomics. First of all, the name
Bidenomics. Do we know who coined that? Is they're reporting on who coined
that? And secondly, tell us just a little bit about how this push
has been going for him, what he's kind of in, what his intentionality,
and what we know about the intentionality behind this campaign from the last week
or Emily Well, this is coming out of the big brain trust in the
West wing. That's Louisa Terrell, Steve Baschetti, and Anita Done. We
don't know who actually came up with it, but of course it harkens back
to the policies of Reaganomics from former President Reagan's two terms in office, which
the Biden team is, you know, trying to flat out refuge for the
last for years, we've heard this president talk about how trickled down doesn't work
in this day and age, and they're trying a quote bold new strategy to
build the economy from the middle out and the bottom up. Now, some
of these policies that the Biden administration is talking about, extending childcare to people,
eliminating some student debt, on their face, those policies pull pretty well
when you look at them in a vacuum but given President Biden's poor approval ratings,
the sort of cracks who've seen in the jobs market not only in June,
but over the last couple of months, this push is really struggling to
pick up traction. And you've seen President Biden goes to a lot of these
states that were critical in twenty twenty that Democrats think are again going to be
critical in twenty twenty four. I'm talking at you know, Wisconsin, I'm
talking to Pennsylvania. He was in South Carolina, which of course kick started
his big Super Tuesday back in twenty twenty just yesterday. So they're committed to
the brand essentially, and what it is it's a punchy tagline that lets the
Biden team sort of cover up some of this negative pulling about the president itself
and talk about issues that at least the base of a Democratic Party, you
know, they really care about. Given the fact that we're three years removed
from COVID now in the economy, while it boomed pretty early in twenty twenty
one and twenty twenty two as flat out stagnated while prices have made incredibly elevated.
Yeah, I want to talk about that trickle down question. Because I
have mentioned him kind of harp on that a couple of times, and you
know, there's a potential ups strike looming there is. Yes, it's a
tight labor market, inflation is still really high. So as he goes and
makes this pitch for byonomics, I guess, tactically, how are they dealing
with those questions of inflation, those questions of the labor movement. You know,
it's a certainly not a perfect economy, and there's probably no such thing
as a perfect economy, but for a lot of people, those gains or
those jobs that they may have gotten, or any sort of gains to earnings
are really the inflation levels are still really hurting them. It is a real
problem, and I think it's one that the White House hasn't necessarily got a
full handle on how to tackle. Again, I think when you talk about
strategy, their first and foremost move. You know, when you talk about
I know you're Wisconsin Badgers fan, every team has like fifteen scripted plays that
they run at the beginning of every game. Well, any time this White
House encounters a question that they don't want to talk about, they either shield
themselves using the Hatch Acts anything tangentially related to the election, or if it's
on the side of the economy. They say, we're still recovering from the
pandemic, and even though President Biden has authored and ushered in all of these
historic legislative spending packages, we still need more time or making American families to
really feel the sort of downstream effects that this team is trying to harp on.
Now again, you might say, well, the downstream effects. That
sounds a lot like trickle down economics again, but they're trying to highlight the
subset of the population that they say have been sort of left out by the
free market expansion that we've seen over the last thirty years. We're talking about
black and Hispanic families in the inner cities and communities that have been underserved.
We're talking about tribal nations. And again they're really trying to zero in on
these young gen Z voters, many of them who have you know, dozens,
if not hundreds of thousands of dollars in student loan debt. All these
people have not necessarily seen any of the economic progress that that we've experienced as
a country over the last four decades. So it's not even necessarily a strategy
of rebutting this criticism or rebutting the slow economic progress we've seen with facts.
It's dovetailing into an entirely new approach, and they're just saying, well,
there's no way to know if our plan won't work because we haven't given enough
time. It's very similar to what Nancy Plomacy told people when they pass Obamacare.
If you want to know what's in the bill, you got to read
the bill. If you want to see these doubtail effects, you're going to
have to give us time to try and implement more of this legislation. That's
super interesting. And actually, I know you've been reporting on the student loan
situation. There's there are big political questions. There are also obviously just major
policy questions that are looming over this for the Biden administration, especially now that
any support action on a policy that they pursue, maybe the Higher Education actles
what a lot of left activists are hoping that the Biden administration will pursue after
the Supreme Court's ruling one student debt. What's your sense of how the White
House is approaching this? And then that's just sort of on the policy level,
and then on the political level, how have they been handling it so
far? Well, I'm going to talk about the political angle first, because
even though they got dealt this big loss at the Supreme Court last week,
they're sort of looking at the ruling as a win politically. Namely, if
we look at how the Supreme Court abortion ruling from last year sort of,
you know, reinvigorated some of those you know, white liberal elites in you
know, important states in the midterm elections that allow the Democrats to hold the
Senate and minimize their losses in the House. They're saying that this ruling should
again especially energize those young voters heading into the next cycle. So politically,
even though it's a policy loss, this could be a win for President Biden
once ballots are cast in twenty twenty four. Now, from a specific policy
angle, and you cited the Higher Education Act already, there have been a
couple of new steps that were announced by the Education Secretary Miguel Cardona and President
Biden himself last week after that ruling was handed down. The first sort of
proponent of this of this phase two plan we'll call it, is what we
call IDRS, income based deferral Programs which allow certain borrowers, depending on how
much money they're making, to essentially pay a zero dollar minimum payment on their
loans and not be preferred to creditors. Now, right now, because of
the law, the Higher Education Act, again, Secretary Cardona has unilateral authority
to set an income level for that zero dollar payment. Right now, that
salary is I want to say, thirty three thousand dollars a year, but
it does leave the door open for him raising that threshold so that more people
could potentially not be paying anything per month for their student loans. Now,
the important part about this plan comes, you know, two decades down the
line. Anyone who's enrolled in the program at at the end of that twenty
year period, they had the remainder of their debt forgiven. So this is
a potential move that could see upwards of you know, the four hundred billion
dollars President Biden's original debt forgiveness, you know, wipe off a table.
That number could be even higher depending on how many students enroll into this program
over the next you know, five, ten, twenty years or so.
So again, politically, even though this was a policy loss for the Biden
White House, the people that I'm talking to who are keyed in on the
education insider to talk with the administration. Believe that this could invigorate the base
and politically could be a win for the president. And folks should go read
your story over at the Examiner on this, because you you dive into it.
I also would just want to ask the President said he always thought the
Heroes Acts as a post nine to eleven law that they used to justify conditioning,
you know, student loan forgiveness up to twenty thousand dollars for certain borrowers.
He always said, He said, he always thought that would be a
faster, a faster tactic to provide relief to borrowers and to graduates. But
I mean that's actually always been questionable too. I guess I'm curious if you
had a sense that they were surprised by this ruling, or that, you
know, some people, especially people with tens of thousands of dollars on the
line, might have a really cynical approach to this. He was playing with
their futures and their livelihoods and their bank accounts. I was sort of playing
politics with them, and kind of knew that this was going to get struck
down so why didn't he try something else first? How are they dealing with
those issues? And what's your sense of how they've sort of thought about that
even from the beginning when they went to the drawing board and figured out how
to do this. Well, I think those two statements aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.
Emily, I do think that this was the most expedient way that the
President could have extended relief because of how the Hero's Act is structured. Of
course, this second plan, too, whatever we're calling it, there is
a negotiated rulemaking process which could take months even potentially years to implement, as
opposed to the executive authority granted by the Heroes Act. So that would have
had it not been challenging court, which obviously it was, extended that relief
merely immediately. We're talking, you know, essentially six months from when President
announced it, and you know, around the summer of twenty twenty two up
until you know, when people would be seeing that debt come off the books.
So I don't think it's necessarily fair to say that President Biden was giving
these people false hope. This was and again, even at the time when
the President announced this action, it was viewed as legally dubious, but it's
certainly if it would have been allowed to stand, would have been the fastest
way to get people money. Essentially, Now when it comes to the Heroes
Acts again, and I think I sort of touched on this before, this
is a law that grants the Secretary of Education unilateral authority to oversee how these
loans are structured. He can't go in and wipe off debt that's off the
books, but he can structure the programs so that once the normal or excuse
me, the negotiated rulemaking process plays out, that is locked in stone,
and it would not be challenged or would not be able to be challenged legally
by opponents of the plan. So I guess politically, and again this is
coming from conversations I'm having with you know, folks at the DNC, with
Biden campaign officials. Politically, they're trying to make the case that we weren't
trying to prey on people's hopes heading into the midterms. We viewed this as
the fastest option, but now we're going to our backup plan, which is
the safest option, And even though it doesn't extend as much relief in the
immediate future, as you step one might have. We're sure that this will
stand and that you know, we won't be receiving another loss at the Supreme
Court or at a lower court in the near future. Again, because of
how far we are out from the general election, I think people will sort
of forget about the immediate pain. And when I say people, I'm talking
of course about the Democratic base. I don't think necessarily Republicans or Conservatives will
have their opinions flipped on this right now. So any sting that the Democrat
voters are currently feeling should probably be alleviated by the time the general election swings
around, if not the primaries early next year. I'm kind of fascinated by
the internal dynamics of the White House in some ways. They remind me of
what was happening in the Trump administration, where you had this push poll between
the establishment, people who are aligned more with the establishment, people who are
aligned more with the conservative activist base, and you can, I mean,
I guess if from the outside sent some of that. In the Biden administration,
you have people who are you know, richetty, people who are aligned
more with a democratic establishment. But I've heard, you know, on student
loan debt. I've heard on Bidenomics. I've heard actually on China too,
that there's a real push and poll kind of ideologically playing out behind closed tours.
And you see some of that also, I think just in the policies
themselves. So is there am I right? You know that he has people
that are kind of in both camps, pushing in both directions. The fact
that he did student loan debt in and of itself, I think it's a
real win for the activist base. But is that a correct assessment of those
dynamics. Is that happening to at least to some extent behind closed doors.
Yeah, that's certainly happening on the economic issues, Emily, I think on
China, and I'll just be quick on this, but because you brought it
up, I would say that's the one area where there's real by partisan accord
and you know, trying to address the looming threat coming from Beijing. It
might not be you know, a full overlap then diagram when it comes to
actual policy, but on its space, this is really the only area where
we're seeing collaboration between the White House, Republicans on the hill and Democrats on
the hill. I think a lot of that is due to the way that
converse by Gallagher from Wisconsin is sort of running that China Select Committee. But
that's enough about that. And when it comes to economics, and I mean
again, in the Trump administration, President Trump was was certainly the outsider.
He was, you know, far to the right of the Republican establishment,
and we've sort of had the reverse happened in this administration. You mentioned Steve
Richetti. I mean, I'm just looking at President Biden himself. I mean,
I don't know if there's anyone who's been more synonymous with the Democratic establishment
over the past five decades than you know, senator turned Vice president turned President
Biden himself. And again, I think this all goes back to, you
know, where is the new core of the Democratic electorate. It's it's much
to the left of where President Biden has spent the majority of his political career.
So that's certainly a poll that they're feeling, but it's you know,
one that's sort of hampering in the actual policy making because again, you know,
this is a split Congress. The Democrats have a you know, the
most narrow of narrow majorities. When it comes to Vice President Harris having to
break a record number of votes in the Senate in her role as as as
you know, President of the Senate. But like, this is not an
issue that's going to go away. And again, I think it's one that's
going to hamper President Biden even more in a potential second term because a he'll
be viewed as a lame duck by the Republicans and they're not going to want
to reach across the aisle and work on anything. And b because they're going
to have these activists say, Okay, well, we've only got four more
years. Do we need to get everything we can while we've got the opportunity.
And it could hinder some of those more center moderate policies that President Biden
has backed really his entire career. Every year, children are trafficked around the
world. And now there's a new movie aimed at raising awareness to this often
unseen horror. It's called Sound of Freedom from Angel's Studios. Sound of Freedom
is based on a true story. It shines a light on even the darkest
of places. After rescuing a young boy from ruthless child traffickers, a federal
agent learns the boy's sister is still captive and decides to embark on a dangerous
mission to save her. With time running out, he quits his job and
journeys deep into the Colombian jungle, putting his life on the line to free
her from a fate worse than death. Starring Jim Cavizo, the actor renowned
for his Unforgettable portrayal of Jesus and the Passion, and Academy Award winner Mira
Sorvino, the film is directed by Alajandra Monteverde. It's rated PG thirteen.
Again It's based on a true story and it will be theatrically released in the
US on July fourth, twenty twenty three. You can buy your tickets online.
New theaters are being added daily, so check out the website for current
information and that is angel dot com, slash Freedom and listen. I've seen
the trailer. Check out the trailer. I think you're gonna want to go
see this film, especially in theaters. Just a fascinating glimpse at again,
something that is a true story. It explores these themes of human trafficking,
bravery, and justice. By supporting the movie, you contribute to raising awareness
and propelling a movement to save children around the world. It's also a pay
it Forward initiative. That's a concept where generous individuals provide free tickets for others
to see the film. If you want to pay it forward so that they
can pack the theaters the week of July fourth, you can do so once
again at angel dot com slash Freedom. And if the price of a ticket
is keeping you from going, generous fans have paid it forward tens of thousands
of free tickets worth of money, so you can you can see the film
opening week and you can get a free ticket also at angel dot com slash
Free Tickets help spread that message worldwide. Sound of Freedom is coming to theaters
July fourth, so you can buy your tickets today to reserve a spot opening
week, and the more theaters are sold out, the more awareness is raised
on this issue that so often does go unnoticed. Find a theater near you
by visiting angel dot com slash freedom. Get your tickets today at that same
website once again. That's angel dot com slash Freedom. Now for the Cocaine
and Mistress portion of our conversation, which I say, as I say,
you know, sort of laughing, but I think you've rightfully covered this as
more serious than it probably sounds at first plush. In fact, you have
a really good story in something a lot of people in the legacy media,
the left media, have ignored and have I think allowed the Biden White House
not to really talk about it at all, which is Joe Biden's seventh grandchild.
I want to start there and then we can move to the cocaine portion.
What on earth is going on with that situation? It seems from the
outside like incredibly sad. I know your reporter, and so you're focused on
the facts of the situation. What are those facts right now? Where it
stands well, I mean, this is an incredibly sad story. We hear
a lot about President Biden as being a family man, and you know that's
why Hunter Biden and Natalie Biden and his other grandchildren oftentimes a company. I'm
on these you know, lavish trips overseas and to Camp David or their home
and rehobic on the weekends. But it's one that really sort of is a
glaring hole in that record, and it's one that obviously former President Trump and
a number of the Republican primary presidential candidates are are trying to, you know,
to Widen at the moment. But I just can't understand why the President
won't recognize this young girl from Arkansas as a legitimate grandchild. Of course,
she was you know, born out of wedlock. Hunter Biden is married to
his second wife now and the woman who he had a relationship with back in
twenty nineteen, London Roberts, you know, was down in Arkansas, and
she's I think for her unfortunately, been getting some legal advice and you know,
support from folks who are I think the best way to put them would
be, like you know, Maga adherence. Garrett Sigler, who of course
used to work in the Trump White House, was called as a as a
key witness in the latest you know, not paternity suit but the latest child
support suit that Hunter Biden London Roberts just just settled, I think two weeks
ago. But again, this is one that no one in the White House
is really asking about. The paternity test has come back. We know Hunter
Biden is the father of this child, we know he's paying her child support,
and that the mother has dropped forbid to have her daughter adopt Biden as
her last name. But again, like I we criticized former President Trump for
claiming to be you know, pro family values while he obviously had a long
litany of affairs. I don't understand why President Biden hasn't recognized this young girl
as his granddaughter. It's not one that we really have any answers on,
and I think it's a story that's really only going to pick up steam and
be hammered not only by you know, Republican candidates, but of course be
picked out by the mainstream media the closer we get to twenty twenty four.
Obviously there's a lot of intrigue around the cocaine story, which continues to evolve
and in ways that seemed to be worse and worse for this White House.
You know, shortly after they confirmed that they found a cocaine in the found
a small bag of cocaine in the West Wing on Sunday, we learned the
president. I guess we'd already known the President was gone from Friday until I
believe Wednesday. Is that right? They talked he got back in town on
Tuesday for the Tuesday celebration. Yes, okay, And so then you have
a law enforcement official talking to Dan Littmann at Politico saying it's very unlikely that
we'll ever find who did this because it's a highly trafficked area and you know,
you have tourists potentially coming in and out of that area. But it
seems like, actually we know that it's it's more specific and it's it's probably
not a highly trafficked area. But maybe maybe I've misread something where I'm confusing
boomers for like confirmed fact. What do we know about this cocaine right now?
Well, what we know is that this bag was discovered in the West
Executive Entryway. That's for those who are familiar with the geography of the White
House, not a public entrance. It's located east of Tubble Driveway, where
you see a number of you know, foreign dignitaries deriving for bilateral meetings.
It's right where everyone shoots their live shots looking at the White House, you
know, facing southwest. So that's probably where you're not far from where you're
standing right now as you talk to us. Yeah, No, it's it's
about it's about two hundred feet where I am right now, Um, and
it is not a highly trafficked area. This, you know, was sort
of an about face from the Secret Service because originally we had heard it had
basically been picked up at you know, one of those um you know,
trays for your keys or your phone, at an X ray machine at a
public entrance, which again those are highly traffic It's not only media and staffers
who use those, but people who come in on tours, people who come
in for meetings with a variety of White House officials from the lowest level all
the way up to the cabinet level. So there's only a select number of
people who really use that entrance. It's operated by Secret Service, it's you
know, it's it's utilized by White House staff and of course those visiting for
dignitaries. We haven't had any visiting dignitaries except for actually, I guess i
Ida, the Prime Minister of Sweden this year, so it's possible that you
know, this is this is due to their team. But again it looks
like, you know, it's got to be someone in the White House or
someone who uses that entrance you know, quite frequently. And I'm not trying
to speculate here, but because this criticism is out, there's a number of
you know, presidential candidates Republican lawmakers who have suggested, you know, is
this hunter Biden's bag if we caame essentially, and I think this is an
issue that's not going to go away. It's one that according to our good
friend Dan Littman, you know, the Secret Service probably isn't going to release
a name of who is responsible for the bag, but it's one that you
know is clearly going to hamper President Biden. It's one that has been asked
about in the briefing room and on an Air Force one for the last three
or four briefing since it was discovered. And it's one that their response,
you know, we're parking back to those fifteen called plays earlier in this interview.
It's one that getting the hatch Act explanation for, and it's you know,
it has nothing to do with the election. But again, because President
Trump is one of the people making these critiques or asking if it's Hunter Biden
the bag, they're using that to shield themselves on a question that I don't
really think they want to give an answer on. Can you explain the hatch
Ack saying a little bit more because I've heard that a lot and I haven't
like fully to open into it. When when they're sort of using the hatch
Act in that way, what does that mean here, Well, essentially,
the Hatch Act would prevent any White House official other than the President who is
not subject to the law from using their official position, meaning speaking from the
White House briefing room, speaking in front of any West Wing insignia or presidential
emblems, from you know, lobbying for or against any candidate. In particular,
Karine Jean Pierre uses it to avoid most questions that we have about Republican
bobmakers, whether they are sitting or running for office right now. And it's
also one that we really saw it from rust into the four front of the
conversation. During the previous administration, Kaylee mcinanny faced a number of hattacked you
know, inquiries regarding her rhetoric in the briefing room. And I think it's
one that the Biden team has made a calculated decision and said, look,
we're being cautious, We're trying to restore, you know, the rightful rule
of law essentially to this White House, and they're using they're using it as
a shield. The Biden administration pledged transparency when they first entered office, and
I think this is an issue that not only folks on the right, but
in the mainstream media. We're also starting to take issue with because at the
end of the day, why are we having press briefings, Why are we
having press gaggles? If the top ranking officials at the White House aren't actually
going to answer questions, it's a disservice to journalism at large. But it's
also a disservice to you know, American voters who care about these issues.
And when we can talk all we want about how the political life and the
policy life is separated here in Washington, you see, but we all know
that's not true. Everything is political in this day and age. And it's
a shame that this White House isn't being more forthcoming with these answers, which
you know don't necessarily impact policy, but I do think would impact how they
look at President Biden as a man of character and again just as someone who
they feel comfortable voting for or again. And there are a couple of are
there are many reasons for this that you could imagine, but a couple of
serious ones. I want to ask you about. One. People have speculated
that Hunter Biden's recent settlement could be affected if he is personally implicated in this,
and you know, members of the Biden family, Naomi Biden, Hunter
Biden whose rumor drew up, and living at the White House. But I
think it's confirmed that Naomi Biden and her new husband live at the White House.
There are any number people who aren't Hunter Biden who could be responsible for
this, But on the chance that it is Hunter Biden's, it's probably not
the worst chance in the world, but that possibility, it seems like that
could actually have implications for his recent settlement. The other thing I can think
of is, just in May, was it that Jake Sullivan, national Security
Advisor, his house was broken into? He had twenty four hour security essentially
at his house, a drunk man breaks in and isn't caught until he's in
the house, And so potentially this is a problem of security failures that the
White House would have to answer for, from mismanagement and secret Service, for
missmanagement at the White House itself. What do you make of, you know,
for whatever you know particular reasons there might be and maybe those potentialities in
particular, what do you make of why the White House might not want to
talk about this if it's essentially just a dimebag, but some you know,
tourist or you know, random White House staffer left behind. What could really
be going on here? Well, on its face, I think, you
know, there's a very simple answer for why they don't want to talk about
this, and it's because it takes away from the President's Biden I'm explosi right,
he's in campaign mode. He doesn't want to talk about scandals involving members
of his family or White House staff or even just you know, friends or
family who are visiting the White House grounds. He wants to talk about,
you know, what he wants to do for the economy moving forward. Now,
when it comes to Hunter Biden, and I'm not a legal expert by
any means, I don't think this would complicate his plea deal. Of course,
that's for the tax broad charges. But what this could complicate is his
path moving forward with the felony gun charge. Now again, Hunter Biden pledged
guilty only to the tax charges, not the gun charge. I'm not exactly
sure what happens moving forward, but I would have to imagine that potentially,
you know, bringing drugs onto federal browns would complicate that process, and it
might even pull that path out from under him entirely. When it comes to
Jake Stullivan and the Secret Service. This is an investigation that is still being
investigated. Excuse me, a situation that is still being investigated, and it's
one that I think sort of belies the failings of law enforcement here in DC.
Now. I don't think it was that long ago when on January sixth
there was some serious confusion with Capitol Police, with Secret Service, you know,
with the National Guard, about how to react to these types of situations.
And I think, you know, the Secret Service being the monolith that
it is, there's there are thousands of officers and agents operating in DC every
day, both at the White House and other federal buildings, but also,
like you mentioned, at the home, at the homes of some of these
political VIPs. This is a serious failing, especially given the sort of you
know, vitriolic atmosphere that we find ourselves in. I think it was just
last week when one of the January sixth defendants was arrested outside of President Obama's
home here in Washington, DC. And again, I don't really necessarily have
a policy outlook for this, but I think it's one that should be concerning
two Americans of all political stripes. I don't really see us moving forward as
a country, either to the left or to the right until we can sort
of tone down this rhetoric and these threats of violence, because they're only worsening
the situation each one that comes up. The Watchdolt on Wall Street podcast with
Chris Markowski every day Chris helps unpack the connection between politics and the economy and
how it affects your wallet. Is America not number one anymore? Sometimes it
takes admitting we have a problem to'll be able to fix it. Between parental
rights over their children or the government paying big tech for your private info,
how can we right our wrongs to go back to being the shiny city on
the hill. Whether it's happening in DC or down on Wall Street, it's
affecting you financially. Be informed. Check out the Watchdot on Wall Street podcast
with Chris Markowski on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcast.
But one more question and then I'll let you get out of the rain,
because again, if you could see data actually unfolded an umbrella, like halfway
through this interview, because he's outside of the White House, he's waiting on
the bridge. Today's briefing, I would be so kindly standing in the rain
and talking to us for Federalist Radio Hour. But my last question is really
simple a Christian and that's just what has it been like to cover this White
House? You've covered previous white Houses? And I don't think we've checked in
with you since the Biden White House, since you've had a lot of time
covering the Biden White House. What's it like? What's this house White House
like? How does it compare to others, well, other than the past,
you know, a few weeks or so, I would say it's been
wholly boring. And that might sound silly to some of the folks back home,
but this administration is incredibly tight lit, especially when you look at how
they stack up against the Trump administration. It's not only our policy level staff
or is not willing to talk to the media, but even when we talk
to folks about new programs that they're rolling out, all of that is on
background. None of that is on the record necessarily, and that's a problem
for outlets like the Associated Press. Certainly not someone that we would say falls
into the conservative you know, meet you can, they're not allowed to use
any background sources. They have to quote folks on the record. So again,
when one of the most storied media institutions in the country is not able
to cover policy announcements as they come out because again the administration behind those policies
aren't willing to back up those words with names and faces. I think that's
a real problem. So when I say it's boring, I don't necessarily mean
that we're not doing our jobs or that, you know, things aren't happening
here in Washington. It's just that the flow of information has really, you
know, sort of slowed down to a trickle. And again when it comes
to informing the electorate, when it comes to giving voters ample opportunity and all
of the information that they need to make an educated decision at the voting booth,
that's a real problem and I hope it's one that changes in this next
year of of the Biden administration. Are you still hosting Joint Session? You
know, I am. We're on a hiatus right now, but you can
check us out at Joint Protession pot And we're definitely going to be picking up
for twenty twenty four part of the plod because my co host is having a
baby and I Coore is getting married in September, so we got a lot
of things going on. But for all the stands the pod. You can
catch us back in time for the election next year. Nothing like your early
thirties. Well yeah, check out joint Session. He'll, like, like
day Tech said, they'll be back for things kicking up in the election.
But you also absolutely should follow his work at the Washington Examiner. You can
follow him on Twitter, at Talk radio as same at Instagram and talk as
t oc like day Talk. Very clever, Christian, Thank you as always
for joining the show. No problem, Emily. Thanks again. Of course
we'll let you get to the briefing. I'm Emily, just says a culture
editor here at Federalists. You've been listening to another edition of Federalist Radio Hour.
We'll be back soon with more. Until then, the lovers of freedom
and anxious for the fray heard a famous a reason and then I faint it away.