Speaker 1: Today's presenting sponsor is Simply Safe Home Security. We all
Speaker 1: promise to digital detox on August vacation. I don't, but
Speaker 1: you can't actually unplug if you're anxiously checking your security
Speaker 1: camera feeds when you're poolside. I mean that's a little
Speaker 1: different than digital dtalks on Twitter. Simply Save once you
Speaker 1: put the phone down, because you know live agents are
Speaker 1: helping to watch the perimeter. Well that's nice. Unlike traditional
Speaker 1: security systems that only alert you after a break in
Speaker 1: is already underway. Simply Safe it's designed to help stop
Speaker 1: intruders before they get inside. Smart AI powered outdoor cameras
Speaker 1: detect suspicious activity at the perimeter and alert live US
Speaker 1: based agents to step in. Simply Save agents assess the
Speaker 1: threat intervened through the outdoor camera to scare off trespassers,
Speaker 1: and call for nine to one to one dispatch. Our CEO,
Speaker 1: Sinda recently had a Simply Safe installed in her home.
Speaker 1: She actually installed it herself. It was so easy and
Speaker 1: now she's pretty happy with it. Installation was quick and easy,
Speaker 1: and all the components have work smoothly. The app's easy
Speaker 1: to use and gives her total peace of mind. To
Speaker 1: say who's dropping by, or if you want, you can
Speaker 1: easily chat with visitors through the camera even when you're away.
Speaker 1: Simply Safe it's been protecting your world for twenty years.
Speaker 1: Celebrate their anniversary with us and save sixty percent on
Speaker 1: your new simply Safe system at simplysafe dot com slash crooked.
Speaker 1: That's sixty percent off at simplysafe dot com slash crooked.
Speaker 1: Plus when you order, write in our show name in
Speaker 1: the how did you hear about a survey to let
Speaker 1: them know we sent you. Don't forget there's no safe
Speaker 1: like simply Safe.
Speaker 2: Every big story starts with a question, why did this happen,
Speaker 2: Who's behind it?
Speaker 3: And what happens next?
Speaker 1: That's three questions.
Speaker 2: I'm Considered This from NPR. They answer those questions every
Speaker 2: weekday by going beyond the headlines with the reporting, contacts
Speaker 2: and analysis that help you make sense of the biggest
Speaker 2: story of the day. The news doesn't stop it.
Speaker 3: What happened? Get the full story.
Speaker 2: Listen to Consider This from NPR wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 1: Welcome to pot Dave America. I'm John Faber, I'm John Lennont,
Speaker 1: I'm Toddy Etur. On today's show, we'll talk about Trump
Speaker 1: declaring economic d Day against Iran, but also maybe against
Speaker 1: Canada and the American people. We'll also cover jd Vance
Speaker 1: as a return to the campaign trail, complete with mentions
Speaker 1: of his papaw Sharia law and his friendship with Susan Collins.
Speaker 1: We got a quick midterm update that includes the weird
Speaker 1: meeting between Hakeem Jeffreys and Jared Kushner. The long awaited
Speaker 1: Duffy Family reality show finally hits the airwaves. I've been
Speaker 1: desperate for this to pop up on YouTube, as have
Speaker 1: most Americans.
Speaker 4: Need someone to watch for Assault Lake comes back, and.
Speaker 1: Later you'll hear my interview with Congressman Seth Moulton, who
Speaker 1: faces off against Senator at Markey next week in the
Speaker 1: last big primary contest before the midterms. But first we
Speaker 1: have some big news. The newest podcast joining the Crooked
Speaker 1: media family is called Still Counting, hosted by Nate Silver,
Speaker 1: Claire Malone, and Galen Druk. You might remember this crew
Speaker 1: from the five thirty eight pod, which we always thought
Speaker 1: was one of the smartest, most entertaining shows about politics
Speaker 1: out there before five thirty eight was shut down by
Speaker 1: the corporate media last year.
Speaker 5: But some big corporate mouse.
Speaker 1: Who will remain nameless, right but now, nay Claire and
Speaker 1: Galen wanted to get back on the air ahead of
Speaker 1: the midterms, and we are thrilled that they've chosen Crooked
Speaker 1: as their new home.
Speaker 3: Damn right.
Speaker 1: So each week on the pod, they're going to dig
Speaker 1: into the latest in politics and polling to break down
Speaker 1: what's happening and why. But they're also going to cover
Speaker 1: everything from elections to betting markets to AI with their
Speaker 1: trademark rigorous analysis and plenty of hot takes. You can
Speaker 1: hear the trailer right now by subscribing to Still Counting
Speaker 1: wherever you get your podcasts and on YouTube at Still
Speaker 1: Counting Podcast.
Speaker 5: Great for the audience, huge get for us, huge kid.
Speaker 2: I look, Dan's Pollarcoaster is fantastic and I will continue
Speaker 2: to listen to it all the time. But I need
Speaker 2: a little more of a polling junkie fix. Wow, is
Speaker 2: still Counting in my life? I just need more.
Speaker 3: I thought it was going to be, but there it
Speaker 3: was a yes, it was literally exactly.
Speaker 4: This is pod is like is good. It's basically for
Speaker 4: for for pat America. Host is like selling drugs outs
Speaker 4: out of school, you know, the first hits free thing.
Speaker 1: Tell me I like keeping Dan on his toes and
Speaker 1: be a little Dan.
Speaker 5: Hey, hey, hey, Dan, you know, prove us wrong. Prove
Speaker 5: us wrong.
Speaker 1: Dan.
Speaker 5: All right, it's not it's not. It's not a no,
Speaker 5: but it's not a yes.
Speaker 4: We're not we're not We're not a full hard yes
Speaker 4: on Dan.
Speaker 1: Despite the yes, we Dan merge that's everywhere. New episodes
Speaker 1: have still kind of drop. September ninth, Uh and uh yeah,
Speaker 1: we're very excited to have subscribe and Galen subscribe right away,
Speaker 1: joining the fam. All right, let's start here with the news.
Speaker 1: Donald Trump continues to bankrupt America by waging war against
Speaker 1: two of our greatest adversaries, Iran and Canada. We'll get
Speaker 1: to that in a second, but first we should talk
Speaker 1: about breaking news, but a third war. Trump is losing
Speaker 1: against another longtime adversary he's been personally obsessed with for years.
Speaker 1: Let's listen.
Speaker 6: Let's call it the fat drug. The fat drug fat
Speaker 6: for fat people.
Speaker 7: Anybody uses the table, don't ask.
Speaker 1: And a friend of mine who's very fat told.
Speaker 6: Me, and I want to tell you, you know, he
Speaker 6: could be a famous guy. He's begging me not to
Speaker 6: release his day.
Speaker 1: He's a very highly neurotic, very fat sort of a
Speaker 1: fat slab. I would drum.
Speaker 4: I bought the fat drug. I said, I didn't know
Speaker 4: you used it because.
Speaker 5: It's not working and the governor is a big fat slab. Jesus,
Speaker 5: we can't do that, sir.
Speaker 1: You can't call JB.
Speaker 5: Pritzk or a fat pig. Please.
Speaker 1: You know some people say never use the fat word,
Speaker 1: and I know I would never call anybody fed.
Speaker 7: I have my own problems.
Speaker 1: Well he sure does, because here's Sunday's headline from the
Speaker 1: Washington Post. Doctor say Trump's weight post as a significant
Speaker 1: health risk. The president has gained about twenty pounds since
Speaker 1: his campaign, according to his statements and those of AIDS. SO.
Speaker 1: Back in June, the White House had to publicly refute
Speaker 1: speculation that Trump was on an experimental new weight loss
Speaker 1: drug after stat News reported that a seventy nine year
Speaker 1: old man with government connections got early access to the drugs.
Speaker 1: I guess the White House was telling the truth.
Speaker 4: Yes, it turns out that Trump is not like reckless
Speaker 4: gay guys in West Hollywood buying compound versions of this
Speaker 4: drug from China.
Speaker 1: Is that happening, I think so?
Speaker 2: I just want to say for the record that Favor
Speaker 2: and I wanted to lead with Canada and Love it
Speaker 2: locked the door of our production meeting until we agreed
Speaker 2: to start with the GLPS.
Speaker 1: I did to start with fat, I said, deserve fat dessert.
Speaker 4: Hey it's August, let's have desert for dinner, all right?
Speaker 1: The cakes for the fun clearly has been.
Speaker 5: Yeah, he's well, he's well called.
Speaker 4: I love the moments in those videos where he hesitates
Speaker 4: where he goes and this person they're fat.
Speaker 1: I want you to know, I uh put that super
Speaker 1: cuts together myself. There was like ten more clips of
Speaker 1: him just saying fat, fat slob. He tells the story
Speaker 1: about the friend like fifty times.
Speaker 4: One other thing to note too, is this is the
Speaker 4: this is the figures that they're telling us. I feel
Speaker 4: like they've been slowly trying to get the number back
Speaker 4: to a real number, so he may not have gained
Speaker 4: as much as they're saying. On the other hand, based
Speaker 4: on the weight and height they've released, his BMI is
Speaker 4: twenty nine point seven, which means if his weight was
Speaker 4: one pound more, he would be technically obese, which I'm
Speaker 4: sure he would not like. And so for all we know,
Speaker 4: they've kind of brought that number down a pound or two.
Speaker 2: Yeah, they may have been telling the truth about him
Speaker 2: not being on this experimental GLP one, or it could
Speaker 2: just be eaten through it.
Speaker 3: It has happened before through it power.
Speaker 2: My favorite part of these stories though, is that as
Speaker 2: they track his weight, they cite when he was arrested
Speaker 2: in Georgia. When he was booked, they released that he
Speaker 2: was six three two fifteen, which was John Elway's playing
Speaker 2: weight when he won two super Bowls in NFL MVP.
Speaker 1: Isn't it amazing by the way, well muscle is heavier.
Speaker 1: Isn't it amazing by the way that we're just kind
Speaker 1: of you can just say something like, oh, you remember
Speaker 1: when he was arrested in Georgia because of his mugshot
Speaker 1: because the president is a convicted criminal, but also gain
Speaker 1: twenty pounds since twenty twenty four is an eighty year
Speaker 1: old almost obese man. I don't know what even what
Speaker 1: to say. Oh, what's again? He's gonna turn over a
Speaker 1: new leaf right now?
Speaker 3: Yeah?
Speaker 1: Yeah, he's one to really he's one to really make
Speaker 1: a lot of resolutions and try to keep them.
Speaker 5: No, well done, Burger today, just the steamed fish.
Speaker 2: It was also their response to this story was to
Speaker 2: attack Joe Biden, who is currently recovering from cancer. So
Speaker 2: that's a classy move as always from the White House.
Speaker 2: Did you see the video of Trump's workout that was
Speaker 2: on Twitter over the weekend. No, it's actually really good. Yes,
Speaker 2: should roll this thing.
Speaker 8: Don't know?
Speaker 1: This is? This is? That is the clip I showed
Speaker 1: my choulders this morning when I was laughing, and I
Speaker 1: was like, it's like, why are you watching that? And
Speaker 1: I was like, it's a work thing. And He's like,
Speaker 1: what is it at work? And I was like, well,
Speaker 1: sometimes we watch clips of robots falling and then and
Speaker 1: then people laugh at them, and then we laugh at it,
Speaker 1: and then people watch us laugh at the videos. And
Speaker 1: Charlie's like, oh, I want to do that job.
Speaker 3: It's a good job.
Speaker 9: They can't.
Speaker 4: Kind of just a point of personal privilege about the
Speaker 4: Robot Olympiad that's going on the.
Speaker 1: World Humanoid Robot Games in Beijing.
Speaker 4: So they keep saying things like, oh, this is the
Speaker 4: fastest robot, this is the fastest robot, and it's like okay,
Speaker 4: but like, we have lots of robots that can go
Speaker 4: very fast already. I guess they just don't have human lengths.
Speaker 4: They have to have a human leg to them. Is
Speaker 4: that what makes it different?
Speaker 1: Yeah, like you're saying like you're saying, way way most.
Speaker 5: B Yeah, we got lots of fast ship.
Speaker 3: You know, I think it's a humanoid. The humanoid.
Speaker 5: Oh, it's got to be humanoid.
Speaker 1: I'm going to kill you.
Speaker 2: But there's also like weird dogs and ship getting preaded around.
Speaker 2: There's a guy riding a giant dog.
Speaker 5: Yeah, that one that was nightmare fuel.
Speaker 3: That's really bad.
Speaker 4: No, I think it's great that we should give them thumbs.
Speaker 4: And also that open eye have every once in a
Speaker 4: while is like.
Speaker 5: Yeah, we lost a couple. We think they're in the pacemakers.
Speaker 5: Now it's sorry everybody.
Speaker 4: We're gonna we've realized the air of our ways again
Speaker 4: and now we got up.
Speaker 5: We put up. Just here's the thing.
Speaker 4: We put a lock on the door, but the one
Speaker 4: of our guys fell in love with the robot and
Speaker 4: unlocked it, and so we got to figure out how
Speaker 4: to make them less sexually charming.
Speaker 3: But they're not sure how.
Speaker 4: To do that.
Speaker 1: But you know what, there's only so much we can
Speaker 1: do because China, right, right, yeah, then.
Speaker 3: The rest of the ones cut the China. You're doing
Speaker 3: karate kicks.
Speaker 2: They're drop kicking like six years old.
Speaker 1: Like, so, what do you want us to do if
Speaker 1: we have a few escape the sandbox? That's sorry, you
Speaker 1: gotta crack cracked a couple of eggs when I supposed
Speaker 1: to not I p o right, make an omelet anyway? Uh,
Speaker 1: there aren't. We do have some more consequential but no
Speaker 1: less absurd Trump stories. Soybean farmer Scott Bessant announced Operation
Speaker 1: Economic Outcast on Monday, a series of new sanctions against
Speaker 1: Iran and the threat of much larger sanctions down the
Speaker 1: road that he likened to the most significant military invasion
Speaker 1: of the twentieth century. But there seemed to be a
Speaker 1: bit of a gap between Besant's framing and the reality.
Speaker 1: Let's listen.
Speaker 10: In the Second World War, D Day mark the historic
Speaker 10: beginning of a campaign with our allies to target and
Speaker 10: drive the enemy from its positions, including those in third countries. Today,
Speaker 10: in that same spirit, we are launching an economic onslaught
Speaker 10: against Iran's financial connections around the globe.
Speaker 3: Around the globe.
Speaker 11: You described this as an economic D Day, but D
Speaker 11: Day wasn't a threat of an invasion in the US
Speaker 11: didn't give a timeline to Germany, So why not impose
Speaker 11: the sanctions today?
Speaker 10: Well, we are giving everyone the opportunity to remedy bad behavior.
Speaker 10: Why would I want to blow up the global financial system?
Speaker 3: Oh?
Speaker 5: Extraordinary sentence? Extraordinary sentence? Crazy?
Speaker 4: That is that? I like saw that as like, what
Speaker 4: what an absolute fucking doof?
Speaker 5: Because it's like, what, first.
Speaker 4: Of all, is that what you're threatening? Why are you
Speaker 4: the good you are? We're supposed to be the good guys. Yeah,
Speaker 4: and then also if you're suggesting that the thing you're
Speaker 4: going to impose is basically a global economic crisis, it
Speaker 4: does signal to the people you're threatening that you're deeply
Speaker 4: concerned about the risk you'd be taking, which you've consistently
Speaker 4: shown yourself willing to back off of when you get
Speaker 4: close to the line. Because they know that you can
Speaker 4: back off right before you go through your various threats.
Speaker 1: Those mulas must be terrified. Huh.
Speaker 2: Twenty five hundred Americans died on D Day, so you
Speaker 2: know some downsides that do. Yeah, the pissy kid ever
Speaker 2: calling That's why cost cup Essen calling this economic D
Speaker 2: Day is so funny because I cannot overstate how mundane
Speaker 2: this sanctions announcement actually was. This is just like stuff
Speaker 2: they roll out all the time. For example, they try
Speaker 2: to make it sound like they're sanctioning all these new sectors.
Speaker 2: So they mentioned gold in the aviation sector. But if
Speaker 2: you look at US sanctions over the years, we've been
Speaker 2: sanctioning gold the sort of gold industry since twenty eleven,
Speaker 2: and the aviation sectors in two thousand and eight. So
Speaker 2: this announcement today is not going to make the Iranian
Speaker 2: regime the RGC kind of give up.
Speaker 3: I think it's a lot of bluster, it's a lot
Speaker 3: of rhetoric.
Speaker 2: It's a lot of them trying to figure out what
Speaker 2: they do to get through the midterms. The scary thing
Speaker 2: is that I think the Axios report on the sanctions
Speaker 2: today mentioned that they're considering restarting the war after the
Speaker 2: midterms are over. So you'll love when the wars are
Speaker 2: timed with the midterms.
Speaker 1: That's always well in the blowing up of the globe.
Speaker 1: So I had to dig into this because basically there
Speaker 1: were two things today. There were like sanctions against sixty
Speaker 1: Iran linked people, entities, vessels that, like you said, are
Speaker 1: pretty mundane, very like a typical day all.
Speaker 3: The time, right.
Speaker 1: And then there's the threat of Major's sanctions that would
Speaker 1: blow up the global economic system, which is sanctioning any
Speaker 1: country that does business with Iran China, for example, which
Speaker 1: he would not take off the table, but would also
Speaker 1: not mention the.
Speaker 2: Only thing that would matter is secondary sanctions on China
Speaker 2: to a less India, maybe Russia, maybe Turkey. But there's
Speaker 2: no way that they're going to do a bunch of
Speaker 2: secondary sanctions on Chinese banks, for example, in advance of
Speaker 2: the shijin Ping visit, nor do I think they would
Speaker 2: do them period, because the Chinese will retaliate against us,
Speaker 2: then the Iranians will ittaliate against us, and then it'll
Speaker 2: be a big dust.
Speaker 1: Up again, which leads you back to love It's original point, right,
Speaker 1: which is so it's just bluster, or else if it's
Speaker 1: not bluster, it's blowing up the global economic financial system,
Speaker 1: which I guess they don't want to do until after
Speaker 1: the midterms, or maybe they'll just bomb after the midterms.
Speaker 4: Well, the other part of just the threat in Axios
Speaker 4: about how we're going to maybe resume the military campaign
Speaker 4: after the election, which, by the way, as I think
Speaker 4: in part like I hope it's not true. I hope
Speaker 4: they're doing politics with their own neo cons that they're
Speaker 4: trying to keep in line, because this is of they're
Speaker 4: not doing the retaliation that a lot of these people want.
Speaker 4: They're doing sort of mid tier. They're doing sort of
Speaker 4: these sort of threats of future economic sanctions. But if
Speaker 4: it is a real threat, and I assume Urn will
Speaker 4: have to take it as a real threat, then they
Speaker 4: are telling you in advance, hey, we should conflate economic
Speaker 4: activity with military activity. If you're thinking if Iran is
Speaker 4: going to potentially retaliate against economic sanctions with military force,
Speaker 4: one argument against it would be that it would be
Speaker 4: escalating the war.
Speaker 5: But the US is.
Speaker 4: Promising to escalate the war potentially after the election.
Speaker 5: Anyway.
Speaker 4: The other part of it too, so did it's just
Speaker 4: in the best in op ed reannounced all this in
Speaker 4: a written like like he asked a large language model
Speaker 4: to write like a Victorian with a head injury. It's
Speaker 4: just like over the top, ridiculous thing. But in any
Speaker 4: set refers to something called Pascal's Wager, and basically he says, uh, people.
Speaker 1: Working that was going to be triggering for you.
Speaker 4: People working with Ran should be careful because of Pascal's wager,
Speaker 4: which basically says, you can't know for sure if God
Speaker 4: is real, so act as if God is real, because
Speaker 4: if it is, boy, you'll wish you believed, which is,
Speaker 4: you know, philosophically confusing, but whatever. And so he seems
Speaker 4: to be suggesting that countries may want to do a
Speaker 4: deal with Iran because in the short term it's quite
Speaker 4: beneficial to them, but they should be careful that even
Speaker 4: though partnering with the US, per Besson's argument, has no
Speaker 4: benefits whatsoever, to the point where you can't even tell
Speaker 4: if the United States exists, we could exist, and if
Speaker 4: we do, boy will be mad.
Speaker 5: That's sort of what he's.
Speaker 4: That's sort of the position he's trying to direct, I guess,
Speaker 4: not just to by the way, also to Korea, to
Speaker 4: other countries that are desperate to try to figure out
Speaker 4: how to get out of this sort of view Blot.
Speaker 2: Someone who most recently cut a deal seemingly with the
Speaker 2: Iranians to avoid getting fired at all the time, Did
Speaker 2: you guys see that? Barry McCaffrey tweeted quote in my judgment,
Speaker 2: US armed forces have probably permanently lost access.
Speaker 1: To fifteen Persian golf bases.
Speaker 2: Iran now poised to control access to the Gulf States,
Speaker 2: US will have to negotiate new access in western Saudi Arabia, Israel,
Speaker 2: Southern Europe. It's like an entire recalibration of our charity
Speaker 2: architecture in the Middle East because we have lost this
Speaker 2: war just sort.
Speaker 1: Of by accident. And in case you're wondering how seriously
Speaker 1: the rest of the world and the markets took this,
Speaker 1: today oil went down two and a half percent, so
Speaker 1: it's crazy.
Speaker 3: I don't think.
Speaker 1: Anyone's too worried or take Scott Beston seriously. And it
Speaker 1: seems like with good reason. Pose of America is brought
Speaker 1: to you by Article. Article makes it effortless to build
Speaker 1: a home that lasts without the boutique markup. They're curated
Speaker 1: collections of mid century, coastal and scandy furniture are designed
Speaker 1: to mix and match perfectly, so you can create a cohesive,
Speaker 1: designer look that will stand the test of time. We
Speaker 1: got some great Article furniture here in the office we
Speaker 1: have for a while. They have. They got a nice couch,
Speaker 1: they got some chairs, very very sturdy, and it looks
Speaker 1: really good, looks fancy, even though looks even though it's
Speaker 1: very affordable. Article offers fast, affordable shipping across the US
Speaker 1: and Canada, with options for professional assembly. If you prefer
Speaker 1: a hands off experience, have a question, or need help
Speaker 1: with your design choices, Article's customer care team is available
Speaker 1: seven days a week, offering knowledgeable support and even free
Speaker 1: interior design services to help you get your home just right.
Speaker 1: With articles thirty day satisfaction guarantee, you can shop with
Speaker 1: confidence knowing that if you're not completely in love with
Speaker 1: your new furniture, you can easily return it. This peace
Speaker 1: of mind ensures you can invest in your home without hesitation.
Speaker 1: Articles offering our listeners fifty dollars off your first purchase
Speaker 1: of one hundred dollars or more. To claim, visit article
Speaker 1: dot com slash crooket and the discount will be automatically
Speaker 1: applied at checkout. That's article dot com slash crooked for
Speaker 1: fifty dollars off your first purchase of one hundred dollars
Speaker 1: or more. Podsave of America is brought to you by
Speaker 1: the Working Forests Initiative. The Working Forest Initiative is a
Speaker 1: coalition of forest products companies set out to establish and
Speaker 1: advance a common understanding of the broad range of environmental, economic,
Speaker 1: and societal benefits generated by working forests. At the heart
Speaker 1: of this coalition are working forest professionals whose mission is
Speaker 1: to keep America's working forests sustainable. Encompassing roles like gis analysts, biologists,
Speaker 1: hiring managers, and accountants, these teams ensure that more trees
Speaker 1: are planted than harvested for future generations. Planting is what
Speaker 1: makes forest sustainable, and replanting generations of trees ensures continued
Speaker 1: critical role working forests play in the fight against climate change.
Speaker 1: That's what the Working Force Initiative is all about. As
Speaker 1: managers of working forces across the US, they're led by
Speaker 1: a single guiding principle to plant more trees than they harvest.
Speaker 1: More than one billion trees are planted in working forests
Speaker 1: each year, and less than two percent of the land
Speaker 1: is harvested. Through modern sustainable management methods, working forests have
Speaker 1: become an integral part of the effort to mitigate the
Speaker 1: most harmful impacts of wildfires and ultimately reduce wildfire risk.
Speaker 1: More broadly, learn more about what America's working forests are
Speaker 1: doing for all of us at Workingforcets Initiative dot com.
Speaker 1: So the Trump administration did save the more serious action
Speaker 1: for the far more dangerous adversary, Canada. The President has
Speaker 1: announced fifty percent tariffs on all Canadian cars, trucks, autoparts,
Speaker 1: and deal starting January first, again after the midterms, because
Speaker 1: he believes the country has been quote ripping off the
Speaker 1: United States for years. He also announced that quote Canada
Speaker 1: will be treated like a state no longer, and threatened
Speaker 1: quote someone should get these clowns to fall in line
Speaker 1: or the consequences for Canada will be far worse. This
Speaker 1: all comes after trade negotiations with our once closest ally
Speaker 1: fell apart Friday night, which led to Trump slapping fifty
Speaker 1: percent tariffs on twenty billion dollars of Canadian exports. Prime
Speaker 1: Minister Mark Karney's response was that the US attacked his
Speaker 1: country and is now at war with Canada. He promised
Speaker 1: to retaliate dollar for dollar. On September eighth, Jade Vance
Speaker 1: was asked by a reporter in Maine on Monday what
Speaker 1: he'd say to Americans worried about the new tariffs. And
Speaker 1: here's what Van said.
Speaker 9: We have to remember, Canada is a state, s all right,
Speaker 9: Freudian slid that was actually an accident. Canada is a
Speaker 9: country that has underinvested in its military that quite literally
Speaker 9: would get invaded by a foreign country were it not
Speaker 9: for the umbrella of protection provided by the United States
Speaker 9: of America.
Speaker 1: You think you got that joke from Rubio the big
Speaker 1: the jokes during the administration that.
Speaker 3: Was so canned Freudian slip.
Speaker 5: Canada is a country not it's really suck.
Speaker 4: It's the like politics can be confusing and complicated. The president,
Speaker 4: someone who comes out of a presdential campaign, usually doesn't
Speaker 4: make you uncomfortable every single second you see him on screen,
Speaker 4: just every time he is speaking, you're just like a
Speaker 4: little bit, I'm just uncomfortable.
Speaker 3: Uncomfortable.
Speaker 1: Four your weapon unleashed. They finally unleased JD events in
Speaker 1: the campaign trail again.
Speaker 5: Let JDBJD. They wrote on a napkin.
Speaker 1: So for reference, Canada is our second biggest trading partner,
Speaker 1: which means a lot more products are about to become
Speaker 1: a lot more expensive for Americans and Canadians. Anyone care
Speaker 1: to explain why the president may have just blow up
Speaker 1: the relationship with our closest ally and made life more
Speaker 1: expensive for everyone.
Speaker 3: I can try.
Speaker 2: If Trump is mad that Canada has been rivving us
Speaker 2: off for years, he is mad at his own team's
Speaker 2: deal that they cut the USMCA.
Speaker 3: So that's what we're operating under.
Speaker 2: I've heard a couple of different theories for why the
Speaker 2: talks blew up. The first theory you hear is that
Speaker 2: the US try to insert some eleventh hour provisions to
Speaker 2: the deal that were just a bridge too far for
Speaker 2: Mark Karney, the Prime Minister. Some of the specifically, it's
Speaker 2: like they wanted to exclude medium like trucks from the
Speaker 2: reduction in tariffs the US did, which would have made
Speaker 2: it unprofitable to produce like the four f one fifty
Speaker 2: in Canada. The deal could have weakened some French language
Speaker 2: protections that.
Speaker 3: Are very important in Quebec.
Speaker 2: Listen, thing, this is like a third rail, like you
Speaker 2: do not fuck with this stuff.
Speaker 1: But also why did we ask for that?
Speaker 4: It's not of our fucking business with the by language,
Speaker 4: the bilingual labels.
Speaker 2: I'm sure like certain companies hate having to print stuff
Speaker 2: in French on the side of a pill bottle. Look,
Speaker 2: I know it's stupid.
Speaker 4: It's that if you want to sell in Quebec, you
Speaker 4: got to put in the French.
Speaker 2: You have to And if Carney messes around with this,
Speaker 2: Quebec will seceed from Canada.
Speaker 3: So it's a big deal.
Speaker 2: And then there were some provisions that would have repeated
Speaker 2: Canada's ability to cut trade deals with other countries. I
Speaker 2: don't really understand that one. There's also a kind of
Speaker 2: a personnel argument that you hear.
Speaker 1: There's also the big one was also they wanted exclusive access.
Speaker 1: We wanted exclusive access to their critical minerals.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Carney was like, Canada would never give that to anyone.
Speaker 1: It's crazy talking about never keeping it open.
Speaker 3: Yeah, open relationship with our critical men.
Speaker 5: With our tungsten.
Speaker 2: There's also reports that the US trade rap Jameson Grier
Speaker 2: was like professional and you know, he speaks French like
Speaker 2: he's like a pro to work on.
Speaker 3: And then Nick came in at the end, the Commerce secretary,
Speaker 3: you speak gay, what's he saying? And Lutnick got involved
Speaker 3: in negotiations. They went to shit.
Speaker 12: Uh.
Speaker 2: And then there's the politics of it all, which which
Speaker 2: the political reality at this point for Mark Karney is
Speaker 2: the politics of fighting Trump are so much better than
Speaker 2: cutting a deal. That requires you to make concessions and
Speaker 2: then going to and having to explain that because voters
Speaker 2: in Canada remember the whole fifty first state thing. They
Speaker 2: don't think it's funny. They haven't forgotten events, and they
Speaker 2: don't trust Trump. They think that he's going to tear
Speaker 2: up any trade deal that they signed in a year,
Speaker 2: and the Canadian nationalism has been kicked up in a
Speaker 2: way that's been really durable. Like a friend of mine
Speaker 2: was in Canada the other day watching TV and the
Speaker 2: commercials would be like Lay's Potato chips with potatoes grown
Speaker 2: proudly in Canada.
Speaker 3: It was like, you know, it's like an ongoing thing.
Speaker 2: And so the other thing for Carney is like all
Speaker 2: the reasons Canadians might oppose this deal vary by region.
Speaker 2: So like in Ontario it's the auto industry. In Quebec,
Speaker 2: it's the cultural stuff about the French language. In other
Speaker 2: parts of the country it's like lumber provisions, and like
Speaker 2: stitching that all together is a pain in the ass.
Speaker 2: So for him, he's like, you made it easy for me.
Speaker 2: Now I get just to punch you in the face
Speaker 2: with my sixty percent approval rating you being weak. Donald
Speaker 2: Trump and going into your midterms where you're likely to lose,
Speaker 2: Like I think Carney thinks it's worth the risk.
Speaker 1: Well, I mean he's not asking to reopen the talks Carney,
Speaker 1: probably for those political reasons.
Speaker 4: Well also because he gave a speech where he said,
Speaker 4: I am outlining a new approach for countries, media, countries
Speaker 4: that are kind of in between these sort of great
Speaker 4: powers that are battling, and it is that we can
Speaker 4: find a way to stitch together these other kinds of
Speaker 4: arrangements without conceding, without giving up. And he can if
Speaker 4: he means that, and I do, I do he means
Speaker 4: it's inin Serreal. I don't think it'sress politics. He has
Speaker 4: to prove it in his own negotiations. He can't signal
Speaker 4: to Europe that they need to stand up to Donald
Speaker 4: Trump and then when he's faced with that himself be capitulates.
Speaker 2: And in the Canadian reciprocal tariffs I think going to
Speaker 2: place September eighth, Trump was like, ours will go into
Speaker 2: place in January, which is already him kind of you know, caving.
Speaker 3: Well or at least blinking.
Speaker 1: Yeah, Well, we just talked about Iran, right, and so
Speaker 1: that is the axios story right, like they might restart
Speaker 1: the war after the midterms, or you know, the the
Speaker 1: sanctions for the trading partners with Iran or anyone doing
Speaker 1: business with Iran. Is we're threatening that, you know, past
Speaker 1: the midterms, right, and now we're doing the Canadian tariffs
Speaker 1: past the mid terms, at least on the auto parts.
Speaker 1: So it is going to set an interesting dynamic, which
Speaker 1: is it seems right now like the White House is like, Okay, well,
Speaker 1: we don't want to at least some people in the
Speaker 1: White House, we don't want to fuck ourselves for the
Speaker 1: midterms too hard, So maybe we can delay this stuff
Speaker 1: till after the midterms. But if they it sounds like
Speaker 1: whether they lose or do better than expected in the midterms,
Speaker 1: they still want to do all this damage after the midterms,
Speaker 1: which will set up an interesting dynamic for the twenty
Speaker 1: twenty eight primary in which jd Vance we just heard
Speaker 1: from presumably is going to want to run for president
Speaker 1: or maybe Mark Ruby or whoever else and now have
Speaker 1: to deal with the fucking bigger mess that the administration
Speaker 1: seems like they're planning to cause.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 4: I also, before you even get to twenty twenty eight,
Speaker 4: take Trump at his word, like there are a lot
Speaker 4: of people running.
Speaker 3: We're going to get to Susan Collins.
Speaker 4: Donald Trump is saying I am going to put in
Speaker 4: place a giant tax increase on January first on Americans.
Speaker 4: Because Congress will not pull back the authority it has
Speaker 4: vested in Trump to do terrorists without congressional approval. Congress
Speaker 4: has the power to vent those taxes increases from going
Speaker 4: into effect. Like that, you know, seems to me a
Speaker 4: pretty big issue that people could.
Speaker 3: Be talking about about what happens.
Speaker 4: I mean, obviously Trump is the ability to veto, but
Speaker 4: it would be nice to get people on record about
Speaker 4: where they stand on him doing this.
Speaker 3: And I think they're all going to run on it.
Speaker 2: I mean, in Michigan, obviously the auto industry is like
Speaker 2: the biggest fight they're going to have. So I'm sure
Speaker 2: Abduls I know Abduls all over this. In Iowa, it'll
Speaker 2: impact John Deere, which is an important industry there, but
Speaker 2: also farmers who sell agg products into Canada.
Speaker 3: In Maine, it's all about lumber.
Speaker 2: And I think there's a bigger question of like we
Speaker 2: know Trump loves tariffs, but we don't really know why,
Speaker 2: you know, like Jamison Greer seems to want to kind
Speaker 2: of reorder the manufacturing business and bring it all back
Speaker 2: to the US from China, and I think a lot
Speaker 2: of people support that. Scott Beson seems to think that
Speaker 2: tariffs are a way to collect revenue and just make
Speaker 2: money for the government. Then there's another group that just
Speaker 2: seems to think they're a way to bully other countries
Speaker 2: and get them to do whatever you want about whatever issue.
Speaker 2: And that's kind of it seems like where Trump kind
Speaker 2: of lands on this.
Speaker 3: Like I think.
Speaker 2: I assume he is more interested in looking tough and
Speaker 2: looking like he beat up Mark Carney than he is
Speaker 2: in getting some extra milk into you know, a Canadian.
Speaker 4: Visaon one more, But there's the other I think, and
Speaker 4: Vance has sometimes slirted with this is that you accept
Speaker 4: lower growth and the cost of tariffs because you reorder
Speaker 4: the economy around old school manufacturing, which where the jobs
Speaker 4: for men. And even though you give up service jobs growth,
Speaker 4: you give up all the benefits of a modern globalized economy.
Speaker 4: It like it creates a It is more about the
Speaker 4: kind of old school values of a kind of work
Speaker 4: we used to vout, we used as a society view is.
Speaker 1: Important but even though that aside, it is hard to
Speaker 1: overestimate what a dumb, fucking political move this is the
Speaker 1: number one issue for voters across the political spectrum is
Speaker 1: the cost of living. Everything's too expensive, and they don't
Speaker 1: just think it's a bad economy. They know they blame
Speaker 1: Trump for it, and specifically the blamed Trump's tariffs for it,
Speaker 1: like it is maybe his one of his most unpopular policies,
Speaker 1: certainly his most unpopular economic policy over the last several years.
Speaker 1: And now he is doubling down on it, if not
Speaker 1: in fact in a threat, at least before the midterms.
Speaker 1: So they are going to be headlines about tariffs before
Speaker 1: the midterms. And of course he's already levied tariffs on
Speaker 1: twenty billion dollars worth of Canadian goods, so that's gonna
Speaker 1: you know, that'll have an effect on things. So people
Speaker 1: are still pissed at the tariffs that he's slapped on
Speaker 1: everything before this. Now there's headlines about more tariffs and
Speaker 1: we are sixty something days out from the midterms. It's
Speaker 1: fucking nuts, not smart, Okay, So let's talk midterms. One
Speaker 1: person noticeably absent from Vance's event in Maine was Susan Collins.
Speaker 1: This is the second time she skipped out on a
Speaker 1: vance event in Maine this year. Though I'm sure she
Speaker 1: was thrilled that the Vice President told the crowd in
Speaker 1: that speech that Susan Collins is a quote dear friend
Speaker 1: who has been to his house quote probably a half
Speaker 1: dozen times.
Speaker 5: That's not a dear friend. Sorry.
Speaker 1: Collins has been trying to convince voters that she hasn't
Speaker 1: become a rubber stamp for Trump, despite voting with him
Speaker 1: ninety five percent of the time. The latest move was
Speaker 1: a statement asking the President to quote consider the negative
Speaker 1: impacts his trade war with Canada would have on maners.
Speaker 1: On the Democratic side, things have been relatively quiet since
Speaker 1: Troy Jackson locked up the nomination to replace Graham Plattner
Speaker 1: on the November ballot, but Jackson's campaign is beginning to
Speaker 1: heat up, finally getting on TV this weekend with this
Speaker 1: great thirty second spot featuring Jackson's mother.
Speaker 12: Troy was born to two teenage parents, and we struggled
Speaker 12: a lot.
Speaker 7: He didn't use that as an excuse.
Speaker 12: He used that as fuel to make things better for
Speaker 12: other people. Troy never talks about what he's done, but
Speaker 12: somebody will come up to me in the grocery store
Speaker 12: or someplace in town, and they'll say, Troy helped me
Speaker 12: get a sewer. If Troy helped me, help me get
Speaker 12: my mother into a nursing home. If you need help,
Speaker 12: he's going to be there for you. That is That's
Speaker 12: who he is.
Speaker 1: Troy Jackson. This is my mom, and I approved this message.
Speaker 1: What do you guys make of the Jackson campaign so far?
Speaker 1: And do you think he's doing enough to nationalize the
Speaker 1: race so that it is about a vote for Trump
Speaker 1: versus a check on Trump.
Speaker 5: So there was this ad.
Speaker 4: There was another ad or video he filmed just sort
Speaker 4: of sitting on a stoop talking about Elon Musk jumping
Speaker 4: money in the state.
Speaker 5: There's a there's another.
Speaker 3: The crotch mog shot.
Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, it was very it was very im shot
Speaker 4: from below for sure. I didn't notice that time he
Speaker 4: noticed that, but I.
Speaker 3: Thought it was innovative.
Speaker 5: It was good.
Speaker 3: It was good.
Speaker 4: I mean, we've used that technique here at BYASE America,
Speaker 4: but the U sometimes against without our consent. Well, look
Speaker 4: at the video like that's hey, guys, that's three crotches.
Speaker 1: But and then alternate name for the podcast.
Speaker 4: Yeah, and then there's others where he'd sort of say, like,
Speaker 4: according to our our enemies, but I say, let our
Speaker 4: haters be our motivators. But the uh And that's what
Speaker 4: Troy Jackson said as well on that ad. But but
Speaker 4: he also is doing a lot of like like kind
Speaker 4: of he the act the accent is the accent, and
Speaker 4: he's like, look, I don't care if I don't give
Speaker 4: a damn if you're I'm not going to do the accent.
Speaker 4: But Democrat or Republican, like I just we just want
Speaker 4: to get these good things done for people. So there
Speaker 4: is a war right now because he is coming into
Speaker 4: the campaign late, kind of introducing himself. And as he's
Speaker 4: doing that right like as much as they'd want to
Speaker 4: nationalize the race, Republican groups are dumping millions of dollars
Speaker 4: into May, calling him like a dirty politician and kind
Speaker 4: of trying to define him negatively.
Speaker 5: So I don't know what the mix should be.
Speaker 4: I think he's trying to fight a ward to find
Speaker 4: himself because he came in so late. Part of it
Speaker 4: is all the attention, like the national media should probably
Speaker 4: help nationalize this race a bit, because people boy, a
Speaker 4: lot of people stopped caring about Maine once it stopped
Speaker 4: being about Democrat on Democrat and started being about a
Speaker 4: Democrat versus Susan Collins.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: I mean that ad was good as a good biospot,
Speaker 2: but it's definitely an older version of politics, more parochial
Speaker 2: version of politics. It's like he helped me get a
Speaker 2: sewer in my community. That's not nationalizing it. That's not
Speaker 2: making it about rubber stamping the Donald Trump agenda. I'm
Speaker 2: nervous about this race. I mean, like shout out to
Speaker 2: the main Democratic Party and Troy Jackson for like turning
Speaker 2: this think from platnir to his race so quickly. That's
Speaker 2: genuinely impressive. I think it was like literally a month
Speaker 2: ago right where he accepted the moumination. I do think
Speaker 2: that does. I do think, you know, they need to
Speaker 2: go on offense every day. I mean, Jadvan's visiting name
Speaker 2: is a gift to the Jackson campaign. I saw that
Speaker 2: he was highlighting Vance, calling Collins his dear friend on
Speaker 2: his Twitter feed. I hope they're doing more with that.
Speaker 2: The Canada trade war is a huge opportunity for Troy Jackson.
Speaker 2: Like Troy Jackson's political career started because he led a
Speaker 2: group of loggers to the border of Canada and blockaded
Speaker 2: the road to protect Maine loggers from getting their jobs
Speaker 2: stolen from them.
Speaker 1: Where he's from. He's from Aroosta County, which is like
Speaker 1: the border county between Maine and Canada. Like he should,
Speaker 1: he could go there today and speaking of nationalizing the
Speaker 1: race and explain what a fifty percent tariff does to
Speaker 1: a logging down right.
Speaker 2: Some Canadian premiers, we're talking about blocking electricity to America
Speaker 2: from Canada.
Speaker 3: If that happened to me, and it would hurt them
Speaker 3: a lot. They get a lot of electricity from me.
Speaker 5: And people love electricity in Maine.
Speaker 4: I know I've seen a lot of pulling on it,
Speaker 4: but my sense of it in Maine is that they're
Speaker 4: just stands of electricity.
Speaker 1: Data Center's bad, electricity good.
Speaker 5: You know what you think about hundred.
Speaker 4: Of zero, but I think its probably ninety five five
Speaker 4: because everything is. But yeah, they're pretty pro electricity up there. Yeah.
Speaker 2: Uh an ongoing disaster. Collins does not do anything to
Speaker 2: stop the war. Ice is hugely controversial. Sudent Collins gave
Speaker 2: a terrible interview the other day.
Speaker 3: She was asked. She was asked by someone she got
Speaker 3: like doors.
Speaker 2: Stopped at the elevator and the Senate and was like,
Speaker 2: why did you vote to send seventy billion to Ice?
Speaker 2: And she was like it was for body cameras. It's
Speaker 2: like that they never turn on when they're killing American.
Speaker 2: So there's there's a lot of opportunity there for Troy
Speaker 2: Deaction to make the campaign about Collins as a rubber
Speaker 2: stand for Trump. There's also this concerning report that Elon
Speaker 2: Musk is preparing to spend one hundred million dollars on
Speaker 2: the midterms and a lot of that will be focused
Speaker 2: on Maine.
Speaker 1: So we don't know where.
Speaker 2: That's going to go, but maybe you could jiu jitsu
Speaker 2: that back on Collins. We'll see, but you started to
Speaker 2: do I'd like to see a little more. You know,
Speaker 2: we got to be aggressive, We got to make it.
Speaker 1: About her, especially in this rate because like you look
Speaker 1: at all the polling, and this has been true since
Speaker 1: Plattner is in the race, still true today. Maine does
Speaker 1: not like Donald Trump. Maine is not happy with Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: Majorities of voters if they were going to go to
Speaker 1: the polls, they would vote against Donald Trump, and they
Speaker 1: did in twenty twenty four, they voted for Kamala Harris.
Speaker 1: And so the way Susan Collins gets elected here is
Speaker 1: and it's a little different from the other races. They're
Speaker 1: going to try to disqualify Troy Jackson. But the real
Speaker 1: emphasis in why the White House is going to like
Speaker 1: let her criticize them is showing that Susan Collins is
Speaker 1: some kind of an independent voice, right, and so she
Speaker 1: wins if enough voters are like, I really don't like
Speaker 1: what Trump's doing, but I don't really know him, and
Speaker 1: she's actually delivered from Maine and she's kind of like
Speaker 1: an independent voice, and she came out against these tariffs.
Speaker 1: I just heard her say that, you know, And so like,
Speaker 1: the only way to win this race is to tie
Speaker 1: her to Donald Trump as closely as possible and make
Speaker 1: and nationalize this race in every way possible. And I
Speaker 1: think Troy Jackson like has to do that. And that
Speaker 1: was Look, that was the criticism of Platner, one of
Speaker 1: many like after he wrapped up the nomination, as people
Speaker 1: were like, Oh, he's going after Susan Collins too hard
Speaker 1: on being corrupt and everything else and being part of
Speaker 1: an establishment in Washington, and he's not tying her to
Speaker 1: Donald Trump enough and that was fair criticism. But like
Speaker 1: that's now that's what Troy Jackson has to do as well.
Speaker 1: He has to tie her Donald Trump.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I just I'm just, I am you have to
Speaker 5: do that.
Speaker 4: While part of their strategy is to try to define
Speaker 4: Troy Jackson as unacceptable or corrupt or worse in some way,
Speaker 4: and he's unknown and part and you know, I'm sure
Speaker 4: people have in the back of their minds that Democrats
Speaker 4: went through this bruising primary with sort of these like
Speaker 4: unsavory figure in the end, and like that he's trd
Speaker 4: with that. So I'm sure it's like a difficult balance
Speaker 4: of trying to figure out how to just get people
Speaker 4: over the line of like knowing who you are that
Speaker 4: you're okay to vote it instead of you know, stable,
Speaker 4: reliable Susan Collins. So like that's I'm sure that's part
Speaker 4: of what we're seeing in the ads. And the question
Speaker 4: is how do you make moments when there's a nation,
Speaker 4: when jd Vance is there, when there's a tariff thing.
Speaker 4: While also understanding probably has to do some work to
Speaker 4: counteract what will be a deluge.
Speaker 1: About him, I do think that ninety five percent number.
Speaker 1: She voted with Trump ninety five percent of the time.
Speaker 1: It sort of reminds me of what we did to
Speaker 1: McCain and O eight. Right, there's a senator who was
Speaker 1: seen as more independent, a maverick, and all we did
Speaker 1: for the three four months of the general election was
Speaker 1: be like, this guy voted for George voted with George
Speaker 1: Bush ninety something percent of the time. I can't remember now.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Jdvans tried to get ahead of that by being like
Speaker 2: and sometimes she annoys me by being so independent. What
Speaker 2: a subtle line, Jack, I know, I know away.
Speaker 1: It's very obvious.
Speaker 5: What's he doing in Maine?
Speaker 4: You know, it's like she like he's campaigning for her
Speaker 4: again that she can't show up, and she.
Speaker 5: Can't show up.
Speaker 3: It's all a little bit like.
Speaker 1: It's only Danage. Only the page showed up the Republican
Speaker 1: nominee for the main second district, not even the gubernatorial
Speaker 1: nomine showed up right, Republican side for JD. Vance, So
Speaker 1: he's popular. Positive America is brought to you by Helix.
Speaker 2: I don't know about you, but sleep is the most
Speaker 2: important thing in my life besides my family.
Speaker 3: A really good chance that they are very connected.
Speaker 2: Thank you John for seeing me I get a good
Speaker 2: night's sleep having a great day. If I got a
Speaker 2: bad night's sleep, I am almost guaranteed to have a
Speaker 2: rough day. And good sleep starts with a right mattress.
Speaker 2: Upgrade your sleep quality with a Helix mattress. How do
Speaker 2: you know which mattress is right for you? You take the
Speaker 2: Helix Sleep Quiz and it'll match you with the perfect
Speaker 2: mattress based on your personal preferences and sleep needs. They
Speaker 2: have over twenty mattress models so you can find the
Speaker 2: perfect model for you. Helix delivers your mattress right to
Speaker 2: your door with free shipping in the US. The Happy
Speaker 2: with Helix Guarantee offers a risk free customer first experience
Speaker 2: designed to ensure you're completely satisfied with your new mattress
Speaker 2: so you can rest easy with seamless returns and exchanges. Plus,
Speaker 2: Helix offers a one hundred twenty night sleep trial and
Speaker 2: limited lifetime warranty. We got a Helix mattress at our house.
Speaker 2: It is unbelievably comfortable. It's in our guest bedroom. Anyone
Speaker 2: who sleeps there says they love it. I've had a
Speaker 2: multiple people say to me where'd you get that thing?
Speaker 2: And I say, Helix take the quiz ship it to
Speaker 2: your house. Couldn't be easier. Go to Helix Sleep dot
Speaker 2: com slash crooked for twenty seven percent off site wide.
Speaker 2: This offer is exclusive to Podsave America listeners. That's Helixsleep
Speaker 2: dot com slash crooked for twenty seven percent off site
Speaker 2: wide Helix Sleep dot com slash crooked.
Speaker 1: Podsave America is brought to you by ZipRecruiter.
Speaker 5: With everyday interaction.
Speaker 2: Becoming increasingly impersonal, someone going just when extra step can
Speaker 2: be huge, Like when my doctor takes the time to
Speaker 2: call me with test results instead of sending them electronically.
Speaker 3: I feel like a human being again.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's nice if.
Speaker 2: You're hiring great candidates can also go the extra step
Speaker 2: and tell you why they're interested in your job on ZipRecruiter.
Speaker 2: It's a way to stand out from the others in
Speaker 2: the pool, and right now you can try it for
Speaker 2: free at ZipRecruiter dot com slash crooked. Ziprecruiter's new feature
Speaker 2: shows you the most interested qualified candidates first, so you
Speaker 2: meet the right people faster. They're powerful matching technology finds
Speaker 2: qualified candidates quickly candidates can tell you in their own
Speaker 2: words why they're interested in your job. We've used ziprecruter
Speaker 2: here at Crooked Media, we've hired a bunch of people.
Speaker 2: It shortened the process. It helps us find great people
Speaker 2: really quickly and just cut through a lot of the
Speaker 2: slower processes and other sites out there that are just
Speaker 2: not as effective. Try ZipRecruiter and meet great candidates who
Speaker 2: will go the extra step for your job. Four out
Speaker 2: of five employers who post on zipreruiter get a quality
Speaker 2: candidate within the first day. Try it for free at
Speaker 2: zipprecruiter dot com, slash crooked that ZipRecruiter dot com slash
Speaker 2: crooked ZipRecruiter.
Speaker 1: Meet your match on ZipRecruiter. Speaking of him, he also
Speaker 1: recently weighed in on the Michigan Senate race during a
Speaker 1: visit to his hometown in Ohio. Here's what he had
Speaker 1: to say about Democratic candidate Abdul l Sayed.
Speaker 9: Now right, el say ed this guy running for Senate
Speaker 9: in Michigan. He once argued not too long ago that
Speaker 9: criticisms of sharia law were rooted in white supremacy. I'd
Speaker 9: love to go back in time and tell my papal
Speaker 9: that there's a man who claims to stand for working
Speaker 9: people who says, not only should we have Sharia law,
Speaker 9: but if you criticize it, you're a white supremacist. That's
Speaker 9: not my Papal's Democrat party, my friends.
Speaker 4: That's not my pap paus Democrat party, my friends, just
Speaker 4: a just a collection of real, authentic people in there.
Speaker 1: Also to notice how he just just kind of got
Speaker 1: in there. Not only does he think we should have
Speaker 1: Sharia law? Like, what are you talking about?
Speaker 3: I know?
Speaker 2: I was like, he makes Abdul's name sound weird like Elsayed,
Speaker 2: and he's like my p pop.
Speaker 1: I think I said pop Plot earlier. Are a lot
Speaker 1: of different names. Yeah. So Abdul responded on ms NOW
Speaker 1: by pointing out the Advance was cherry picking who gets
Speaker 1: to be defined as American and distracting from the issues.
Speaker 1: What do you think of that response? And in general, like,
Speaker 1: what is the best way for Abdul to handle all
Speaker 1: of these islamophobic attacks from people like Vance, from people
Speaker 1: like Mike Rodgers. I've seen a lot of them are
Speaker 1: just like not even like thinly veiled lies, like very
Speaker 1: obvious lies like who he just loves shari a law?
Speaker 4: He loves like this is where advance to. It's he
Speaker 4: kind of performs as like the sophisticated version of Trump,
Speaker 4: And there's.
Speaker 5: Like a way in which you take his rhetoric and you.
Speaker 4: Can find some shred that they can call it the
Speaker 4: truth somehow. But then it'll go back to the eating
Speaker 4: the cats and they're eating the.
Speaker 5: Dogs, or I'll go there.
Speaker 4: It's like he wants shari a law, which is just
Speaker 4: just just a lie, just just lying to people. I
Speaker 4: think he's doing, like I don't know what a more
Speaker 4: defiant or direct version of what he's already been saying
Speaker 4: sounds like, but like you can just say what this is. Uh,
Speaker 4: if this election is a referendum on Trump's policies and
Speaker 4: whether people want in the Senate he rubber stamp for
Speaker 4: what Trump will do, then Mike Rodgers will lose. And
Speaker 4: everything about what Republicans are doing is going to be
Speaker 4: to try to hide that or or muddy that or
Speaker 4: make noise around that. And if this is an election
Speaker 4: about about healthcare, about jobs, about someone looking out for
Speaker 4: the middle class in Michigan, about someone who will actually
Speaker 4: kind of go to the Senate to advocate on behalf
Speaker 4: of people in Michigan as opposed to for Donald Trump
Speaker 4: or whatever that or or or kind of siding with
Speaker 4: the corporations that are trying to kind of cut their
Speaker 4: taxes even more deregulate. Uh, that's what the race is about.
Speaker 3: Then the obdoable when they know.
Speaker 1: That Popov versus Sharia.
Speaker 2: Yeah, his his response to JD was like Calden boring,
Speaker 2: which I like, just not equivocally true. He made a
Speaker 2: line about Peter Teele, which I don't know that most
Speaker 2: people get. Like MS NOW viewers probably get it because
Speaker 2: we're all political junkies, but most folks don't. And then
Speaker 2: you want to do this thing about how well you know,
Speaker 2: do you think Jade Vance looks his wife's parents in
Speaker 2: the eye and tells them that they are not real
Speaker 2: Americans referencing Usha Vance.
Speaker 3: And again it's like, it's.
Speaker 2: A good point that I'm not totally sure everyone would understand.
Speaker 2: It's also a point you could make about Donald Trump
Speaker 2: and Milania, by the way, because her parents are not
Speaker 2: born in the United States. I did like, there's the
Speaker 2: this is a distraction thing. I think that is true
Speaker 2: and it's valuable. I did wonder if it's missing a
Speaker 2: beat that just kind of like undercuts the suggestion that
Speaker 2: he's an extremist. It's like JD, I played fucking college lacrosse.
Speaker 2: That's not the most like Sharia compliant activity or something
Speaker 2: like something that just get that, like, I love America,
Speaker 2: I'm an American, I grew up playing high school football.
Speaker 2: I'm from Michigan. My name is of Duel, I'm a doctor,
Speaker 2: I'm a union member. Like enough of this fear mongering crap.
Speaker 5: And he does that.
Speaker 4: He says like I'm a dual from I've always been
Speaker 4: Abdul from Michigan.
Speaker 1: It's also, yeah, distraction is sort of the right ballpark,
Speaker 1: but you got to kind of put a finer point
Speaker 1: on it by being like, like every answer has to
Speaker 1: go back to Mike Rogers at this point, and like
Speaker 1: Mike Rogers and Jade Vans and all these people, they're
Speaker 1: saying all the shit because they have nothing to say
Speaker 1: about why everything's so expensive in Michigan. They have nothing
Speaker 1: to say about what a disaster Donald Trump has been
Speaker 1: from Michigan over the last four years. And like they
Speaker 1: so they're just gonna make this entire race about Sharia
Speaker 1: law and Hassan Piker and all this other bullshit because
Speaker 1: they have nothing else to say about anything that you
Speaker 1: care about, you know, and I think that like he's
Speaker 1: and Mike and they may know that it's a pretty
Speaker 1: weak argument that Mike Rodgers is just going to go
Speaker 1: to the fucking Senate and have another another two years
Speaker 1: of doing whatever Donald Trump tells him to do.
Speaker 4: Yeah, the thing about the usha point is like, so
Speaker 4: he's a hypocrite, right, right, And like it's like it's
Speaker 4: just this is sometimes it's just like hey, like stop,
Speaker 4: you're not gonna win on points.
Speaker 5: It's like like that's a logical.
Speaker 4: Argument about how you should like what he's racist towards you,
Speaker 4: but not towards his wife. Like I don't like, it's
Speaker 4: sort it's it is beside the point and just sort
Speaker 4: of done with sort of hypocrisy arguments are kind of
Speaker 4: well what about this?
Speaker 1: You know, Well it's luring and their their goal is
Speaker 1: to sort of lure you into an argument about identity
Speaker 1: and culture and race. Right. This is like you know,
Speaker 1: Bernie tweeted today too, like well, you know you talk
Speaker 1: about us on Piker, but you know, Jake Laying is
Speaker 1: in Michigan the January sixth Rioter, and he's got a
Speaker 1: connection to Mike Rodgers, which is is true, you know.
Speaker 1: And then Mike Rodgers is like, well, I'll disavow him.
Speaker 1: I'll disavow Jake Lane, but also will Abdul disavowed Piker.
Speaker 1: And now we're like in a back and forth about you.
Speaker 3: Know, disavow off.
Speaker 1: I know it's a classic disavow off.
Speaker 2: I think Lamer is like a mayor's bet on a
Speaker 2: sports game.
Speaker 5: Yeah, there's there is something about that, like.
Speaker 3: The other side of it, right, Oh, were this these
Speaker 3: steaks from Chicago, Philly whatever?
Speaker 5: I wasn't listening.
Speaker 3: I was waiting for my turn to talk.
Speaker 4: What I was trying to What I was gonna say
Speaker 4: is yes, there's like the tit for tat for how
Speaker 4: you respond to these things, right, and and then there's
Speaker 4: sort of the proactive rhetoric, whether it's in responding to
Speaker 4: the song Piker thing, which he did, right, he's not
Speaker 4: just ignoring it, he is responding to it. And then
Speaker 4: what you were doing proactively to address those kinds of things.
Speaker 4: And I will say, like I read the statement he
Speaker 4: put out in response to the backlash to a comment
Speaker 4: from Hassan Piker from his fucking stream because we've all
Speaker 4: decided that Hassan Piker is the main character in American politics.
Speaker 4: You have Fox News on He's there's every third figure.
Speaker 4: It's just it's Hassan Trump and then just a socialist
Speaker 4: that choice in at random basically maybe a trans swimmer.
Speaker 4: I'll get in there, but that's it. That's what's on
Speaker 4: Fox News.
Speaker 1: And so like his respite well is also in the
Speaker 1: third way, and some other Democrats and and DSA people, right,
Speaker 1: like a lot of people are invested in making his
Speaker 1: on the main character of the binterms.
Speaker 4: But if you look at that statement, it like, I
Speaker 4: think all the sentiment inside of the statement is good,
Speaker 4: but it's very like it's very careful, right, it's very
Speaker 4: careful statement and not like that there needs to be
Speaker 4: if he's going like if he's trying to prove to
Speaker 4: the Jewish voters in Michigan that he would like to
Speaker 4: come home despite having had thirty or sixty million, sixty
Speaker 4: million dollars with ads dumped on his head, then like
Speaker 4: the same language that he would use the defiant language
Speaker 4: about saying this is why we need medicare for all,
Speaker 4: or like this is why we need to take on
Speaker 4: the corporations. Like that level of defiance is certainly welcome
Speaker 4: in describing anti Semitism, right, It like like it's a
Speaker 4: very it's a very kind of careful language as opposed
Speaker 4: to something that's just like this is more more in
Speaker 4: the style that he's using on every other issue.
Speaker 5: That's all.
Speaker 1: There's also some interesting news about Roger. Over the weekend,
Speaker 1: ACTS reported that allies of Rogers asked APAC to rethink
Speaker 1: their involvement in the Michigan general election, urging the group
Speaker 1: to quote get involved without putting the group's name front
Speaker 1: and center. The New York Times followed up with reporting
Speaker 1: of their own, noting that quote, a PAC leaders have
Speaker 1: privately voiced unease with a plan that makes APACK a peer,
Speaker 1: as if it is hiding. None of this has stopped
Speaker 1: Rogers from fundraising with APAK. He attended three APAC fund
Speaker 1: raisers in LA over the weekend and a fourth on Monday.
Speaker 1: What do you guys make of the request from the
Speaker 1: Rogers camp?
Speaker 2: I mean, I think it tells you a lot about
Speaker 2: how toxic the APAC brand has become politically. I think
Speaker 2: ultimately what they're doing there is saying just don't spend
Speaker 2: on your own behalf, funnel your money to some other
Speaker 2: superpack and have them spend it for you, which is
Speaker 2: what APAC will probably do, although it does make APAC
Speaker 2: look incredibly weak if they can't even run ads, although
Speaker 2: they normally don't run ads in.
Speaker 3: A general election.
Speaker 2: They usually just screw around in Democratic primaries taking out progressives,
Speaker 2: so this is new for them, but it's a punch
Speaker 2: in the gut.
Speaker 4: But also a Pack has run tons of ads under
Speaker 4: the names of other organizations and not Their ads during
Speaker 4: this primary had nothing to do with Israel at all.
Speaker 4: They were about sort of acchoosing him, of being anti
Speaker 4: women and other things like that. So like they already
Speaker 4: are running a campaign which at least for most people
Speaker 4: that are trying to kind of make it about other
Speaker 4: issues and not about a PAC.
Speaker 1: It seems like they wanted the headline the Rogers campaign.
Speaker 1: They wanted a headline out there to say that they
Speaker 1: are resisting a pack because they know that it's toxic.
Speaker 1: Right like that, I think that, I'm sure the ones
Speaker 1: that leaked it.
Speaker 5: That that is good.
Speaker 4: I guess like the politics are a little simpler for
Speaker 4: a Republican and a Democrat, right Like, I don't totally
Speaker 4: understand why he wouldn't want.
Speaker 1: I think because I think that it has become so
Speaker 1: toxic that it is not just toxic in a Democratic
Speaker 1: primary now, but APAC is toxic in a general election.
Speaker 4: Right, right, I guess I guess I want to understand
Speaker 4: is who are the voters. I guess there are there
Speaker 4: are some Republican voters might just stay home, right because
Speaker 4: any right that are.
Speaker 1: Like independents, spe voters, a pack is extremely unpopular with
Speaker 1: independent butvoters. So, but I think it's I think, you know,
Speaker 1: the important thing is he's still doing fundraisers with them,
Speaker 1: like he's talking. It's it's a double hit because he
Speaker 1: is he's still allied with APAC and doing fundraisers, but
Speaker 1: he's and he's also talking out both sides of his mouth.
Speaker 3: He just wants them to hide the spending.
Speaker 5: I mean, he wants the wants.
Speaker 2: He wants UDP to cut a thirty million dollar check
Speaker 2: to name your fake you know, like the cryptic fair
Speaker 2: Shake I'm crypto fund or whatever it is, and.
Speaker 3: Have them run the ads.
Speaker 1: The Times had another piece this weekend uh with the
Speaker 1: with the headline Angry Ohio voters could turn their state
Speaker 1: Purple Again, which details how Ohio's frustrations over data centers,
Speaker 1: rising prices, the war and around could put not just
Speaker 1: the Senate seat, but the governor's race and a series
Speaker 1: of house races in play for Democrats. Nan Whaley, a
Speaker 1: former Dayton mayor who ran for governor in twenty two,
Speaker 1: told The Times, I've just not seen people this pissed.
Speaker 1: What do you guys think too good to be true?
Speaker 1: We turn in Ohio Blue. I mean, I'm surprised at
Speaker 1: how bullish Nate Silver was on Ohio.
Speaker 3: We talked about this the last episode.
Speaker 2: I mean, look, Jim Arnacci, the former congressman, posted something
Speaker 2: on the social media where he said, you can get
Speaker 2: mad at me for posting this, but I'm just delivering
Speaker 2: the message. The biggest issues for independence are Iran war,
Speaker 2: gas prices, food prices, utility bills.
Speaker 1: Rent.
Speaker 2: Okay, So today Trump is further dragging out the Irn war,
Speaker 2: maybe indefinitely. That keeps gas prices up, That impacts food
Speaker 2: prices because of fertilizer costs. He started a trade war
Speaker 2: with Canada, which is going to jack up food and
Speaker 2: maybe utility costs. And then Trump threatened to veto his
Speaker 2: only accomplishment on housing. So that wasn't that wasn't his
Speaker 2: finest moment.
Speaker 1: Also, Dan Wyley had another quote in that piece said,
Speaker 1: you know it comes down to you hate everything. You
Speaker 1: can't be mad at the Democrats because they don't control anything. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's like, honestly, that is that's what might get us
Speaker 1: over the line. It's like at some point, you know,
Speaker 1: there's there's no one left to blame but the Republicans
Speaker 1: that have had complete control over most of Ohio, yep
Speaker 1: and and now the country. So last, but not least
Speaker 1: on the House side. The Times had another story that
Speaker 1: raised eye brows, the private meeting between House Minority Leader
Speaker 1: Hakem Jeffries and Jared Kushner, where the two discussed quote,
Speaker 1: potential areas of common ground. This comes as Democrats reportedly
Speaker 1: prepared to launch numerous investigations into the Trump administration should
Speaker 1: they win back the House in November. What'd you guys
Speaker 1: think about Jared and Hakem meeting? What kind of common ground?
Speaker 5: I think maybe in the West Bank.
Speaker 2: I mean, yeah, look, this triggered me deeply because I
Speaker 2: obviously I am not a big Jared Kushner family. My fear,
Speaker 2: big picture is that. And this is not really about
Speaker 2: Hakim Jeffries, but he's a part of this. The Democrats will,
Speaker 2: once they get the gavel and have oversight authorities, waste
Speaker 2: time with like sternly worded letters and requests for things
Speaker 2: instead of just subpoenas right out of the gate. And
Speaker 2: those demands for documents and oversight have to include the
Speaker 2: Trump family and the Kushner family and Jared's firm, and
Speaker 2: Kushner is going to have very powerful allies calling around
Speaker 2: to Democrats. Maybe they're a peace well that he's friends with,
Speaker 2: who are rich people in New York or Miami who
Speaker 2: are also donors to Democrats and saying go easy on Jared.
Speaker 2: He's a moderating force. He's one of the good guys.
Speaker 2: Look at what he did with the Abraham Accords, which
Speaker 2: we all have seen have brought peace to the Middle
Speaker 2: East ever since they were put into place. And remember
Speaker 2: Corey Booker voted to confirm Charles Kushner, Jared's dad, as
Speaker 2: ambassador to France because of their pre existing relationship. So
Speaker 2: I think that's why those reports were triggering on a
Speaker 2: substantive level and on just a political level, It's like,
Speaker 2: why would you take this meeting now, it just doesn't
Speaker 2: make any sense. There's nothing you're going to work on,
Speaker 2: absolutely nothing.
Speaker 1: Yeah, my reaction was like, what is the common ground
Speaker 1: with Jared Kushner. He's not a housing policy expert, he
Speaker 1: has no government job. Here's no government job.
Speaker 5: He's just a private, private citizen with a lot of interests.
Speaker 1: If you want to talk with the White House about
Speaker 1: finding common ground on cost of living, go talk to
Speaker 1: someone in the Domestic Policy Council, talk to the President,
Speaker 1: the speaker that we talk to the president, right, and
Speaker 1: maybe Jeffrey you know, and the White House, I guess
Speaker 1: through Jared is pricing in that you know, Democrats are
Speaker 1: going to take the House, and Jefferies wants a channel
Speaker 1: to the White House that isn't Trump, which is like,
Speaker 1: that's fine, but again, that's not Jared Kushner. He doesn't
Speaker 1: have a government job. And you can't you can't take
Speaker 1: a meeting like that quietly and then be surprised when
Speaker 1: the reaction is, you know, a signal about how confrontational
Speaker 1: that you're going to be over the next two years.
Speaker 1: It's like it's just like, it's what do you think
Speaker 1: you're going to do that in quiet meet with Jared,
Speaker 1: and then everyone's going to just assume the best intentions.
Speaker 4: Well, this is this is I think the deeper problem,
Speaker 4: which is and Dan wrote a good message box about
Speaker 4: why there's so much consternation around this, and it is
Speaker 4: to Tommy's point that people are afraid that as speaker,
Speaker 4: he won't be standing up to Trump enough, that he'll
Speaker 4: be too conciliatory. But like, I don't under what is
Speaker 4: your theory of power? In a second, in a in
Speaker 4: the if you're the Speaker of the House, you have
Speaker 4: the Senate, you don't have the Senate. Is it about
Speaker 4: launching investigations? Is it about a publicly defiant posture. But
Speaker 4: you're back channeling with the administration. Are you going to
Speaker 4: be drawing lines? Like if you do what I think
Speaker 4: certainly democratic voters want to see from a democratic House majority,
Speaker 4: there will be no successful working relationship.
Speaker 3: With the Trump administration.
Speaker 4: You will be doing subpoenas, you will be doing investigations.
Speaker 4: You will be trying every day to get to the
Speaker 4: bottom of deeply embarrassing stories about corruption, ties to the
Speaker 4: Epstein files, failures, chaos.
Speaker 3: Abuses of power like that is what every day will
Speaker 3: be about.
Speaker 4: Trump will hate you. Trump will want to destroy you.
Speaker 4: Trump will be saying you should be in jail. He
Speaker 4: will be putting the DOJ on you. So what exactly
Speaker 4: is Jared, who we already did a version of this
Speaker 4: in the first term, ineffective, ineffective, effeckless, careless Jared going
Speaker 4: to do for you? What is your back channel with
Speaker 4: this guy who didn't preserve the Paris Accords, really didn't
Speaker 4: do much of anything going to get you, certainly before
Speaker 4: the election, let alone after.
Speaker 2: And now he spends his time spending billions of Saudi
Speaker 2: dollars on god knows what. He's trying to colonize an
Speaker 2: island off of the coast of Albania that's not going
Speaker 2: very well. He's constantly meeting with a Russian oligarch. Who
Speaker 2: is this economic sort of channel to putin, Like, everything
Speaker 2: Jared's doing in Trump two point zero is really really
Speaker 2: sketchy and not something you want to be affiliated with
Speaker 2: in any way, shape or form, in something that.
Speaker 3: Demands a lot of scrutiny, a lot of scrutiny.
Speaker 1: Truck Shream is probably pretty happy about the media because
Speaker 1: he's not him.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, I.
Speaker 1: Didn't do this.
Speaker 2: One's tiptoe run, all right, the other kushioners buying the
Speaker 2: Lakers probably.
Speaker 1: Oh that's right, yeah, with Bob Bob Aker. All right,
Speaker 1: one last thing before my interview with Seth Moulton. After
Speaker 1: months of delays, the Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy, finally
Speaker 1: released his YouTube series The Great American Road Trip. All
Speaker 1: six episodes are out now. Each opens with a disclaimer
Speaker 1: that no tax dollars were used to fund the show. Instead,
Speaker 1: there are several corporate sponsors, many of which share a
Speaker 1: theme if you can, if you can pick up on it, Boeing, Toyota, Shell,
Speaker 1: United Airlines, Royal Caribbean Enterprise, rent a Car Lift, and
Speaker 1: the US Travel Association. The team put together some low
Speaker 1: lights for you to enjoy so you don't have to
Speaker 1: watch the rest.
Speaker 13: Here they are And as I say, I've been carrying
Speaker 13: them luggage ever since.
Speaker 1: I carry your babies and you carry my luggage.
Speaker 8: If I do get it, I feel like you can't
Speaker 8: say no to Harvard.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well me and mom can say no.
Speaker 13: They have professionalized figuring out how they can take good
Speaker 13: young girls like you and I think corrupt their minds.
Speaker 8: I went to an extremely conservative school in high school,
Speaker 8: and I'm part of an extremely conservative family. And then
Speaker 8: if I go to a liberal setting, that's a way
Speaker 8: more rounded education than if I go to a conservative
Speaker 8: high school and then go to a conservative college, that's
Speaker 8: just being kind of one sided anyway.
Speaker 13: Like they're so good at it. You'll see young people
Speaker 13: go to a conservative school with a conservative family, and
Speaker 13: they get perverted and controlled.
Speaker 1: And now I controlled the trains lot, not me. The
Speaker 1: house was set up for the two of us room together,
Speaker 1: real wing will. Though it was fun, it was good.
Speaker 3: We called her bitch I did. I did.
Speaker 13: Not dancing even poorly is really introyable.
Speaker 1: Maybe we'll have a little dance in our human horror.
Speaker 1: Here a rockstart for doing the show trip thank you.
Speaker 5: Oh boy, oh boy, dude.
Speaker 3: I had not watched that yet. That was troubling, I
Speaker 3: really am.
Speaker 4: It's so funny this idea that like there's a kind
Speaker 4: of this idea in the kind of whatever the conservative
Speaker 4: gen x boom er mine that the reason their kids
Speaker 4: turned against them is because they went to colleges where
Speaker 4: they were as if like.
Speaker 1: Young girls had their minds perverted.
Speaker 4: Meanwhile, meanwhile, you you look at the discourse around college,
Speaker 4: you're like, hey, we got this problem. Our professors don't
Speaker 4: seem to be reading anything that's submitted to them anymore. Also,
Speaker 4: the kids are using chat gybt in the classroom. No
Speaker 4: one seems to be doing any of the work anymore.
Speaker 4: It just seems like I don't know that they're very
Speaker 4: good at indoctrinating us to believe in anything, let alone
Speaker 4: specific liberal ideas.
Speaker 2: Its like Alex Jones, they turned the frogs gay, you know,
Speaker 2: with the water kind of stuff. That poor First of all,
Speaker 2: this poor kid like doesn't want to you having this
Speaker 2: conversation on camera for it to be released to She's
Speaker 2: totally liked her a total of sixteen thousand viewers so
Speaker 2: far and YouTube going great for Sean Duffy.
Speaker 3: Uh what what a weird Well.
Speaker 1: Also, it's like it's not even like she's saying I
Speaker 1: want to rebel against my conservative upbringing. She's basically just like,
Speaker 1: I'd love sort of a well rounded point of view.
Speaker 1: You know, I've got the conservative point of view, and
Speaker 1: I had high school and now i'd like to, you know,
Speaker 1: a well rounded liberal point of view. Study's like no,
Speaker 1: absolutely not me, and mom will say no, it's the
Speaker 1: like this, I'm like a slap mom on the ass.
Speaker 4: Is infantilization, Like there's like there's like, oh, would you
Speaker 4: like you you will be like why do you think
Speaker 4: your kids don't have the ability to hear an opposing idea?
Speaker 3: Like what what do you?
Speaker 1: What? What did this?
Speaker 4: Like? She'ld be an adult, you know, young adult person
Speaker 4: going to college a time where people, by the way,
Speaker 4: time you are able to serve in the military, you're
Speaker 4: allowed to do all kinds of things in a vote,
Speaker 4: and you don't believe they can handle a college professor
Speaker 4: telling you something liberal.
Speaker 3: Like what how little respect do you have for people?
Speaker 2: Dude?
Speaker 1: You did road rules?
Speaker 3: Well, what are you lecturing your child about there? Like
Speaker 3: their learning environment? You went real world road rules? The
Speaker 3: challenge like how you and mom met?
Speaker 2: It's okay to go out and live your life and
Speaker 2: be around people who are different than you. Maybe you'll
Speaker 2: learn something.
Speaker 1: What a potential next White House pre Secretary Rachel Campo stuffy?
Speaker 4: Yeah, is Scott Jennings coming on a little too strong?
Speaker 1: I don't know. Trump said something nice about him last
Speaker 1: week when he was asked about it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, but it was very like cursoris He's good.
Speaker 2: It's funny because there was the there was the Scott
Speaker 2: Jennings is in the running, he had a dinner with
Speaker 2: Susie Wiles sort of news cycle, which was immediately followed
Speaker 2: by the Scott Jennings is overdoing it. He's terrible, The
Speaker 2: White House hates him news cycles. So you can see
Speaker 2: a lot of posturing and the mediates not at all.
Speaker 3: Clear to me where Trump is heading.
Speaker 1: We'll see up next my interview with Congressman Seth Moulton,
Speaker 1: and also we are currently out to Ed Market's team
Speaker 1: as well, hoping to get him on ahead of the
Speaker 1: primary that's up next.
Speaker 2: Today's show is sponsored by Strawberry dot me. You're probably
Speaker 2: no stranger to seeing self professed career coaches advertise their
Speaker 2: services on social media. It can all feel a little
Speaker 2: at hoc, a little vague, and might leave be wondering
Speaker 2: is anyone being helped by this? With Strawberry not me,
Speaker 2: you don't have to wonder, because hundreds of their satisfied
Speaker 2: clients have left glowing reviews about what professional coaching has
Speaker 2: done for them. Here's a little sampling of those reviews.
Speaker 2: My coach was amazing, the experience was transformative. I landed
Speaker 2: a new job within weeks. And how about this one.
Speaker 2: It helped transform me back into a high powered leader
Speaker 2: following my extended maternity leaf. It was that you when
Speaker 2: so many people go out of their way to write
Speaker 2: a positive review about something, you know that something is special.
Speaker 2: So if you're feeling stuck your work, do what tens
Speaker 2: of thousands of people have already done. Go to Strawberry
Speaker 2: dot me slash crooked and claim fifty percent off your
Speaker 2: first coaching session. That's Strawberry dot me slash crooked.
Speaker 1: Seth Moulton, welcome back to Plaise America.
Speaker 7: It's always an honor to be on the pods, So
Speaker 7: thank you very much for having me back.
Speaker 1: John, of course, So your primary against Senator ed Marky
Speaker 1: is in a week. The only three polls taken in
Speaker 1: August have you down twenty eight fifteen thirty three in
Speaker 1: the most recent poll. Do you think the public polling
Speaker 1: is all wrong or do you think you can make
Speaker 1: up a lot of ground by next Tuesday? What does
Speaker 1: your internal polling show? Internal polls have this very very close.
Speaker 7: I think the polling has been wildly off in just
Speaker 7: about every primary across the country, and the energy that
Speaker 7: we're hearing on the ground the numbers that we're seeing
Speaker 7: on the doors is incredibly positive.
Speaker 6: People want change.
Speaker 7: But at the end of the day, this will be
Speaker 7: about who turns out for this election, and we have
Speaker 7: a great turnout operation that will help the win.
Speaker 1: Your central argument is about the need for generational change,
Speaker 1: which has already worked in several Democratic primaries the cycle,
Speaker 1: though usually it's been a young progressive defeating an old
Speaker 1: or older moderate. I know you called yourself progressive in
Speaker 1: the last debate, but do you think it's fair to say,
Speaker 1: would you call yourself more moderate than Ed Markey? No,
Speaker 1: I wouldn't.
Speaker 7: I think there are two progressives in this race. And
Speaker 7: if you look at our policies, I mean, first of all,
Speaker 7: the center market and I pretty much agree on policies.
Speaker 7: There's really very little where we disagree fundamentally. Some of
Speaker 7: my policies are actually more aggressive and progressive than his,
Speaker 7: like my affordability agenda.
Speaker 1: For example.
Speaker 7: But you know, there's no policy change that I've made
Speaker 7: in this race. This is always who I've been it.
Speaker 7: You know, takes some time for people to get to
Speaker 7: know you. And as I've been doing town halls all
Speaker 7: across the state, I mean, I think people have seen
Speaker 7: how committed I am to change, because it's not progressive
Speaker 7: without progress. And at the end of the day, Senator
Speaker 7: Markie has been advocating for a lot of things that
Speaker 7: he's advocated for a very long time, and yet fundamentally
Speaker 7: there are a lot.
Speaker 6: Of problems that are just getting worse.
Speaker 7: Housing costs keep going up, energy bills are twice a
Speaker 7: national average here in Massachusetts. And it's just people admit
Speaker 7: that the status quo approach is not working. And so
Speaker 7: I've proposed some transformative ideas to address these things, and
Speaker 7: I think that's what voters want right now.
Speaker 1: Just to look at one policy difference, like Marki's for
Speaker 1: a Medicare for all, single payer version of Medicare for all,
Speaker 1: You're for a public option that lets people keep employer coverage.
Speaker 1: There's a good amount of evidence out there that even
Speaker 1: a robust public option is the more popular, more achievable option,
Speaker 1: even though it's more moderate. Why isn't your argument that
Speaker 1: your positions, some of your positions may be more moderate,
Speaker 1: but they're also more likely to win and pass and
Speaker 1: easily achieved.
Speaker 7: Look, I think that achievable is absolutely part of the argument.
Speaker 7: In fact, there is a not bed in the Boston
Speaker 7: Globe today that said that Molten's policies are achievable and
Speaker 7: Marquees are not. I mean, he was re elected in
Speaker 7: twenty twenty on a promise to pass Medicare for all
Speaker 7: in six years. He also promised to pass the Green
Speaker 7: New Deal, and you have voted President on it himself
Speaker 7: when it came before the Senate. It's got fewer co
Speaker 7: sponsors today than it did when he first introduced it.
Speaker 7: So again, it's not it's not progressive without actual progress.
Speaker 7: And on this, you know, the question of healthcare for all,
Speaker 7: we both support universal healthcare. In fact, I've gone so
Speaker 7: far as to say it should be a human right,
Speaker 7: not even debatable, whether you're a citizen and an immigrant,
Speaker 7: you know, homeless on the street. It absolutely is a
Speaker 7: human right. I think that's good for everybody in America.
Speaker 7: But I actually want to get it done. And that's
Speaker 7: why I stand with President Obama, which just says, yes,
Speaker 7: you can have Medicare if you want it. Literally, everybody
Speaker 7: can have Medicare if they want. But if you're a
Speaker 7: union that's fought for years to get a great healthcare
Speaker 7: plan that you really enjoy, you can keep it and
Speaker 7: I made a commitment to keep going to the VA
Speaker 7: from a healthcare when I was elected, because we know
Speaker 7: the VA has got problems and I wanted to see
Speaker 7: them firsthand. There are a lot of vets who want
Speaker 7: to continue being able to go to the VA as well.
Speaker 1: What's your specific argument as to why Marky's age matters.
Speaker 1: Is it that he specifically isn't up to the job
Speaker 1: because of his age, or that fifty years is just
Speaker 1: too long for anyone regardless of age.
Speaker 7: I think it's I think it's three things. I mean,
Speaker 7: first of all, it's not personal, you know. I mean,
Speaker 7: it's kind of against the idea, this establishment idea that
Speaker 7: one person ought to be able to hang on to
Speaker 7: a seat in Congress for fifty years, even if the
Speaker 7: world is you know, passing him by. So it's kind
Speaker 7: of this like establishment idea that the personal power is
Speaker 7: more important than public service that as a VET I
Speaker 7: really resent. The second point, though, is that if we
Speaker 7: win the Senate, John, it will almost certainly be by
Speaker 7: just one vote, and we cannot afford to have someone
Speaker 7: miss a vote due to a medical issue or anything
Speaker 7: else and potentially have that turn into another conservative Trump
Speaker 7: appointed Supreme Court Justice. The stakes are just too high,
Speaker 7: and we should learn the lessons of Diane Feinstein and
Speaker 7: Joe Biden and Ruth Bader Ginsburg and of course on
Speaker 7: the other side of the aisle, Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham,
Speaker 7: and recognize that there's just simply a risk when you
Speaker 7: re elect someonet at eighty he'd be closer to ninety
Speaker 7: at the end of his next term than eighty. But
Speaker 7: the third reason, which I think is really resonating right now,
Speaker 7: is that you've got to have a new generation of
Speaker 7: leaders to take on a new generation of challenges and opportunities.
Speaker 7: And in the last debate, we were asked about AI
Speaker 7: and Senator Marky explained to Massachusetts that he can't tell
Speaker 7: the apps on his phone or iPad a part. He
Speaker 7: doesn't know which ones use AI and which ones don't.
Speaker 6: And that's tough.
Speaker 7: After the debate, he tried to clean it up by
Speaker 7: comparing AI to an automobile and saying we ought to
Speaker 7: regulate it the way we regulate seat belts. I mean,
Speaker 7: how are we going to make this technology safe if
Speaker 7: the senators don't even understand what it does?
Speaker 1: What specific regulations do you favor for AI.
Speaker 7: Well, first of all, we ought to learn from all
Speaker 7: the lessons of messing up the regulations for social media
Speaker 7: and actually, Senator market he talked about how he's been
Speaker 7: the architect of some of those regulations. His nineteen ninety
Speaker 7: six Telecom deregulation bill opened the door for big tech
Speaker 7: to come in make billions and billions of dollars but
Speaker 7: have absolutely no accountability for things on the Internet. Now
Speaker 7: he's tried to walk back some of that, but we
Speaker 7: all know the internet is unsafe. I mean, I've got
Speaker 7: a five year old and seven year old at home.
Speaker 7: I dread the time when they get on social media
Speaker 7: and we know that their suicide risk goes up. That
Speaker 7: the harm that can have and just from being on
Speaker 7: social media, it's very real, and Congress has totally failed
Speaker 7: to regulate it. So Number one, we've got to make
Speaker 7: AI safe, and that means holding the AI companies actually accountable.
Speaker 7: Number Two, we do have to win the AI race
Speaker 7: against China because we don't want to have zero accountability
Speaker 7: here in the United States because everyone starts using models
Speaker 7: from overseas. And then the third thing I'd say is
Speaker 7: that there will be job displacement. Now we don't know
Speaker 7: exactly when it will happen or what will it will be,
Speaker 7: So rather than try to anticipate where that's going, Like
Speaker 7: remember a few years ago and Democrats said, oh, we'll
Speaker 7: just retrain the coal miners to be computer programmers and
Speaker 7: then they'll be fine. I mean, even if that was
Speaker 7: realistic back then, these are like the first jobs that
Speaker 7: are getting automated out of existence by AI. So I
Speaker 7: think we have to have almost a FEMA like disaster
Speaker 7: fund approach to dealing with job loss, a federal fund
Speaker 7: to say, look, if every paralegal in their country loses
Speaker 7: their job within a month, we're going to help. We're
Speaker 7: going to bail them out until they can find new jobs.
Speaker 7: I think that going to be critical as well.
Speaker 1: You mentioned China. I feel like this constant tension with
Speaker 1: the development of AI is someone proposes regulation, someone proposes
Speaker 1: slowing it down. The counter argument is, well, yes, we
Speaker 1: want safeguards and we want regulations, but we can't let
Speaker 1: China beat us. So it's used as an argument to
Speaker 1: just keep pushing ahead, Like what is the balance between
Speaker 1: you know, making sure that we're not all using you know,
Speaker 1: Chinese AI models, or even if we do nothing about it.
Speaker 1: Even if we stopped day tomorrow here for some reason
Speaker 1: in the US, obviously it's still going to be with us.
Speaker 1: It's the rest of the world is going to move ahead. So, like,
Speaker 1: how do you regulate AI without, you know, letting China
Speaker 1: win this race.
Speaker 7: I think it's a great question, John, And this really
Speaker 7: is the administration's argument, right They basically say we shouldn't
Speaker 7: have any rules. In fact, we should just do it
Speaker 7: exactly what all the AI executives tell us to do,
Speaker 7: because they're the experts and they're going to win this
Speaker 7: race against China. I do not think these two things
Speaker 7: are mutually exclusive at all. I mean, no one wants
Speaker 7: to fundamentally use a model at the end of the
Speaker 7: day that is unsafe. In fact, there's a good chance
Speaker 7: that governments will just shut things down that are unsafe.
Speaker 7: So there's no reason why the winning model shouldn't also
Speaker 7: be the safe model. I also think that the wrong
Speaker 7: way to do it is for the federal government to say, Okay,
Speaker 7: we're going to just make all the rules, because we
Speaker 7: all know we're not going to keep up, like we're
Speaker 7: not going to keep up with the technology. That's why
Speaker 7: I talk about accountability. I think the big problem with
Speaker 7: social media and big tech companies is that there's just
Speaker 7: no accountability whatsoever. If I were just starting to see
Speaker 7: big tech care because there have been successful lawsuits for
Speaker 7: the first time against them for the things that show
Speaker 7: up on their platforms. We've got to make it clear
Speaker 7: from the very beginning that these AAI companies are actually liable,
Speaker 7: and that will force the kind of self regulation that
Speaker 7: we've never seen appropriately with social media, but also importantly
Speaker 7: will be able to keep up and therefore stay competitive
Speaker 7: with China and other countries around the world.
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders recently wrote a letter to AI leaders like
Speaker 1: Sam Altman, Dario Amiday, and Mark Zuckerberg following the news
Speaker 1: that their companies lost control of their AI models. First
Speaker 1: it was Open Ai, and then Claude and then Anthropic
Speaker 1: and Meta said the same thing. So the letter said, quote,
Speaker 1: in the interest of humanity, stand by your words, pause
Speaker 1: AI development. It is not too late to avoid disaster.
Speaker 1: Stop building machines that humans cannot control. Do you agree
Speaker 1: with Bernie that these companies should pause AI development?
Speaker 7: I mean no, John, As you said, like the world
Speaker 7: is going to continue developing AI, I mean China may
Speaker 7: only be a few months behind us, depending on who
Speaker 7: you talk to. So just pausing it is not smart
Speaker 7: for the United States, for I mean, look, do you trust,
Speaker 7: at the end of the day, the United States of
Speaker 7: America or Communist China to make AI safe? I certainly
Speaker 7: trust the United States of America as many as many
Speaker 7: problems as we have back here. But again, we have
Speaker 7: to make big tech accountable, and so fundamentally I agree
Speaker 7: with Bernie that they are not doing enough to make
Speaker 7: models safe and to show accountability for their behavior right now.
Speaker 7: But the answer is not pretending that this is not
Speaker 7: going to happen. Bernie is also got to build on
Speaker 7: for a moratorium on data centers.
Speaker 1: What do you think about that? Would you support a
Speaker 1: moratorium on building data centers for a year until or
Speaker 1: longer until you know, we can figure this out and
Speaker 1: people in more local communities and states can have more
Speaker 1: of a say in where these data centers are going.
Speaker 7: I think it should be up to local control. Like
Speaker 7: I think that you know, people in communities that are
Speaker 7: going to be impacted by data centers, both negatively and positively,
Speaker 7: you know, should make these decisions. And there are some
Speaker 7: communities that want data centers because of the tax revenue.
Speaker 7: There are a lot of communities right here in Massachusetts
Speaker 7: that are really nervous about them jacking up electricity prices
Speaker 7: when electric bills are already way too high here in Massachusetts.
Speaker 7: There are a lot of people who are worried about pollution,
Speaker 7: you know, for good reason. So my view is that
Speaker 7: this should be this should be local control. These should
Speaker 7: be local communities making decisions. The federal government should not
Speaker 7: be forcing data centers down everybody that anybody's throat. But
Speaker 7: at the end of the day, when when there are
Speaker 7: local communities that say, no, we want this business, we
Speaker 7: want this here, we want the construction jobs, a lot
Speaker 7: of unions are very in favor of these data centers
Speaker 7: because all the jobs that they bring. Then it's a
Speaker 7: good thing for our data to sit in data centers
Speaker 7: in the United States and not in data centers overseas
Speaker 7: in China, where we know that they do not respect privacy,
Speaker 7: they don't have proper controls over intellectual property. I think
Speaker 7: it's already a problem that big tech companies and AI
Speaker 7: companies use our data without our permission or any any
Speaker 7: benefit back to us. But it could get even worse
Speaker 7: if there's absolutely no control over our data because it
Speaker 7: sits overseas.
Speaker 1: There was another odd moment in an earlier August debate
Speaker 1: that I wanted to ask you about. At one point,
Speaker 1: you asked Marky why he'd take a meeting with a
Speaker 1: lobbyist on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein. This was based on
Speaker 1: a twenty fifteen email in the Epstein files where colleague
Speaker 1: of a lobbyist named Bob Crowe said he'd had an
Speaker 1: initial briefing with Marky about getting the son of a
Speaker 1: former Senegalese president out of prison. Epstein paid for that lobbying,
Speaker 1: but both Markey and Crowe say the meeting never happened.
Speaker 1: Three independent fact checks found the claim mostly false or unsupported.
Speaker 1: There's no evidence that the briefing with Markey took place,
Speaker 1: or that Marky had any idea Epstein was involved. You
Speaker 1: also took two thousand dollars from Bob crow which you
Speaker 1: later returned. But considering all that, do you still think
Speaker 1: it was fair to suggest that Marky took the meeting
Speaker 1: and did a favor for one of Epstein's pals.
Speaker 7: Well, look, I mean, if you look at the the email,
Speaker 7: the meeting happened, and it's not a prize that Senator
Speaker 7: Market would sadly not tell the truth about this, because
Speaker 7: he's been lying a lot in this campaign. I mean,
Speaker 7: he said that he does not take corporate pack money,
Speaker 7: and he does. He said that he does not take
Speaker 7: fossil fuel lobbyist money, and he does. The Boston Globe
Speaker 7: and the Boston Herald have documented these things. So unfortunately,
Speaker 7: he's been lying to his supporters throughout this campaign, and
Speaker 7: it's not a surprise that he would be dishonest about
Speaker 7: a meeting that emails clearly documented occurred. But my question
Speaker 7: was actually very simple. It was simply just why would
Speaker 7: you take a meeting? Because this actually does go to
Speaker 7: the heart of an issue that I'm hearing all across Massachusetts,
Speaker 7: which is that they don't people don't see the Senator.
Speaker 7: I've done over fifty town halls across the state where
Speaker 7: anyone can come. It was like hundreds of individual events,
Speaker 7: but anyone can come to over fifty public town halls
Speaker 7: and ask me any question that they want, and I
Speaker 7: often hear we never see the Senator. I've never been
Speaker 7: able to get a meeting with him. I've never been able.
Speaker 6: To ask a question.
Speaker 7: So this simple question I asked is why would you
Speaker 7: take this meeting on behalf of a lobbyist working for
Speaker 7: Epstein and not and not take meetings with constituents? And
Speaker 7: that is representative of things that I'm hearing on the trail.
Speaker 1: But it's possible that it was just a you know,
Speaker 1: a call between this lobbyist or a colleague of the
Speaker 1: lobbyists and Marque's staff, and Markey had nothing to do
Speaker 1: with it or had no knowledge of them.
Speaker 7: And the email didn't say it brief to staff. I mean,
Speaker 7: I've worked in the congressional office for ten years. A
Speaker 7: big difference between Oh, we brief Molten's staff or we
Speaker 7: brief Moulton, right, I mean, it's pretty it's it's pretty clear.
Speaker 7: But you know, look, he could at least return the money.
Speaker 1: I mean.
Speaker 7: The point is a lot of voters ask like, why
Speaker 7: can't we get access to our senator? And this just
Speaker 7: goes to the heart of that question, Like the wealthy
Speaker 7: and the well connected, even if they're connected to a
Speaker 7: convicted felon, seemed to be able to get meetings or
Speaker 7: briefings or whatever you want to call it with senators,
Speaker 7: and yet ordinary people in Massachusetts can't, and that's a
Speaker 7: change that I would like to bring if I'm elected Centator.
Speaker 7: We've actually won as many Democracy Wards awards from the
Speaker 7: Congressional Management Foundation as I think any other office on
Speaker 7: Capitol Hill, and including ones for transparency and constituent services.
Speaker 7: I mean, literally the best office in the country for
Speaker 7: constituent services, and that means people can come to us
Speaker 7: at all times for anything. In fact, we do get
Speaker 7: a lot of constituent services requests from other congressional districts
Speaker 7: aince they say I can't get an answer from that
Speaker 7: Congressman or that Senator, so we're coming to you. And
Speaker 7: I think that's the kind of service and the kind
Speaker 7: of access that people in Massachusetts want and deserve.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I was going to ask because obviously, like corruption
Speaker 1: is a huge issue thanks to the administration and Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: but also it's just you can tell people are sort
Speaker 1: of fed up with some of the things that you're
Speaker 1: talking about, just broadly with Congress and Washington in general.
Speaker 1: Sort of reminds me of two thousand and six and
Speaker 1: when Democrats took the House and it was an anti
Speaker 1: corruption message. You know, back then there was sort of
Speaker 1: a series of proposed reforms if Democrats took back Congress,
Speaker 1: what they could do on ethics and lobbying. I remember
Speaker 1: when I first started working for then Senator Obama, you know,
Speaker 1: spearheaded some of those as well. Have you thought about legislation,
Speaker 1: ethics reforms, lobbying reforms, anti corruption legislation that you'd like
Speaker 1: to pass if you're senator. And additionally, even if there
Speaker 1: are things that you can't pass legislation you can't pass,
Speaker 1: just sort of rules for your own office that you
Speaker 1: want to put into places as senator.
Speaker 6: Yes, absolutely so.
Speaker 7: First of all, I was the first office on Capitol Hill,
Speaker 7: House or Senate to ban prediction market trading for me
Speaker 7: or my staff, and that's set an example that other
Speaker 7: offices have followed. But that's a great example of something
Speaker 7: that we've already done internally, and those bands should of
Speaker 7: course be passed into law. I also think that we
Speaker 7: need campaign finance reform, and we've tried for years to
Speaker 7: get it. As you said, people have proposed this for
Speaker 7: a long time, it's been difficult with the Supreme Court.
Speaker 7: A novel approach that I've been pursuing is to tie
Speaker 7: campaign finance reform to term limits and The reason why
Speaker 7: this is an interesting combination is that campaign finance reform
Speaker 7: tends to be more popular with Democrats, term limits tend
Speaker 7: to be more popular with Republicans in Congress, and yet
Speaker 7: both are widely popular with the American public.
Speaker 6: So we could make a compromise.
Speaker 7: Each side could eat a little crow, and we could
Speaker 7: do something that would I think be fundamentally good for
Speaker 7: Congress and raise our esteem in the minds of the
Speaker 7: general public. But it has been proven difficult to pass
Speaker 7: without some sort of grand bargain like that. I've also
Speaker 7: co sponsored three Congressional stock trading bands, and I think
Speaker 7: that I've also disclosed my whole family's taxes in this race,
Speaker 7: which Center Marquee has not. I think that kind of
Speaker 7: transparence is just helpful. And of course some of these
Speaker 7: were unwritten rules, like we had disclosure of taxes amongst
Speaker 7: all presidential candidates until Trump came along and just refused
Speaker 7: to do it. I think one of the biggest lessons
Speaker 7: that Democrats have to learn after the second Trump administration.
Speaker 7: We clearly didn't learn well enough after the first. Is
Speaker 7: it just pretending we can go back to normal?
Speaker 6: Isn't enough?
Speaker 7: We need these kinds of fundamental reforms so that the
Speaker 7: next person like Donald Trump doesn't come and just completely
Speaker 7: abuse the system once again.
Speaker 1: You hit a line in one of the last debates
Speaker 1: that said, if you're happy with your electricity built tonight,
Speaker 1: vote for the Senator expand on that argument a little
Speaker 1: bit for me, like, what is the thing Massachusetts doesn't
Speaker 1: have because Ed Markey has held this seat.
Speaker 7: It's just innovation and change and an urgency to get
Speaker 7: these problems fixed. Because electric electric bills are not a
Speaker 7: new problem, and we've had a high electricity rates, high
Speaker 7: high gas prices for a long time in Massachusetts and
Speaker 7: they haven't been addressed. And in the last debate, Senator
Speaker 7: Marquee was he thought, rather indignant, and he trotted out
Speaker 7: a list of things that he's done on this issue,
Speaker 7: and I said, look, Senator, I respect your work on this.
Speaker 1: I really do.
Speaker 7: In fact, I've supported many of those measures myself. But
Speaker 7: we've just got to admit that it's not enough. When
Speaker 7: our electric bills are twice the national average. It clearly
Speaker 7: hasn't gotten that done. On housing, for example, there are
Speaker 7: a lot of tweaks in the system that have been
Speaker 7: proposed and worked on for a while, but housing prices
Speaker 7: are skyrocketing in Massachusetts, and one out of three people
Speaker 7: here in this state thought about leaving just last year
Speaker 7: because it's unaffordable to live here. So I've proposed a
Speaker 7: totally transformative initiative to make it faster than driving to
Speaker 7: get around Massachusetts by turning our commuter rail system into
Speaker 7: a fast regional rail system like they have throughout Europe.
Speaker 7: It would finally connect north and south Stasian, so every
Speaker 7: train from the north would flow through to the South
Speaker 7: and west. I mean, I'm down in the Cape right now.
Speaker 7: It took like two and a half hours to get
Speaker 7: down here. That trips to be from Salem in like
Speaker 7: forty five minutes right now. This has been shown by
Speaker 7: our recent Harvard study to take one hundred and fifty
Speaker 7: five million cars off the road and spur hundreds of
Speaker 7: thousands of units of new housing. In fact, this is
Speaker 7: one of the things that the Globe recently cited as
Speaker 7: a really achievable project that we just need next generation
Speaker 7: leadership to get done. And Centatra Markie has proposed improving
Speaker 7: rail service to western Massachusetts. His proposal would have rail
Speaker 7: service in two and a half hours, which is actually
Speaker 7: slower than the same trains applied the route in nineteen fifty.
Speaker 7: That's just not the change that we need to address
Speaker 7: these problems.
Speaker 1: Yeah. So, like, I mean, you know, you've said that
Speaker 1: a lot of your policy views and an ideology are
Speaker 1: similar to Markey. There's obviously a generational argument there, but like, specifically,
Speaker 1: what do you think a Senator Moulton actually delivers in
Speaker 1: the next six years that a Senator Marquee does not
Speaker 1: or would not. Where would you guys differ in terms
Speaker 1: of Okay, a vote comes in the Senate and you'd
Speaker 1: vote one way and market would vote another way.
Speaker 7: Yeah, great question, because we really do agree on most policies. Like,
Speaker 7: for example, we were just talking about housing. I mean,
Speaker 7: we obviously both agree that we need to bring housing
Speaker 7: costs down. I just admit that what we've been trying
Speaker 7: hasn't worked and we need to do something much more
Speaker 7: transformative like this regional rail initiative. I don't think that
Speaker 7: really translates into a different vote in the United States Senate.
Speaker 7: But I'll tell you something that does, and that is
Speaker 7: voting for Chuck Schumer. When I started this campaign, I
Speaker 7: said from day one, I'm not going to vote for
Speaker 7: Chuck Schumer. I'm not going to run on a platform
Speaker 7: of next generation leadership here in Massachusetts and then go
Speaker 7: to Washington and support Senator Schumer. Senator Marquee not only
Speaker 7: supports Senator Schumer, but just took sixty two thousand dollars
Speaker 7: from the Senator out of the Senate Victory Fund, the
Speaker 7: fund that's supposed to flip seats from red to blue
Speaker 7: in Michigan, in Ohio and Alaska and Maine and other
Speaker 7: states across the country where we to flip seats to
Speaker 7: win back the majority. Senator Mark he took that money
Speaker 7: out of the Victory Fund. The Democrats of the across
Speaker 7: the country have contributed to it to bail out his
Speaker 7: own campaign, and so that's.
Speaker 6: A huge difference in approach.
Speaker 7: I think, you know, John, I've been working for years
Speaker 7: to do the opposite, to actually use my platform in
Speaker 7: Massachusetts to raise millions of dollars for candidates across the
Speaker 7: country through my Serve America initiative that's recruited, mentored, and
Speaker 7: supported amazing leaders like Mikey Cheryl, who the governor of
Speaker 7: New Jersey, who just endorsed my campaign, Andy Kim, Melissa Slockin,
Speaker 7: in the Senate, Governor Spamberger, and real leaders in the
Speaker 7: House like Laura Underwood, Johnna Hayes, Chrissy Holahan, Pat Ryan.
Speaker 7: You know, these are people who all flipped seats, and
Speaker 7: I think that a Senator in a safe blue seat
Speaker 7: like Massachusetts should really be invested in winning majorities across
Speaker 7: the country, not taking money out of the fund to
Speaker 7: win majorities across the country to cling to power for
Speaker 7: another six years.
Speaker 1: Last question for you, set marque Aside. You spent a
Speaker 1: couple of years arguing that this party is broken. Democrats
Speaker 1: are heading into a mid term environment that's very good
Speaker 1: for the party, but the brand is still underwater. If
Speaker 1: you had to name the single thing that Democrats are
Speaker 1: getting wrong right now that has nothing to do with
Speaker 1: anyone's age, what is it?
Speaker 7: Is that people know one thing about the Democratic Party
Speaker 7: and it's that we're opposed to Trump, and that's it.
Speaker 7: They don't know what we actually stand for, and that's opposition,
Speaker 7: but it's not leadership. And I think when people are
Speaker 7: scared and hurting, as so many are across the country today,
Speaker 7: with cost skyrocketing and MAGA controlling everything in Washington and
Speaker 7: Trump just completely reckless and disgusting, frankly, as this racist president.
Speaker 7: People don't want just opposition, they want leadership. It's an
Speaker 7: interesting way that I've sort of illustrated this in my
Speaker 7: town halls where I'll say, okay, ask everyone here, several
Speaker 7: hundred people, whatever it is, how many of you are
Speaker 7: opposed to Trump's immigration enforcement? And of course every hand
Speaker 7: in the room goes up. Right then I say, how
Speaker 7: many of you can tell me what Democrats immigration policy is.
Speaker 7: I've asked this question of thousands of people and you
Speaker 7: don't get a single hand. And this isn't some idle
Speaker 7: or esoteric issue. I mean, this is the number one
Speaker 7: issue today with Ice terrorizing blue communities all across the country.
Speaker 7: It was one of the top two issues in the
Speaker 7: twenty four election that we lost across the board. And
Speaker 7: yet for Democrats not be able to say what our
Speaker 7: immigration policy is. Now people are going to ask, okay, seth,
Speaker 7: what's your immigration policy? Three quick points? Prosecute Ice. Yes,
Speaker 7: it should be abolish. The institution is completely broken. Immigration
Speaker 7: enforcement should go back into the Department of Justice. But
Speaker 7: it's not enough just to say poof you go away.
Speaker 7: We need to hold these people accountable again. That's a
Speaker 7: big mistake we made not doing enough of that accountability
Speaker 7: after the first Trump administration. Number two, create an immigration
Speaker 7: system that actually incentivizes people to come here legally, not illegally,
Speaker 7: because for many people they find it just easier to
Speaker 7: walk across the border than actually go through the bureaucracy
Speaker 7: to become a citizen. And then number three, we need
Speaker 7: a pathway to citizenship for families and kids who are
Speaker 7: already here and part of our communities. Now, those are
Speaker 7: three broad points. We could spend you know, forty five
Speaker 7: minutes debating the details, but the point is there. You
Speaker 7: go like, that's my immigration policy and you know my experiences.
Speaker 7: You get a lot of nodding heads. But when most
Speaker 7: Democrats can't even articulate how we're going to fix this problem,
Speaker 7: it leaves a lot of people feeling that the party
Speaker 7: is out of touch.
Speaker 6: And I think we just got to get back in touch.
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 7: Last thing I'll say is I ran for Congress because
Speaker 7: I saw the consequences of failed leadership in Washington serving
Speaker 7: in the war on the ground in Iraq, a war
Speaker 7: that Center Marquee voted for. There are a lot of
Speaker 7: people making decisions in Washington that we're totally out of
Speaker 7: touch with those of us who were fighting in the
Speaker 7: sand and the mud in that.
Speaker 6: War of choice.
Speaker 7: And I think there are a lot of people across
Speaker 7: America who feel the same way today that Washington and
Speaker 7: these establishment people who've been there forever are really out
Speaker 7: of touch with the everyday struggles of America, and the
Speaker 7: party that can better demonstrate that we're listening, we are hearing,
Speaker 7: we are responding with real leadership to fix those problems
Speaker 7: on the ground. That's the party that's going to win.
Speaker 7: I'm confident that Democrats can get there, but I'm not
Speaker 7: sure we're there completely. And that's why I've been willing
Speaker 7: to challenge the party establishment, as I'm doing in this race.
Speaker 1: Seth Moulton, thank you as always for joining Pizave America.
Speaker 1: Enjoy the cape. If you pass through North Reading, tell
Speaker 1: people I said hi, Thanks, It's.
Speaker 7: Been an honor to work for your family and friends
Speaker 7: in North Redding.
Speaker 1: That's very much my district. Yes, all right, take care,
Speaker 1: take care. Thanks again. Thanks to Congressman Moulten for joining
Speaker 1: Dan and I will be back on Friday. Positive America
Speaker 1: is a Crooked Media production. Our show is produced by
Speaker 1: Austin Fisher, Saul Ruben, McKenna, Roberts, and Ferris Safari with
Speaker 1: Ree Jerlin, Elijah Cone and Adrian Hill. Our team includes
Speaker 1: Matt de Groat, Ben Hefcote, Jordan Cantor, Charlotte Landis Krol,
Speaker 1: pel Avive, David Toles, Mia Kelman, Ryan Young and Naomi Single.
Speaker 1: Our staff is probably unionized with the Writers Guild of
Speaker 1: America East