Speaker 1: Welcome back, everyone to a new episode of You're Wrong
with Molly Hemingway, editor intered for The Federalist and David Harsani,
writer at The Washington Examiner. If you'd like to email
the show, please do so at radio at the Federalist
dot com. Molly, let's talk about impending peace or maybe
impending more war. We'll see, but Putin and Donald Trump,
Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump met in Alaska. What day
was it last week? Friday? It was pretty historic feeling.
I guess we'll see what happens in the long run,
but obviously it was the first step towards hopefully some
sort of least ceasefire and maybe some sort of lasting
agreement in the Ukrainian Russian War. What did you take
away from that? Your first blush, Well.
Speaker 2: I think it's a good idea when people who are
at war talk. I think that's always a good step
toward ending war. And we should never be so cavalier
about war that we don't have a problem with it.
And this one has been particularly awful, almost a return
to some of the earlier European wars in terms of
how many men have died and how awful it has
been on the population of Ukraine. And I had complained
last week that Trump had said, oh, I'll fix this
war in a day, and not much a dot been
done on it. But it seemed beginning last Friday that
we started to see some real quick movement and necessary
movement toward ending this war. And the moral clarity that
Trump has shown in wanting to end the war is
it is historic. It's a beautiful thing, and I wish
we had more statesman who thought that that way as well.
What do you think?
Speaker 1: I think that My thoughts went to Putin and his
history and how he's never that I know of, actually
seeded anything really to anyone, you know what I mean.
He's a very difficult person to deal with. But you know,
it's not as if we talked about this last week.
It's not as if this war has gone Russia's way
really or how they expected it to go. It's not
to say they can't, you know, in the end, take
those provinces in eastern Ukraine, but there has been a
heavy cost for everyone, including them, And so I wonder
if maybe he does want it to and so anyway,
I hope he does. But what I thought was I
think people shouldn't be to celebrate this or prematurely celebrate
something that seems like it's going to be a very
difficult road to piece in the sense that you're going
to have next. Suppose was lea a bilateral meeting between
Putin and Zelensky, maybe in Hungary. I think he was
invited to Moscow. I wouldn't do that if I were Zelenski.
But this is why I want to talk about a
little bit with you. You know, when Biden and Democrats
were in charge, Essentially one of the reasons that people
say this started was that Ukrainian Ukraine had become to
or had been usurped by some sort of Western involvement,
or that they were going to join NATO, and those
things threatened Russian interests and so on. But it seemed
to me like the things that they're talking about now
and the things that we're promising Ukraine is almost like
an Article five NATO promise, where once this deal is struck,
and I think Trump actually said this, they were going
to be security guarantees for Ukraine and it's essentially as
good as joining NATO, isn't it. I mean, do you
worry about us having to protect Ukraine from now on.
Speaker 2: Well, I have not liked the West's posture toward Ukraine
or even like massive NATO expansion because of the problems
with war with Russia. I haven't liked that for decades.
But I don't think we really have the clearest idea
of what will be offered if it's something like Ukraine
formally joins the West and loses some of these regions
that Russia feels are historically tied with Russia more than
the other regions of Ukraine. I mean, all of Ukraine
has had some ties to Russia that they get the
access to the ports that they went to war over.
You know, if the ending war requires all sides to
make concessions, right, but if they are joining economically, like
the EU and the EU the European Union countries that
care so much about this conflict, do the security for Ukraine,
which there's always been some of that from the West,
so it's not like a brand new thing and the
US backs it. I think that's you know, that's kind
of how the war was always going to end something
like that at least, And that's just whether you like
it or not, that's just kind of how it has
to be right.
Speaker 1: Well, I'll push back and say I don't think that
wars always end with concessions. I mean plenty of warson.
Speaker 2: I mean, unless you're going to have a unless you're
going to have Russia take all of Ukraine, that's how
it's going to end.
Speaker 1: Right, Well, I don't I don't know. I would say
that it seems to be the clearest way around this
is for Ukraine to concede that Crimea is no longer
part of its country, hold on to those eastern provinces,
have some kind of security guarantees from the United States
or the Ornato, and then Russia just accepts that that's it,
and there's a Ukrainian nation, which I don't think actually
Putin thinks is a real thing. But I mean Kiev
is essentially the first Russian city in the world, right,
and you know, going back in history, so I think
he's always viewed Ukrainians as a fake nationalities other even
the Soviets did in a way. But anyway, aside from that,
I think that that is the maybe the way to go.
It doesn't sound like Zelensky was willing to concede any
of those eastern provinces yet, so we'll see. I mean,
maybe some of them. Maybe I don't know that, I'm
not I don't.
Speaker 2: Know if he should go into negotiations acting like he's
going to concede that.
Speaker 1: But what my concern is, like you say, everyone needs
to make concessions. What concession does Russia make? Russia is
the one who aggressive, you know, started this war. Russia
took Crimea before. What concessions do they make taking less
than they were from them before? It's essentially the concession,
all right. I mean I think that, you know, I
could understand why maybe the other side isn't crazy about
that kind of negotiate being starting point. But we'll see.
I hope, I hope it works out. Wars that war
is terrible. You see, lately there has been more and
more sort of civilian targets I think that you were seeing,
especially in Ukraine. It's horrible. It's horrible. A lot of
young men have died, all have men, you know, and women,
but mostly men have died. I mean, we don't know
the real number. I'm sure it's pretty high, and it's
just horrible.
Speaker 2: And there are all sorts of other costs associated with war.
I was feeling, you know, you said, oh, it's been
bad for Russia too, and I'm thinking I have this posture.
I don't think it's very Christian, but it's like, if
you start a war, I don't have so much sympathy
for what happened to you as a result of that war.
You know, we talked about it with Gaza and people like, oh,
this is a horrible situation for the people of Gaza.
It's like it is, and you shouldn't have started the
October seventh War, you know, not that that not that
anything that happens after a country invades is something you
don't need to worry about. But if Russia didn't want
to lose all those men, they should not have invaded.
Speaker 1: Wow.
Speaker 2: You know.
Speaker 1: Yeah, My context was merely that they are paying a
price too. It's not as that this can go on
forever there either. I'm sure there are domestic pressures. People
are dying, that there's an economic cost. There's a cost
in the world. You know, even though China's buying their oil,
you know, India's buying their oil, and Europe was still
buying their gas, you know what I mean, even as
the war was going on. But what I mean is
there's a price for Putin to pay as well, not
that it so.
Speaker 2: The other costs that I think people should think about
in the West, because you're like, you know, there's just
an aspect of realism having to have something to do
with what happens now. Ukrainians have suffered not just all
the loss of life and other casualties. They have also
lost freedom of speech and freedom of press and elections
and you know, these thing are things that happen in
wartime when a war is taking place in your own country.
Freedom to say, freedom of religion too. They've lost that.
These are costs and it's been going on for is
it two and a half years? Yeah, I think it's
two and a half or three and a half. I've
I've lost track of time post COVID, but this is
that's a bearable length of time to lose some of
these things, but it's not something you want to have
be a perpetual situation for the people of Ukraine too.
Speaker 1: It was interesting to see all the European leaders show
up at the White House afterwards with Trump and Zolensky,
and this meeting went far better than the last one.
Zelenski wore some weird suit thing this time, and I
think Trump was impressed. But what'd you make of that?
I thought they all showed up so that probably Trump
or they in their minds, Trump wouldn't kind of steam
roll z Olenski into some thing maybe, or that they
would perhaps lend him support and saying no, or I
don't know, I don't know what to make of it.
Speaker 2: I think they're wanting that, or they just want the
US to be the primary payer of whatever happens next Europe.
We have done so much for NATO since World War Two,
and they would like that to continue at the high
rates that we have been the high percentage of the
cost that we have been paying. And many Americans are
saying that they are more than happy to be in NATO.
They think it's an alliance that has worked very well,
but that it is also what eighty years eighty eighty years.
Speaker 1: Past, yeah, eighty years.
Speaker 2: Past the end of that war, and this should not
be helping people out when they have been war ravaged
for a few years or even a few decades. Is understandable.
When you're starting to hit the one hundred year mark,
you're like, Okay, this is ridiculous. So again, not that
there aren't reasons why we might want to still continue
to be the big dog there in NATO. But Europe
really should have been doing much, much, much, much more.
They could be doing much more. They're the ones who
always talk a huge game about Russia being like the
worst thing in the history of the world, and then
they're like, and to fight them, we're gonna give zero
point two percent of our defense budget to it, or
whatever of our budget to defense against Russia. And so
there were the pro or the the rules based order
publications were really trying to push this idea. Yeah, that
Zelenski and these European leaders were gonna totally showed Donald
Trump whose boss. And I think it's not even that
he showed them whose boss, It's just that it was
a nice meeting on Friday. It was a nice meeting
on Monday, the type of thing you want to see
if you want to see the end of this war,
and people coming together and making sure they're all on
the same page, kind of thinking through what the contours
are for what everybody's willing to do. I did also
just I love seeing Maloney. Do you like her? She's
so pretty?
Speaker 1: I like her? Yeah, I mean I like her personality.
It's very real. A lot of eye rolling.
Speaker 2: That eye rolling during the German guys thing. I was like,
I'm with you, sister.
Speaker 1: She can't she can't control herself. It's amazing. I didn't mean,
I don't Yeah, I didn't think they came here to
show Donald Trump who's boss. But I do think they
came to show that Zelenski has their support. Whatever.
Speaker 2: Oh sorry, David, this is not important in the grand
scheme of things. But you mentioned Zelenski's suit. What did
you actually think of the suit?
Speaker 1: Very Eastern European looking. I don't know. I don't get.
I don't get this like pseudo in military garb that
he wears like he's out there being a general. I get.
Maybe it's I don't know. I read a story that
he actually has designers that make his you know, I'm
which kind of undermines the kind of gritty, militaristic vibe
he wants to give out. I don't know. I don't
know what to make of it. I mean, I am
not a huge fan of the guy or anything, but
I'm also not one of these haters. I'm sort of
somewhere in the middle. I just don't think he's very impressive,
but you know, his country's under attack, and yeah, I
don't know. It's a tough spot for any leader, I think,
but any what do you think. I think you have
something to say.
Speaker 2: Well, so I don't know. I was on with Cudlow yesterday,
Larry Cudlow, and he was really praising. He was talking
about how a bespoke suit can really help someone clothes
make them man this. You know, the negotiations all are
going better because he wore a suit properly. I really
don't like the costume that he has been wearing for
reasons that you just articulated, but I just don't even
like the idea of a costume when war is a
very serious thing, and he wasn't wearing it again with
any degree of reality. It was just the thing he said,
and tell the war is over, I'm going to wear
this costume. And Trump had kind of pointed out that
you should be respectful when meeting with certain people, and
so I was glad. I really was glad to see
him wear a suit. I know it's not the biggest
deal in the world, but it was appropriate for him
to wear suit. I did not love the suit. I
thought it was as one of my friends put it,
he looked like he was headed out to like an
adult playdate. It just didn't really.
Speaker 1: He looks like one of the like in a movie
where the bad guys are sitting up in the VIP
section of like a disco, and he's one of the
the henchman behind him. That kind of suit. I don't
think I could pull that suit off, I was thinking.
But then I think, no one. I don't think can
pull that suit off really, because it was kind of goofy.
But listen, I wish he was, you know, I just
don't think it's a big deal either way. You know,
people have their own styles. I don't know what to say.
He's got his own esthetic going.
Speaker 2: So the other thing. Yeah, I was also I'm up
here in New York and I noticed that the cover
of the New York Post yesterday, even though it was
about Zelenski, in fact, it was praising him as the
hero of the summit. But they took off the Ukraine
flag finally. I think like they had it on for
a really long time, a Ukraine flag on the cover
of the New York Post. It was always weird. Then
they took it off. Then they had it back on
and now it was off again. Why am I mentioning this?
I don't remember.
Speaker 1: Anyway, I'm always slightly weirded out by people putting up
foreign flags, I have to say. I mean, I am
a huge, huge supporter of Israel. I'm a Zionist. I
don't even I don't put Israeli flags up. I'm an
American and that doesn't mean that you can't love another
country even or really support it or want it to
succeed because of all that. But I do find unless
there's also an American flag maybe next to it, I mean,
at the very least, but I just I think it
undermines I think it makes most normies feel weird to
see a foreign flag flying. And I'm not you know,
I get why people do it. I'm not even against
the motivation sometimes, but I just in America, we fly
American flags, you know. You know, if a leader comes
over and you want both flags next to each other
to respect the country of the people who are coming,
I think that's fine. But anyway, so yeah.
Speaker 2: This is Molly Hemingway encouraging you to listen to my
favorite podcast, Issues, etc. Every day you get in depth
interviews with host Todd Wilkin asking expert guests substantive, thought
provoking questions on all of the important news and issues
of our day. The expert guests are in culture, law, ethics, philosophy, theology,
and apologetics. Expert guests expansive topics, always extolling christ issues, etc.
Speaker 1: I wanted to talk about this a little bit as well.
I think Donald Trump has been an excellent forum policy president. Frankly,
I mean, other than tar off stuff. If that's considered
foreign policy, I think it is. But he even made
peace with Armenia and Azerbaijan, which a war that I
only maybe tangentially had even was in my consciously like
I didn't even know what was exactly going on there.
I knew something was happening. That's one more piece deal,
I think than Obama and Biden had all together. Right.
And you know, he's even though he exaggerates in this
hyperbole about ending the war right away or the war
never would have happened if he was president, and maybe
that's true, maybe that's not.
Speaker 2: Yeah, or his involvement in his level of involvement in
resolving the piece is sometimes exaggerated too.
Speaker 1: Yeah, But I do think because the world understands that
the United States will, and not in a Neoconi way,
but will exert their power and strength when needed. Like like,
I obviously I'm very you know, I'm a component of
tariffs and everything, but if India is going to be
buying Russian oil, I can understand the motivation for, you know,
for us to use economic levers of power to try
to involve ourselves in that situation or with Iran, et cetera.
I think the people know that we will, they have
more respect for us, and they're more willing to maybe
come to the table and strike peace deals, talk about
peace and all of that. And then maybe that's what's
happening here as well. I don't know.
Speaker 2: That's kind of what I was trying to get at too,
This moral clarity, his Trump's natural revulsion to war, his
opposition to people just being killed. That's just something we
frequently hear people talk about war in terms of democracy
spreading or spreading values. We don't hear a lot of
people or defending well, yeah, but you know what I mean, Like,
if you're having like a moral component, it frequently is
like and then we're gonna make it so that the
girls can go to school in Afghanistan or something like that.
But I really appreciate that Trump. It really seems to
grieve him personally, like it just comes up naturally when
you're talking to him or when he's talking publicly. The
death that comes along with war. It's a very real
issue he has, and he works to end it, and
he seems to care regardless of you know, like when
you're mentioning the Azerbaijan and Armenia or you know, wars
that were actually much more involved in to be a
similar thing for him.
Speaker 1: Well, I was happy that the other day he said
that the war will end in Israel whin Hamas is decimated,
which I think, yes, shows a lot of moral clarity
for the long term prospects of peace there in general.
But anyway, I think he's done a good job in
foreign policy. I think this hopefully will be successful first
bilateral talks and trilateral talks, and obviously we're going to
have to involve ourselves again in another country. And I
think it just seems like that cuts against the grain
of what realists, so called realists or whatever you want
to call them.
Speaker 2: No, it does not realists to give security restrainers or
you're talking about the people who really oppose involvement in others.
That's what I'm saying. I actually think it is quite
like I said, you don't have to like it. It's
just probably how it's going to be. That there will
be some you know, not insignificant US involvement in securing
the peace. And whether that's just US sort of being
the backstop, or whether they're are financial or other agreements
like the Devil will be in the details here. And
I do think people, you know, first of all, they
need to continue to pray for peace because it's no guarantee.
Just because Putin and Trump talked, and just because the
European leaders all got together, it does not mean that
we're going to see an end to this war. It's not,
you know, it's these are really solid steps, but there
is a long way to go. Even if it happens quickly,
there's a lot that needs to be done to figure
out how to end it. And you know, what the
terms are for everybody, and so the negotiations that take
place in those details will be key. And I don't
think Americans want a super big They understand that there
might be some role here for the United states. They
do not want a super big involvement. I saw someone
pointing out that Trump had said during the campaign that like,
not one American boot would go on the ground in Ukraine,
and I looked up the interview. It's with David Sachs,
and it really relates to what he was saying about.
In terms of escalation of the war. I think Americans
still would like to not see too much American you know,
too many Americans on the ground elsewhere in an official capacity.
There's a difference when it's securing peace versus amplifying the war.
Speaker 1: I don't think there'll be American boots on the ground there.
In fact, I think Trump said it guaranteed that wouldn't
be the other day.
Speaker 2: Already we already have people there, though, you know.
Speaker 1: I don't think there'll be an official marine presence or
something there like you had in the Cold War. I
think that there we have enough, you know, we have
enough air power and stuff like that that I mean,
once we give a guarantee in that way, it's unlikely
in my estimation that Russia would break that, right. I
just I don't think they would risk it. Maybe who knows,
But like you mentioned, NATO which actually think wasn't a
great idea and an amazing alliance for a long time
during the Cold War. Yes, you know, we helped them,
but we helped ourselves not to be you know, we
were in a Cold War. We also helped ourselves in
the sense of not having to go over there and
rescue Europe, you know, which would have been a heart again,
which probably would have happened if we weren't there. The
Soviets almost surely would have started a war. And but
I've been skeptical for years in the sense that I
think its mission as the mission of NATO, should change,
but also that the Europeans, now because they're wealthy and
there's peace there, need to pick it up. And we
essentially just prop that whole thing up. And none of
them were even paying their fair share. I mean, in
a start, this promised percentage, it's not even you know.
Speaker 2: It started as a pretty tight alliance, and it's now
just it's gotten extremely large, and the larger you get,
the less secure it is too, the less ability it
has to work. But it's that doesn't mean it's not
a good alliance. It is a good alliance.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I don't know. I just think maybe it needs
to rethink it's it's it's goals. I mean, I do
think Russia is an aggressive power, but I don't think
it's the same as the Soviet Union by any mean
in a way. So anyway, I know it's a longer conversation,
but anyway, and Trump has gotten guarantees we'll see if
they meet them from I think Germany and other countries
to actually increase how much they're spending on defense, which
they should have been doing. And so that's also and.
Speaker 2: He's already gotten that to be increased, and that's good, right, right,
and just you know European countries too.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and just it's not like a Trumpian thing. Obama
wanted that as well, talked about it. You know, it's
like been going on a long time. And so I
think that's impressive. Anyway, I think Trump's doing a good
job on foreign policy. Next topic, let's talk about unfortunately,
let's talk about Gavin Newsom, governor of California. So he's
been out there. Obviously, he wants to run for president,
wants to be president. It's clear that's what's happening here.
But I noticed he's he has his social media has
become very I would say, Trumpian, or he's trying to
be Trumpian, you know, mocking jd Vance and Trump and
in kind of a I guess, a juvenile way, and
being very aggressive. And then there's a whole redistricting fight
where he's essentially taken the mantle of the Democratic Party
to fight back against the Texas redistricting I guess in
the Indiana redistricting potential redistricting. What do you make of
him just in general, Like, it's hard for me to
know because I don't understand people very well who would
appeal to them and who would not, And it seems
to me he is unappealing to me for many reasons.
He's almost like a caricature of a like a rich,
detached person who who actually doesn't understand what a noormy
is worrying about and so on. Do you know what
I mean? But I don't know.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't. Oh, there's so many thoughts here, and
it doesn't work on me. The Gavin Ussom thing does
not work on me at all. There is nothing about
him that I find appealing in any way. But when
you look at his social media team mimicking Trump, one
of the reasons why it's a bit cringey. Is that
the way Trump speaks is very authentic to Trump. We've
seen it for decades. He's very consistent in his insults
and his praise and all of that is very real.
You might hate it, you might dislike it. I know,
particularly in the first Trump administration, I would talk to
people and they would, you know, constantly say I love
what he's doing. I hate the tweets, but they're real.
Gavin Newsom has hired a bunch of women to run
his social media and they do Trump style insults. And
on the one hand, I think it's not working because
it's not authentic and it's not even him. On the
other hand, there's something about his theatrics, his brazenness, his
very California. Yes, he like embraces the slick. You know,
he's slicking back his hair. He always looks kind of greasy.
He he does. You mentioned the Zelenski and the evil
guys in the movie. Gavin newsm is straight out of
the bad guy part in the in whatever the movie is.
But he's authentically that bad guy and he I remember
he did this debate with Ron DeSantis during the when
when nobody could even be considered a real potential challenger
to Donald Trump in the twenty twenty four primary. Ron
de Santis was just trying to gain some traction, and
so he debated Gavin Newsom.
Speaker 1: Do you remember that vaguely?
Speaker 2: Yeah, And it was on the merits of what was
actually being said. There was no question that Ron DeSantis
was just doing it. What if you cared about the
factual basis of an argument, like a policy argument. He
was winning. But Gavin Newsom was so willing to brazenly lie.
It was unbelievable. And I don't mean it in a
typical politician sense or even like a Donald Trumps sense,
you know, is the most beautiful building in the world
or whatever. He was just he would just make up things,
and he was very convincing about it. And I wonder,
I think that might work for trying to win the
Democrat primary.
Speaker 1: I think he can be president.
Speaker 2: Okay, Okay, Well, then that's that was very that you
just summed up.
Speaker 1: Very very well. I I just I think you're right
about his brazen line. But I don't think people care anymore.
We've sort of broken that down like so, because in
the past, let's say in the eighties, you're running for
office and you just brazenly lie, the newspaper is going
to point it out. You're going to become known as
a person and who's not telling the truth today. You
get away with that, and you'd probably have the Washington
Post in New York Times, you know, figuring out ways
to make whatever he said be true. I don't know
that that would hurt him. Also, we have to remember,
I mean, this is far off, we don't know what's
going to happen. But in twenty twenty eight, it's not
Donald Trump running anymore. You know, someone's going to have
to try to take that mantle, and for them it's
going to be hard also to ape and mimic and
recreate what Trump does, which is he brings a level
of a personality others don't have, of loyalty others don't
have from supporters, and also bringing in people who aren't
Republicans naturally, you know, some union members, working class, but
others as well. I think his latinos, I think his
celebrity works for him in a way. He just knows
how to connect to people in a way. I just
don't think could be wrong that jd Vance has or
Mark or Rubio has or DeSantis has so or whoever,
I don't know who else might run. The other thing
I was thinking about was that what other Democrat really
is in the running here? I don't there you could?
You know, Josh Shapiro is a very popular governor in
a state that Trump won, right, But I just don't
buy a that a Jewish person can run for the
Democratic nomination with the way things are. But also I
just I just don't know that he has the personality
to appeal to to you know, to independence in purplish
red states. I don't know for sure. I don't know
him that well, but I think Newsom has a big personality.
He wants it. He's theatrical, he's a good you know,
he's I don't know. I just I could see him winning.
You I don't, I don't. I don't know what's going
to happen or you meaning, with this administration for the
next few years. But oftentimes you're in charge, Yes, you
accomplish things, but also in your second term you become
less popular. It almost always happens to every president, and
Republicans might become less popular as we move on the
next few years. It just happens and I don't know,
so I could see him when it's Kamala Harris going
to right, who's going to run if not him? On
the Democratic side.
Speaker 2: Well, I was thinking about how when Trump destroyed and
rebuilt the Republican Party, it was at a good time
for that to happen for Republicans, meaning the voters in
the Republican Party had just grown extremely frustrated with their
party leadership. The arguments were just had not really been
updated in a while. It just it was in addition
to Donald Trump being a once in a generation political talent,
it was also just good time. And you have to
think that the Democrats are ready for some type of
massive overhaul of what they're offering. Like there, I'm not
saying they can't do well in the midterms or even
in the presidential but in terms of being a political
party that's not a total embarrassment to be part of,
or that can a party of the few future. I
wonder if it won't just be someone from completely the
outside who wins their nomination. Politicians are like when you
were talking about how Donald Trump is singular, that Rubio
and DeSantis and Vance are not going to show are
not going to be able to bring people in like
Trump does. That is absolutely true. But it's also true
that almost everyone in politics is a politician. You know,
Donald Trump just is not a politician, and there's something
very fresh about that. And Americans have frequently liked that
kind of thing when they feel like they're not dealing
with a politician. So maybe maybe it'll be someone just
completely different.
Speaker 1: I don't know, it could be. I mean, when it
comes to the Trump end of things, you know, let's
say JD. Vance gets he probably has the inside track
of a VP usually does that people if things are
going well or can transpose that support because they leave
that things will just continue in the same direction. So
like Coolidge, you know, Harding was a popular president in
a GW. You know, Bush, who wasn't exactly mister charisma,
you know, could take it because people, you know, they
liked what Reagan was doing in general. So we'll see.
I I just I think the right dismisses him as
kind of a California liberal and all of that, which
is true, which I think helps him bring the if
he was the candidate, bring the activists along with him
because they know he is he has been left wing.
He's done left wing policy. But he's not stupid, and
he articulates himself well. And I think he's a good debater,
as you pointed out. So anyway, I don't know that
he should be dismissed so easy. I think he's a
lot more impressive than Kamala Harris or someone like that.
And let's be honest, this is a split country. You know,
Kamala Harris lost, but you want a bunch of people.
A bunch of people. Tens of millions of people vote
for her, and she could barely articulate an opinion.
Speaker 3: So here's what happens when you pick winners and losers
in a free market economy. The Watch Dot on Wall
Street podcast with Chris Markowski. Every day, Chris helps unpack
the connection between politics and the economy and how it
affects your wallet. Biden gave car manufacturer Rivian six billion dollars.
Now Rivian is losing forty one thousand dollars for every
car sold.
Speaker 1: That is not a business model.
Speaker 3: Whether it's happening in DC or down on Wall Street,
it's affecting you financially.
Speaker 1: Be informed.
Speaker 3: Check out the Watchdot on Wall Street podcast with Chris
Markowski on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 1: Donald Trump, I don't have the exact quote in front
of you. Believe you said something like he's going to
try to ban mail in ballots in the country. I
should preface this by saying, I think mail in ballots
are completely ridiculous. I can't think of another word. It's
so easy to cheat. I was in Colorado. I would
see people filling out other people's ballots and things like that,
or a dad would get his, you know, kids ballots
who are away from college and fill them out. There's
just it is not a secure way to have an election.
It's all, you know. I think people should I think
they should be an election day. I think people should
show up, and I think mail and ballots should be
reserved for people who can't leave the house or elderly
and things like that. In any event, I don't think
he has the power to do that. I mean, it's
not the federal government's job to run elections in the
country for states, because if they did trust me, in
the long run, that's not going to work out. For
people want secure elections because you're going to have institutions
taken by leftists or just going to in the end
make it, you know, let illegals vote whatever.
Speaker 2: Why do you think that quoint issue of the Constitution
which says that elections are to be handled by state legislatures.
When we look back at some of the complaints about
how the twenty twenty election was run, one of the
really good, legitimate, you know, complaints was about how instead
of having legislatures change the rules for an election, sometimes
it was just like a secretary of state and that's
not what the constitution says. Well, it's quite but I
have to mention it.
Speaker 1: No, I mean, yeah, I obviously I agree, and the
state legislatures were not involved. And a lot of what
went on in twenty twenty, as far as COVID stuff,
either shutting down church as businesses, it was just run
like it was authoritarian. I mean, you just had a government.
Speaker 2: State, spauci, you know whatever, a governor.
Speaker 1: Or because there was an emergency. This is why I
don't love all of Trump's emergency declarations because these aren't
actual emergencies. We've totally gutted the meaning of an emergency.
And trust me, if there's a Gavin Newsom president, he's
going to abuse that power as well. Anyway, it is
what it is there. I'm worried about this. There are
Republican states that are very sensitive the electorate to like
cheating and legals voting and this and that, you know,
which happens on the margins, I think for sure, And
they're going to create an election process that makes it
slightly harder for people. I mean, yeah, it makes it
harder to vote. I think that's good actually, but then
you're going to have a bunch of states that make
it almost You tweeted me over something Andrew Yang said,
who was presidential candidate? When was that like whenever it
was an independent or he was a Democrat actually, but
he said that we should make it easier to vote
and let people vote via phone, even like these people
are insane. I see there's a movement to have sixteen
year olds vote. You know, they want just a free
for all because this is the way they win elections,
as you've written a book about and so on. So
are you worried that these Bluish states are going to
create systems that allow them to cheat or have these
free for alls while red states are going to have
really strict elections and that somehow undermines them or I
don't know.
Speaker 2: Yeah, no, it's one of those issues. A lot of
the election laws that changed in response to twenty twenty
happened in red states, not blue states. But and so
it's like, well, what's the good of that? You know,
you have much safer and more secure elections in red states,
and then in New York City you've got illgals registering
to vote and who knows if they're getting to vote
in presidential elections, and you know, there are all sorts
of problems in blue states. They tend to do a
much worse job of cleaning up their voting rules. They
do not know purge non voters. Ten percent of the
country moves every year, and so you have to kind
of like really stay on your voter list to make
sure people aren't registered in multiple states or even just
multiple jurisdictions within a state, or improperly registered in a
given state. But I think the way to look at
this issue is less about you know, will red states
do this and blue states do that? As proper election
administration is a constant activity. It's not something you do
once and then you're done. My favorite example of this
is Florida in the two thousand election, they were the
laughing stock of the world because of their hanging Chad issue,
their inability to resolve the election quickly, the fact that
two Democrat run counties in Florida were causing I mean
it literally led to a Supreme Court battle and decision.
And so the people of Florida, primarily beginning with Governor
Jeb Bush, but continuing to the current day under Governor
Marco Rubio, the legislature and the governor have worked to
improve their elections literally every year, to the point that
now when Florida has an election and they do have
some mail out ballots, in fact, yeah, they have definitely
mail out ballots, and they have a lot of other
provisions that a lot of Democrats like, they know who
won the election immediately within an hour, I would say,
even just massive elections with millions upon millions of people voting,
they know within an hour of its conclusion. And so
everyone needs to understand that how you run elections is
just you don't You don't have a free country if
you don't have good elections, and so it's just something
you need to pay constant attention to. But I do
think it's right to be worried about mail out ballots,
and I've never liked them, and even you know, Colorado,
I think is exclusively mail out ballot. But when you
look at elections as they began in this country, it
used to be people would vote publicly, you know, they
just like go down and publicly say like I'm for
this or I'm against this. And we moved to private
ballot in part so that people would not be pressured
into how they voted. So let's say you owed Tom money,
and Tom showed up at the town meeting and he said,
I'll let you go on some of your debt if
you vote for me for mayor. That kind of pressure
was not good for an election, and so they we
moved to a private ballot, and then we moved back
into the public ballot. I mean, imagine being in let's say,
like a new immigrant community, and you have or like
some kind of community that maybe has a tighter central control,
and the head of that community is like, okay, everybody,
bring in your ballot. I want to see who you're
voting for, and then we're going to seal them together
and we'll drop them off. You know, you just lose
the privacy of the voting booth al in a mail
out ballot situation, or a husband telling his wife how
to vote or vice versa, you know, and there being
some kind of pressure involved with that.
Speaker 1: This is why unions like open elections so they can
pressure the minority might be the majority and not unionizing.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you actually used to have the parties would actually
print up the ballot that you voted, and you would
take it in and deposit it, you know, and so
like there are examples of this from one hundred years ago.
You've got a copy of a Republican ballot and I'm
not saying a list that tells you how to vote,
but literally the ballot. And so we moved to standardized ballots,
have it be issued by the government, have tight control
over them, make sure that people are who they say
they are. All of these protections developed over time to
secure the ballot box. And then with what we've done
to elections in the last couple decades, it's just removed
almost all of them in a bad way. So I
would love it if people moved away from mail out ballots. Also,
I think it's funny. I think Russia does exclusively electronic
voting and people are always like so worried about Russians,
and we want to have elections like they do. They
don't have they don't have paper ballots that you vote
in person.
Speaker 1: It's funny. I'm sorry, no, gun Now, I'm just going
to say I tie this into redistricting as well, where
we're creating states where in a weird way, the parties
are ensuring that they'll never lose power and the way
we vote, for instance, but also in that we're going
to make all districts one. Essentially, states will become like
Senate seats. You know, you're going to have states with
very few districts that aren't voting the same way, and
that undermines democracy, you know, small d democracy and which
i'm usually four because I think democracies should be limited
as much as possible. But except in the House, where
that is the one place where the founders actually wanted
a very more democratic system. And I also want to
quickly say that, you know, there's Jeb Bush. Poor Jeb
Bush came up when Trump was you know, ran when
Trump was rising. That was his moment, and I think
people forget he was probably the favorite that election going in,
and Trump kind of destroyed Jeb and Jeb Bush became
sort of the the the person who everyone mocked is
the past. But he was actually a very good governor
of Florida. He schooled choice, the elect the electoral you know,
the election systems, the voting systems and so on, economics,
I think, you know, taxes and all that, and a
lot of regulation. He was a very effective governor, probably
better than his brother was a governor.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah. Everyone always says that if Jeb had won
his first election for governor and George had lost his
first election for governor, you would have had a different
one as president, and that might have been better for everybody.
Speaker 1: Let's talk about culture. I hear you have something to
tell me that's very exciting. That's something you did recently.
Speaker 2: Yes, I just want to say, first off, to break
the third wall here and speak directly to our listeners.
I told David I'd like to talk about how I
sang at the Grand Ole Opry this weekend. And he said,
what was the first word that you just said?
Speaker 1: You don't know much about your singing. Yeah, I was
just taking notes, and then I'm like, what should just say? Well,
actually it sounds exciting. Let let's hear about it.
Speaker 2: Oh, it was the thrill of a lifetime for me.
Have you been to the Grand Ole Opry.
Speaker 1: I was in the parking. You're talking about the new
like the new building. I was there now, And then
I went to like the old one. Yeah, I went
to visit the old one.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I had been. I'd gotten to go last year
and even be backstage, which was really exciting during a show.
And there's this band that Mark and I. There's this
musical artist that Mark and I just absolutely love beyond belief,
Monty Warden. And he has two bands. He's out of Austin,
you know, infamously with the Wagoneers and then that that
seems like I always use that word wrong, famously with
the Wagoneers.
Speaker 1: Sorry, depends what they did, Molly, that's infamous or not.
Speaker 2: And then his new band, The Dangerous View, which is
this great Americana jazz band that plays at the at
the Parker Jazz Club in Austin, and the Wagoneers play
at the Broken Spoke, which is a great honky tonk
in Austin. And insanely, Monty asked if I would sing
backup when he performed at the Opry this year. So
he's been at the Opry a bunch of times, like
fourteen times, and he is he's you know, he's just great.
So I just said yes, even though that's insane to
do it. And it was so exciting. I mean, I
can't tell you. I still feel like I'm floating. And
it's been many days since I was there. To go
out on that stage, it's weird to have an inanimate
object give that kind of feeling. Like, you know, they
did move the stage from the rhymen to where it
is now, but you just walk out there and it's
like unbelievable. And it was a packed house. It was
a Saturday night. The crowd was awesome. I mean, they
were just they were there to have fun, you know
what I mean, Like they were there to hear music,
and they were very supportive of it. They were just
it was it was a really really great show.
Speaker 1: That's awesome. That is uh yeah, it's something.
Speaker 2: You nerve wracking, really cool. So sorry, I'm like literally
just like thinking about it and dazing off. But so
mont it was the it was the anniversary of Elvis's death,
and so Monty performed the two songs that Elvis sang
at the Opry. And when Elvis was invited to perform
at the Opry, he I mean, by all accounts, he
basically bombed. They did not like what he was doing.
They were angry. They thought it was too rock and
roll infused or too much black influence, and so they
kind of just did not support him at all. He
was even told that he should probably just go back
to Memphis and do trucking or whatever. I mean, like,
they were really hostile to him. So he never performed again.
Wow and uh at.
Speaker 1: The opera and.
Speaker 2: So it's just it was cool son. He played the
two songs and he was like, I hope you give
me a better reception than you gave you.
Speaker 1: What were the two songs?
Speaker 2: Gosh? Yeah. So the two songs that Elvis sang at
the Opry back in the fifties, like nineteen fifty four
were Bluemon of Kentucky and That's all Right, And so
I got to sing back up on That's all Right,
which just you know, such a it was great.
Speaker 1: Did anyone tape this film this event?
Speaker 2: Well, there were people in the audience who filmed it
and posted it on Twitter. Buck Throckmorton was there, which
was exciting. I don't know if you read him at all.
And so he put some stuff up on Twitter and
then I think that the Opry will release it or
I think I don't know.
Speaker 1: So that.
Speaker 2: And Mark was there backstage and he took some videos
from the back. But so I can I can look
at it. But I think that's the so funny is
obviously I sing at church, I sing in the shower.
I like to sing. But making your debut in public
singing while making your debut at the Grandule Opry is
another thing in time?
Speaker 1: Did you sing? Like when you were young, were you
in like the car chorus and high school? Like did
you do you have any singing background? Okay, yeah, did
you have a band or anything.
Speaker 2: Not anything like that. No, but I've definitely always sung
at church and I sung in school. In fact, Ammy
Adams was in my show choir.
Speaker 1: Did she have a good voice, Yeah, she's in that music. Yeah,
all right, congratulations, that's amazing. Yeah.
Speaker 2: It was so exciting. And also while we were there,
we met everybody after the show who had come that
we knew out at the flagpole in front of the Opry,
and while we're walking out, the crowd was just like
cheering us, and it was very addictive kind of thing.
And then also some people came up and they were like,
knew who I was, and so they were very excited
that I was also doing this. It was just I'm
so thrilled that Monty allowed me to do that. And
his wife is one of my very favorite people in
the whole world, so it was great to be able
to do it with her, and she's so she was
up there like so hot. It looked great, and I'm
kind of like so nervous, I'm barely moving.
Speaker 1: When I've watched movies about the Grand Old Opera, you know,
it's like you get to come up, sing a couple
of songs, you leave, and there's just this constant like
show going on where people keep going. Do they still
preserve that tradition or.
Speaker 2: Absolutely? So sorry, I have all these other things I
want to talk about too with it related to it.
So when you normally they have this amazing backup band
or like permanent band at the opry and backup singers,
and when you show up to perform, they have this
thing called the cage that's in the back that it's
just all the musicians are set up in a tight area.
You do your songs, they learn them then and then
they play them. I mean, there's just amazing, fantastic musicians. Okay,
So the night that we performed at the Opry, there
were two kind of like big streamer type people or
you know, big artists that were releasing songs or were there.
Jordan Davis and Kylie Morgan. And so when we show up,
Jordan Davis is practicing with the band on stage, which
is very different. And so then they told us that
we're all we're all going to do our warm ups
on the stage, which was very cool. I'm so glad
we got to go out there before we did it
for real, because it made it a little bit more
comfortable when we did it. If you take us a
tour of the Opry, there's a backstage tour you will
see that there are some of their regular performers throughout
the years have their own own dressing rooms, and then
you get to be in those dressing rooms. So we
got the Porter Wagner dressing room, which was so awesome
to be in there, and it's just fun. You're just
walking back there and all the stars are there and
they're all just hanging out and talking and their supporter
or their support or band are there too, and sometimes
their kids are there. I had a kid there. It
was just great and it is like you feel like
you're in one of those shows they used to show
at the Opry. Just everyone's hanging out and yeah, and
then you can watch people from backstage, which I love
to do, and then you get to cheer them on
they when they come off stage. It's just a very
fun environment. But it's very quick. Only two or three songs.
So Monty did in honor of Elvis because it was
the anniversary of his death August sixteenth, These two songs
that he performed at the Opry, and then he also
did one of the sacred song that he had writen
and with his wife Brandy called Steadfast Love, and so
we also did back up on that and it was
it was just fun. Crowd into it great. I love Nashville.
It's so fun to be there. And we had we
did some other stuff like radio shows on the Friday
beforehand where we sang, and they have these singer songwriter
shows at various bars in Nashville where you go and
you present, and Monty did one of those two which
was really fun at Third and Lensley. So it was
just a great weekend. And so next next.
Speaker 1: Step for you is to appear on one of his
albums as a backup singer and then branch out into
a solo career.
Speaker 2: Right, yeah, that's definitely what's going to happen next.
Speaker 1: Well, congrats, that's awesome. Thanks to tell me we're going
to do that.
Speaker 2: But now did you do any Oh? Sorry, that's also
I kept it kind of secret because I wanted to
surprise Sean Davis. And Sean Davis was there and he
was surprised, so I had to keep it like so
mum rather than talking about it.
Speaker 1: So did you invite him? And then he showed up?
And then you just showed up on stage? Okay, yeah,
that's a lot of fun. So that's great.
Speaker 2: What about you?
Speaker 1: Did you whatever?
Speaker 2: This week?
Speaker 1: My stories are going to see him very small. Now
wait my room by myself. I had a.
Speaker 2: Tweet from someone that said, like it'll be I watched
There was a horrible show I watched about the Cotswalds.
So I only watched four seasons. David Harsani, what did
you do, Molly? You know?
Speaker 1: Oh?
Speaker 2: I sang at the grandele I loved it exactly.
Speaker 1: I was gonna say I played guitar in my room
by myself, but I enjoyed it and I was excellent.
What did I do? Oh? Yeah, I have some news
for you. I think today there's a new documentary on
Netflix about Devo, a one of these two hour deals. Yeah,
I've only watched the beginning. I didn't know they were
at Kent State when Ken State went down and all
that that I have, And yeah, it does seem so small.
I got this. We got this email from Gary who's
the name, and he asked me if I watched Alien Earth.
I thought maybe I spoke about it, but I guess not.
I did watch the first episode. I'm obviously a big
sci fi fan for people who listen know that, and
I thought it was really well done. It's a Noah
Hawley show. He did far Ago. He's ring a couple
of books that I think are okay novels. Timothy Oliphanson,
it who I find I like from Justified, plays a
very different role. I have to tell you I watched him.
I'm not a big like celebrity podcast listener, but Conan
and Brian is a podcast. I think Conan needs a
friend maybe, and he had Tim at the Olifan on
and I find him very refreshing, like very First of all,
he makes me sick in the sense that he's older
than me and he looks like twenty years younger. He's
smart and funny, yeah and all that hate that, but
he's really funny. I think he's funnier than he was,
funnier than Conan, honestly, and you know, he's married a
long time, he's in just it seems like obviously not
a normal dude, because that's abnormal what's going on with
him physically, but normal in the sense that he seems
like easy to get along with. Anyway. I like him
and he's good in it. And the show is a
little it's not you know, it's a little scary and
all that, but good and at least the first episode.
So that's all I have. Did you do anything else
other than sing at the Grand Old Obry?
Speaker 2: Yes? So I'm in New York right now and with
my oldest kid, and we decided after Gutfeld last night,
so I was on Gutfeld and we taped that that
we would go see this new Jeff Buckley documentary called
It's Never over Jeff Buckley. I think that's what it's called.
Speaker 1: Now, I'm sorry. He's the one who died swimming. Was
it swimming or drowned? Yeah? Yes, Okay, I'm not. I'm not.
Speaker 2: You're not like a massive Jeff. Honestly, you are so wrong.
Speaker 1: I'm a bigger fan of his dad, Tim Buckley. Have
you ever listened to him?
Speaker 2: Yes? And I don't think that's a justifiable position.
Speaker 1: No, I never got into it. I'll have to give
it another shot. But go on, Oh, you're killing me.
Speaker 2: So we went down to the Angelica film thing down
in Soho and it was great. It was kind of
like an old school massive movie theater, you know, like
a small and.
Speaker 1: I've been it's been around forever.
Speaker 2: Yeah, right, and it's a good crowd and they were
showing it like every hour on the hour. And at
the end of the documentary they just have a bunch
of songs of him singing at a concert in Boston
before Grace came out. What is that the name of
the album? Did I just make that up?
Speaker 1: You're the massive fan.
Speaker 2: I'm horrible with names.
Speaker 1: Grace, Yeah, Grace, And.
Speaker 2: To ask my kid, I was like, I think that's right.
It was a well done documentary. I have my quibbles
on things, but he was such an interesting figure it
would make it would be better to talk about it
if you appreciated him like you should.
Speaker 1: I will watch it when it's streaming and then we can.
Speaker 2: I think you would really like it. And it does
deal with his father. So his parents got pregnant in
high school, they got married, and the dad left before
he was even born, and it just caught. It creates
a hole in his heart. He does get to meet
him before his father dies of a heroin overdose, but
he's young, and it's just he barely meets him, he
barely has a role in his life. And then his
mom is, you know, on the eccentric, and it just
goes through who he was as a person, how difficult
it was to create this art, how wonderful his album
that his studio album was. And it was a nice story.
And then we were going to go to dinner right nearby,
and we went into a snobby place that explained we
were not allowed to be in there. So we went
to Balthazar and I had at I had what I
consider a celebrity siding, which is did you ever see
that TV show it's called Catastrophe has like an American
comedian and an Irish woman, and.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think I do.
Speaker 2: I think the American comedian is some left winger, but
he was. He's great in this show and they have
had great, did great. So we're walking.
Speaker 1: Into on probably this person is going to be it's.
Speaker 2: So late at night that Balthazar has, you know, like
we could go in there, but we're walking in there
and we're walking behind these really hot women that look
like literal models. And then I realized one of them
was Sharon Morgan, the Irish Chicken. That okay, I was excited.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, no, she's she's around a good work. Yeah,
that's a that's a lot you did this week.
Speaker 2: I agree.
Speaker 1: Yeah. If you want to hear more of Molly's adventures,
come back next week. But until then, be lovers of
freedom and anxious for the phrase see how along the
Street