Speaker 1: Hodsave America is brought to you by simply Safe. There's
Speaker 1: a line between home security and a neighborhood surveillance dragnet.
Speaker 1: You want to know who's at your door, not track
Speaker 1: every passer by walking their dog on the sidewalk. Simply
Speaker 1: Safe respects that boundary. It's why you can trust them
Speaker 1: with your home.
Speaker 2: I set up a simply Safe system and incredibly easy
Speaker 2: to do. I customized it on the website.
Speaker 1: Should you pick up a drill?
Speaker 2: I didn't even think of a drill, didn't even need
Speaker 2: a drill. It just sticks right on there and once
Speaker 2: you have it set up, the app is really great.
Speaker 2: The customer support was always great. It really does give
Speaker 2: you peace of mind. You know, like security can be expensive.
Speaker 2: It costs a billion dollars to secure the White House ballroom.
Speaker 1: Yeah, not your house though, no much less much less,
Speaker 1: But simply say, if you can customize your system to
Speaker 1: fit your needs, it ships fast directly to your door.
Speaker 1: The app guide it's set up is simple and there's
Speaker 1: no drilling required. People are really upset about the drilling. Huh,
Speaker 1: ain't the drill important?
Speaker 2: No holes?
Speaker 1: So you can install and arm your system in under
Speaker 1: an hour. Simply Safe is more than just a security camera.
Speaker 1: It's a comprehensive system of sensors, indoor and outdoor cameras
Speaker 1: and twenty four to seven professional monitoring. It's backed by
Speaker 1: Simply Safe twenty four to seven professional monitoring agents who
Speaker 1: dispatch emergency help, win you need it. Over five million
Speaker 1: people value and trust simply Safe with their home security
Speaker 1: every day. Right now, our listeners will get fifty percent
Speaker 1: off a new system when you sign up for professional monitoring,
Speaker 1: and your first month is free. Just visit simply safe
Speaker 1: dot com slash crooked. That's half off at simply safe
Speaker 1: dot com slash crooked. There's no safe like simply Safe.
Speaker 2: It's a new show from The Guardian called Stateside with
Speaker 2: Kai and Carter. The idea is pretty simple. Slow things down,
Speaker 2: focus on one story, ask the questions you're probably already
Speaker 2: yelling at your phone, and by the end actually feel
Speaker 2: like you understand what's going on. They're digging into everything
Speaker 2: from authoritarianism to the rise of people dating AI chatbots
Speaker 2: to what's really behind the latest mission to the Moon.
Speaker 2: No fluff, no pretending everything is fine, just smart conversations
Speaker 2: and sharp reporting. The show pulls from the Guardian's global newsroom.
Speaker 2: So you're getting covered across politics, culture, climate, and more,
Speaker 2: plus conversations with big thinkers and newsmakers. Join Kai writ
Speaker 2: and Carter Sherman three times a week as they try
Speaker 2: to make sense of all this. New episodes drop every Monday,
Speaker 2: Wednesday and Friday starting May thirteenth. You can watch on
Speaker 2: YouTube or listen wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 1: Welcome to Pod Save America.
Speaker 3: I'm John Favrum, I'm John Love It Tommy Detur.
Speaker 1: On today's show, We're going to break down the new
Speaker 1: gold standard New York Times poll that shows Democrats opening
Speaker 1: an eleven point lead in the midterms. Let's have that
Speaker 1: election today. Huh please hurry up. We'll also talk about
Speaker 1: how Trump's revenge tour came for a Louisiana seditor Bill
Speaker 1: Cassidy and is coming for Congressman Thomas Massey and Tuesday's
Speaker 1: Kentucky primary. There's also some fresh new corruption to discuss,
Speaker 1: Trump's new taxpayer funded two billion dollar slush fund he'll
Speaker 1: use to reward his favorite criminals, and revelations that he's
Speaker 1: basically been day trading in his spare time thirty seven
Speaker 1: hundred stock trades in just three months. That's so many trades,
Speaker 1: so many trades.
Speaker 2: Advice, just put it in an index.
Speaker 1: N just kidding. Yeah. We also got a new Iran
Speaker 1: Taco brewing and renewed interest in Cuba and Greenland, which
Speaker 1: is just one of the reasons. We'll also dive into
Speaker 1: the latest debate over how much Democrats and commentators should
Speaker 1: be talking about old Man Trump losing.
Speaker 2: His marbles speaking old man check out four US. Ever,
Speaker 2: you're just gonna sit here with this. Guy's got his
Speaker 2: fucking this fucking nerds got his glasses off waiting.
Speaker 3: For you to do it.
Speaker 1: Sorry, I scratched my eye. That's don't don't. Don't get
Speaker 1: used to it everyone hopefully, But first before we start,
Speaker 1: tickets for Cricket Con twenty twenty six are on sale
Speaker 1: now for everyone. Come hang with us November fifth through
Speaker 1: seventh in Washington, d C. For live shows, panels, and
Speaker 1: a big fun party to celebrate and or mourn the
Speaker 1: twenty twenty six mid terms. See I added mourn because
Speaker 1: because Dan Dan so superstitious. You know, Cricket's Friends of
Speaker 1: the Pod get a subscriber only priced so if you
Speaker 1: want a subscription loaded with exclusives, and a discounted Cricket
Speaker 1: Con tick. Be sure to join Friends of the Pod.
Speaker 1: There's all kinds of benefits that come with that. No
Speaker 1: more ads when you're listening to any of these any
Speaker 1: of your favorite cricket pods. Plus you get exclusive subscriber
Speaker 1: only shows like Polar Coaster, Dan Pfeiffer, Only Friends, which
Speaker 1: is our extra episode OF's like our secret extra episode
Speaker 1: of Pods Save America that we do, and a whole
Speaker 1: bunch of other stuff. Substack newsletters everything, get the tickets
Speaker 1: for Cricket Con and all the info you need at
Speaker 1: Cricketcon dot com. Go to Crooked dot com slash friends
Speaker 1: to subscribe to Friends of the Pod, and we can't
Speaker 1: wait to see you at Cricket Con.
Speaker 3: All right.
Speaker 1: Donald Trump and the Republican Party have been shitting the
Speaker 1: bed in nearly every poll for the last few months,
Speaker 1: But now Nate Cohne and the New York Times have
Speaker 1: come down from the mountaintop with a stone tablet that
Speaker 1: confirms how screwed they are. Trump's approvals at thirty seven
Speaker 1: percent in their new poll. That is a record low
Speaker 1: for him and for both terms in all New York
Speaker 1: Times Siena polls and midterm voters also favored Democrats by
Speaker 1: eleven points fifty to thirty nine percent over Republicans. President's
Speaker 1: biggest liability in the poll remains his handling of the
Speaker 1: cost of living, which his political strategists keep hoping he'll
Speaker 1: pretend to care about his evidenced by Monday's White House
Speaker 1: event on his discount drug website, trump RX. Let's see
Speaker 1: how it went.
Speaker 4: I think, outside of maybe a cure itself, it's the
Speaker 4: biggest thing to happen to healthcare and everything having to
Speaker 4: do with medical and any in any way, shape or form.
Speaker 2: There's never been anything like this.
Speaker 1: Really sold it. Huh what did that really sold it?
Speaker 1: Trump RX is the biggest thing in meda medical.
Speaker 2: The biggest thing in medical, biggest thing in medical. You
Speaker 2: can tell because there's a doctor here.
Speaker 3: You could tell you didn't like the event because he
Speaker 3: cut it really short, because it kind of looked like
Speaker 3: it looked like Ted X Toledo or something. It was
Speaker 3: just like Joe Gebbi in front of a giant screen.
Speaker 1: The whole thing was embarrassing. Mark Cuban was there. Trump OURX.
Speaker 1: By the way, it's not a platform for buying medications.
Speaker 1: Do you know that it's just it's a facilitator. You
Speaker 1: go to the website, it directs you to the other
Speaker 1: websites to buy the drugs, and sometimes it gives you coupons,
Speaker 1: just redirects you. Yeah, basically, and then and then Amazon
Speaker 1: and cubans thing what's what's his thing called cost plus
Speaker 1: drug cost plus drugs. You know, they work with the
Speaker 1: federal government to have some discounts on some extra drugs.
Speaker 1: But also if you have insurance doesn't help you, meaning
Speaker 1: it's cheaper to buy the drugs if you have insurance
Speaker 1: because the insurance covers the drugs. So really it's for
Speaker 1: people who don't have insurance sometimes get some discounts on
Speaker 1: some drugs. So it's not a bad thing. But it's
Speaker 1: not a it's not weird, it's not it's certainly not
Speaker 1: the biggest thing since medical No. What stood on to
Speaker 1: you guys in the New York Times poll.
Speaker 2: So whenever we're talking about a poll that looks good
Speaker 2: for Democrats, you got to go down and find the
Speaker 2: part where it's terrible for Democrats. And there's a this
Speaker 2: was a new one. I think they said, are you
Speaker 2: satisfied or dissatisfied? With the Democratic Party. And I'm used
Speaker 2: to seeing that voters maybe really unhappy with Republicans and
Speaker 2: planning to vote for Democrats, but then are ultimately not
Speaker 2: super satisfied with Democrats either. I was surprised to see that, uh,
Speaker 2: seven percent of people say they are dissatisfied with the
Speaker 2: Democratic Party and only five percent are very satisfied, which
Speaker 2: is a third of the number of people that are
Speaker 2: very satisfied with Trump. And I get being look, Republicans
Speaker 2: are in power. This is representing people that hate Democrats.
Speaker 2: It's represented by people that wish Democrats would fight more.
Speaker 2: It's represented by Democrats. Everyboney who has a criticism of
Speaker 2: the Democrats represented in that number. But the fact that.
Speaker 1: Where would you be in that when someone asks you
Speaker 1: I would I would be somewhat.
Speaker 2: I'm unsatisfied, baby, I'm unsatisfied.
Speaker 1: And then but then when they gave me the generic
Speaker 1: ballot thing, I'd be a percent right there.
Speaker 2: But just the fact that, like right now, if this whole, big,
Speaker 2: beautiful country of ours, there's only five percent of people
Speaker 2: that just love the Democratic Party. Like we talk a
Speaker 2: lot about the base, it's like we don't really have
Speaker 2: you know, Trump has a base.
Speaker 1: That is, who are those people?
Speaker 2: Right? Who are those five percent? I love everything they're doing.
Speaker 2: Can't wait to see them on tour.
Speaker 1: Like some of some of the staffers. Maybe I don't
Speaker 1: know relatives, a couple of folks on Blue Sky h.
Speaker 1: I don't know. So anyway, that was that's what stood
Speaker 1: out to you.
Speaker 2: That's it up to me. And then there was there
Speaker 2: was a number on AI that I thought was just
Speaker 2: interesting that only sixteen percent of people think AI is
Speaker 2: more good than bad. The vast majority are either undecided
Speaker 2: or think it's more bad than good.
Speaker 3: So it comes in a weekend where there's all these
Speaker 3: commencement addresses where students are booing the mere mention of
Speaker 3: AI to speak, which I love. You can tell there's
Speaker 3: a some of my foot there. Yes there is, Yes,
Speaker 3: there is, Tommy. Would you think I liked that? I didn't.
Speaker 3: I liked that. I noticed that sixty four percent in
Speaker 3: the Times pool said they think that going to war
Speaker 3: with Rom was the wrong decision, including seventy three percent
Speaker 3: of Independence. That is pretty clear cut. And it's not
Speaker 3: going to get better as this thing kind of drags
Speaker 3: out and the straight up home moves remains closed and
Speaker 3: the price of gas goes up seventy six percent. Rate
Speaker 3: economic conditions today is only fair or poor.
Speaker 1: That is quite bad.
Speaker 3: And then you know the glass half full thing of
Speaker 3: the Democratic Party was fifty percent say they will vote Democrat,
Speaker 3: thirty nine percent say they will vote Republican in the middle.
Speaker 3: So it's one of the better numbers of that nature.
Speaker 3: I think we've seen in a while.
Speaker 1: We've been saying Trump bad for so long now that
Speaker 1: when there's a poll this bad, it's sort of hard.
Speaker 1: It's almost like there's a there's a crying wolf thing, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: or like, you know, not Trump's I mean, Trump's always
Speaker 1: been bad, but like this is it for Trump things
Speaker 1: that the walls are closing in. But Nate Cone points
Speaker 1: out in his ride up of the poll, no president's
Speaker 1: approval rating has been under thirty eight percent for more
Speaker 1: than a few days in the last seventeen years, according
Speaker 1: to our average. Now we get Donald Trump, and then
Speaker 1: he realized seventeen years is George W. Bush, which just
Speaker 1: makes us really old. But that is the last president
Speaker 1: to be this unpopular for this long, Like it is
Speaker 1: the fact that this is this is worse than January sixth,
Speaker 1: Now for him.
Speaker 3: The economic indicator is just so bad. I mean, seventy
Speaker 3: six percent say they're concerned about their personal finance. Since
Speaker 3: the CBS bowl, sixty seven percent say they're stressed, Like
Speaker 3: both of those have been ticked up at the last year.
Speaker 3: Only twenty nine percent in the CBS the recent CBS
Speaker 3: pulse of the economy is good. Seventy seven percent say
Speaker 3: their income is not keeping up with inflation, so like
Speaker 3: gas prices are just killing everybody.
Speaker 2: Yeah to me, you look at it too. What's hidden
Speaker 2: is just how many people have just they're done, right,
Speaker 2: You could look at this poll and it's basically almost half,
Speaker 2: not quite half the country. They don't approve on Iran,
Speaker 2: they don't approve on the economy, they don't approven cost
Speaker 2: of living, they don't prove on immigration. They are done.
Speaker 2: And the number of people who now say Trump has
Speaker 2: personally made their economic circumstances worse forty four percent, which
Speaker 2: has gone up by like eight points. It's the last time,
Speaker 2: so it's gone up from out of the third of
Speaker 2: the country, it's rising up to nearly half are no
Speaker 2: longer saying just I don't just disapprove, like I'm feeling
Speaker 2: personally that he's not doing what he said he was
Speaker 2: going to do. So that to me was stood out.
Speaker 2: One other things that said out just about what's happening
Speaker 2: with Iran that you know, we have a lot of
Speaker 2: internet debates about, you know, the anti Semitism and anti
Speaker 2: Zionism and the Democrat's position on Israel. Meanwhile, opposition to
Speaker 2: economic military sport to Israel has gone from thirty eight
Speaker 2: percent to fifty seven percent over the last two and
Speaker 2: a half to three year. Support has gone from fifty
Speaker 2: four percent to thirty seven percent.
Speaker 1: And so a lot of numbers Trump's approval and so
Speaker 1: a lot of hand or support for Israel, financial aid,
Speaker 1: support for Israel is the is just about as popular
Speaker 1: as Donald Trump in this country.
Speaker 2: And so this is not an argument that's being lost
Speaker 2: on the margins. And it's not an argument that's being
Speaker 2: lost based on who gets platformed and who doesn't. There's
Speaker 2: a huge shift that has happened. I think you can
Speaker 2: lay that at the feet of Benjamin and Yaho and
Speaker 2: Joe Biden and Donald Trump. But the sooner people make
Speaker 2: this less about the specific individuals they dislike, often with
Speaker 2: good reason, and more about the deeper shift that is happening.
Speaker 2: I think the sooner people can actually reckon with what
Speaker 2: is a real and lasting damage that has happened to America's.
Speaker 1: Relationship with ISRUMK Yeah, I mean actually has write a
Speaker 1: story this morning about So there's the horrific anti semitism
Speaker 1: being directed towards members of Congress and voicemails and threats
Speaker 1: and all that, and it's it's horrible, And I would
Speaker 1: just say that like it, I do think it's important
Speaker 1: to separate like like virulent anti semitism from people who
Speaker 1: are pro Israel and making the case for supporting Israel,
Speaker 1: like we I think we talked about this last week.
Speaker 1: But like Josh Gotnheimer's op ed about anti semitism, and
Speaker 1: my party has a problem too, Like it starts with
Speaker 1: talking about actual anti semitism and then halfway through it
Speaker 1: suddenly veers into Oh and also Democrats are voting against funding,
Speaker 1: you know, military aid to.
Speaker 2: Israel, which is a major position.
Speaker 3: That's that should not be in the same op ed
Speaker 3: well and says that he wants to wean off military
Speaker 3: support for Israel.
Speaker 1: So yeah, right, I wish I would say. The only
Speaker 1: other thing that stood out to me is on the
Speaker 1: generic ballot. There's real movement just within the Times poll right,
Speaker 1: because every poll is it's a single pole snapshot in time.
Speaker 1: But you take a poll over time and it was
Speaker 1: D plus two to D plus five for the beginning
Speaker 1: part of Trump's term second term in the time Siana polls,
Speaker 1: and now it's D plus eleven, Like it's a big shift.
Speaker 1: And then when they take it to only almost certain
Speaker 1: or very likely voters, it's D plus fourteen. So even
Speaker 1: that D plus eleven is like, may not be what
Speaker 1: we ultimately see because you know, the most motivated voters
Speaker 1: end up turning out in a midterm more so than
Speaker 1: in a general election. So that's it's pretty big, and
Speaker 1: it's late. May you know, not a ton of time left?
Speaker 3: Knock on? Would yeah?
Speaker 2: Well, I mean, look Trump still it was time to
Speaker 2: become a different person.
Speaker 1: The bigger news from the White House on Monday was
Speaker 1: the announcement that President Trump's Justice Department is settling Donald
Speaker 1: Trump's lawsuit against the IRS for one point seven seven
Speaker 1: six billion dollars. Get it, get it, get it. That
Speaker 1: is money that will be taken directly from taxpayers and
Speaker 1: funneled into a slush fund that apparently exists to pay
Speaker 1: Trump supporters who were investigated or indicted or convicted during
Speaker 1: the Biden administration, or I guess none of those things,
Speaker 1: because there's really no guardrails whatsoever. It seems like they
Speaker 1: did this so Trump wouldn't be attacked for directly pocketing taxpayer.
Speaker 1: But I'm not sure this move is as clever as
Speaker 1: they think. What about you, guys?
Speaker 3: This is particularly like this is a Trump's second term
Speaker 3: is a political smash and grab job where he and
Speaker 3: his family and the people around him and people do
Speaker 3: his bidding, just take what they want, get rewarded. They
Speaker 3: take it from taxpayers, They trade on polymarket, they front
Speaker 3: run the stock market. And I think the fact that
Speaker 3: Trump is doing this before the mid terms just shows
Speaker 3: that he doesn't give a shit about politics anymore. It's
Speaker 3: all about money, and it's all about building monuments to
Speaker 3: himself and great shating, you know which, enriching himself. And
Speaker 3: they made an end run around the judge in this case,
Speaker 3: and they just cut a deal with another political appointee
Speaker 3: that he had named to create the slush fund. And
Speaker 3: do you think they thought it was cute saying it
Speaker 3: was one point seven seven six? Doesn't that just make
Speaker 3: the whole thing feel like made up and arbitrary more
Speaker 3: than anything else.
Speaker 1: They think it's like, oh, we've got patriotism in America's
Speaker 1: two fifty is coming up, and so if we call
Speaker 1: it a patriotic fund for patriots, then no one will
Speaker 1: no one will get mad at it.
Speaker 3: Shouldn't a fund to pay out restitution to people harmed
Speaker 3: be based on like metrics.
Speaker 2: And not the number coming from someone with how many
Speaker 2: how much earnings did you lose when you were at
Speaker 2: the Capitol on January sixth?
Speaker 1: When you're right, you know, I will say Congress passed
Speaker 1: a law to give the Department of Justice basically on
Speaker 1: unlimited fund for restitution for anyone who sues the federal government.
Speaker 1: And so that's how they ended up doing this. So
Speaker 1: it's like it is a one of those technically legal
Speaker 1: but extremely corrupt things that we have because of a
Speaker 1: stupid law that was passed that no one. No one
Speaker 1: thought to themselves, maybe they'll be an administration that just
Speaker 1: has the fund being unlimited because the president will sue himself,
Speaker 1: will sue.
Speaker 2: It's unversed in fairness to people that wrote that law.
Speaker 2: You would also assume that if it were to be
Speaker 2: so completely and obviously embrazenly abused by a president who's
Speaker 2: basically just going into the treasury and stuffing his pockets
Speaker 2: and leaving that there might be a Congress that would
Speaker 2: care about that, which we we don't have. Just like
Speaker 2: to Tommy's point, the judge was like, Hey, before this
Speaker 2: lawsuit by Trump against his own imaministration, which is unprecedented,
Speaker 2: that's being administered by his personal attorney, former personal attorney
Speaker 2: at the Department of Justice, I want you to come
Speaker 2: in and explain to me how you're actually parties in opposition,
Speaker 2: how you're not on the same side of this thing.
Speaker 1: And they're like, this is like in the deadline's May twentieth,
Speaker 1: that's when now it's May eighteenth.
Speaker 4: And.
Speaker 2: Basically proving the point that the judge was worried about. Uh,
Speaker 2: they have decided to reach a reach a deal beforehand.
Speaker 2: Now the Justice Department, Uh, if it was actually advocating
Speaker 2: on behalf of taxpayers, the American people, which is what
Speaker 2: it's supposed to do, it would fight this thing to
Speaker 2: the bidder end, or at the very least settle for
Speaker 2: zero dollars, which has happened in not exactly similar but
Speaker 2: cases that are akin to this in the past. But
Speaker 2: instead of doing this, yeah, doing this.
Speaker 1: Exattle the same case, his taxpayer info was leaked and
Speaker 1: he settled for zero zero a public apology from the IRS.
Speaker 2: Because he didn't pay and you know that is a
Speaker 2: that is something that could have come of this, but
Speaker 2: it said no. They are proving that they are in
Speaker 2: cahoots here by doing this kind of a settlement we have.
Speaker 2: They're using a ridiculous justification based on something they happen
Speaker 2: in the Obama administration, which even conservative legal scholars have
Speaker 2: have have batted down because that had actual specific people
Speaker 2: who were harmed by an actual specific policy, un like this.
Speaker 2: My pitch is James Comy, Tiss, James Lamonica mcg ivor
Speaker 2: Lisa Cook, Jerome Powell. They should all be submitting when
Speaker 2: this thing comes out, they should put their names in
Speaker 2: to get money from this fund and if they do
Speaker 2: not receive affair hearing, they should sue the federal government.
Speaker 2: Like there are people that are being politically prosecuted by
Speaker 2: the government. As far as we know publicly, nobody on
Speaker 2: that list would not be kind of at least potentially
Speaker 2: it included in the people hurt that could receive from
Speaker 2: this seventeen hundred and seventy six.
Speaker 1: My pitch is, no one gets it. Give us the
Speaker 1: fucking money back, that's our money.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, I do.
Speaker 2: To beic clear, I don't think James Comy should get
Speaker 2: money from the thorough government, but I think we should
Speaker 2: take this put this thing through its pace.
Speaker 1: This is fuck it. Yeah, well they're not going to
Speaker 1: I mean, Trump appoints the board, it's five people, he
Speaker 1: gets to hire and fire the board. It's just gonna
Speaker 1: be five crony audition out money like this is. This
Speaker 1: thing doesn't even have to be like oh and here
Speaker 1: was my case and it was tried incorrectly. Like someone
Speaker 1: just can go to fucking whoever Todd Blanche puts on
Speaker 1: the commission and be like, hey, I want ten thousand
Speaker 1: dollars because I donated to the president and I'm mad
Speaker 1: that Joe Biden sent the FBI after me. Do you
Speaker 1: have proof of that? No, but I just know they
Speaker 1: were watching me.
Speaker 2: It's crazy that, I mean, like this is it's just
Speaker 2: they're at the point where they're just saying, we're gonna
Speaker 2: take money from the treasury, give it to whoever, give
Speaker 2: it to our friends that particularly.
Speaker 1: People just don't care who are maybe criminals. To let
Speaker 1: everyone else know that if you commit a crime on
Speaker 1: Trump's behalf, not only do you not go to jail,
Speaker 1: but perhaps you might get some compensation for it. Yeah.
Speaker 2: That He was asked at the pres Commerce today, could
Speaker 2: this potentially go to people who committed violence in January sixth?
Speaker 2: He said, Oh, it's going to be up to the committee. Absolutely,
Speaker 2: those people would be eligible. Could totally receive money from
Speaker 2: this one. He pretends he doesn't know about it.
Speaker 3: It's like okay.
Speaker 1: Also, it's a danger going forward too, as we're heading
Speaker 1: into twenty twenty eight and Donald Trump and Jade Vance
Speaker 1: whoever the fuck it is, tries to stay in the
Speaker 1: White House after they lose an election and a bunch
Speaker 1: of people do their bidding for them to help them out.
Speaker 1: What do you think they're gonna think They're gonna be like, well,
Speaker 1: if he stays in there and I help him out,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna be okay, I'm gonna get a pardon, might
Speaker 1: get paid. Great.
Speaker 2: You guys are only my idea that James Comy tries
Speaker 2: to get into that fun.
Speaker 3: Come on, yeah, I mean, I see you're saying I
Speaker 3: think he wants in shells yea, and his shell based
Speaker 3: crime should apply.
Speaker 1: Potze America is brought to you by Smalls. Smalls makes fresh,
Speaker 1: human grade food for cats. It's made from the same
Speaker 1: stuff you or I would eat, but formulated specifically to
Speaker 1: help cats thrive. Cats are obligate carnivores who need lots
Speaker 1: of real meat to stay healthy, but most cat foods
Speaker 1: out there use meat byproducts and cut their food with
Speaker 1: cheap grains, fillers, and artificial ingredients. Boy, you don't want that.
Speaker 2: You don't want that.
Speaker 1: You don't want cheap grains.
Speaker 2: Or fillers, not for your feline friends.
Speaker 1: Basically stuff that isn't great for your cat. Big pet food, oh,
Speaker 1: big pet food. They do this because it's cheaper to make,
Speaker 1: but what they save on cost your cat pays for
Speaker 1: with their health.
Speaker 2: With Smalls, I just put I took a scoop for
Speaker 2: me and a scoop for my cat. Chesterfield and Chesterfield
Speaker 2: we said, we sit across the table, I light a candle.
Speaker 1: Yeah, your first looking shinier. Smalls is different. Their fresh
Speaker 1: recipes are over eighty percent animal protein and they never
Speaker 1: use fillers or artificial ingredients.
Speaker 2: Chesterfield has never been happier.
Speaker 1: Their food is so healthy that eighty eight percent of
Speaker 1: cat parents say that after feeding Smalls, they notice that
Speaker 1: their cat has better digestion, is softer and shinier what
Speaker 1: did I say, and has more energy to play because
Speaker 1: it's actually good for cats. If you want to invest
Speaker 1: in your cat's health, Smalls is giving you sixty percent
Speaker 1: off your cat's first order, plus free shipping and free
Speaker 1: treats for life when you go to smalls dot com
Speaker 1: slash crooked. That's sixty percent off your first order plus
Speaker 1: free shipping and free treats for life when you head
Speaker 1: to smalls dot com slash crooked.
Speaker 2: Pot Dave America has brought you by Zipper Cruder. When
Speaker 2: you're trying to hire, you want somebody who's qualified, but
Speaker 2: you also want somebody who's excited to do the job.
Speaker 2: You know, they can't. You can't just have somebody who
Speaker 2: has like all the right skills, but they and well
Speaker 2: you know then it's like they o you owe them
Speaker 2: a favor, you know what I mean? That's that's how
Speaker 2: I behave, you know' that's my role here. If you're hiring,
Speaker 2: you want a candidate who's passionate about the role, but
Speaker 2: you can't get that insight from a resume unless you
Speaker 2: post your job on ZipRecruiter. Ziprecruiter's powerful matching technology finds
Speaker 2: quality candidates quickly, and zippercruiter is a new feature that
Speaker 2: shows you the most interested qualified candidates first, so you
Speaker 2: meet the right people faster. Candidates can tell you in
Speaker 2: their own words why they're interested in your job, no wonder.
Speaker 2: Zipprecruiter is the number one rated hiring site based on
Speaker 2: G two. Find candidates who really want your job on ZipRecruiter.
Speaker 2: Four out of five employers who post on ZipRecruiter get
Speaker 2: a quality candidate within.
Speaker 3: The first day.
Speaker 2: Try it for free at ZipRecruiter dot com, slash cricket
Speaker 2: that ZipRecruiter dot com slash crookeet meet your match on ZipRecruiter.
Speaker 1: Speaking of Trump allies getting away with crimes, what do
Speaker 1: you guys make of Jared Polis, governor of Colorado, Democrat,
Speaker 1: commuting the prison sentence of election denier Tina Peters. She
Speaker 1: is the former county clerk from Mesa County, Colorado. She
Speaker 1: was in jail for orchestrating a security breach of her
Speaker 1: county's voting system. Trump has been publicly and privately pressuring
Speaker 1: Polus to pardon her completely. They also tried to like
Speaker 1: transfer her from state prison to federal prison so that
Speaker 1: Trump could pardon her. Didn't do that. But now Polus
Speaker 1: has commuted her sentence. He was sentenced to nine years.
Speaker 1: He cut it to four and a half years, with
Speaker 1: parole next month.
Speaker 3: I have to be honest. I know this is not
Speaker 3: a great answer for the purposes of a talk show.
Speaker 3: I just couldn't give less of a shit. I know
Speaker 3: people are like outraged about this. I read jvl's long
Speaker 3: piece on this. I don't give a shit. I don't care.
Speaker 3: I have so much to be outraged or to worry about.
Speaker 3: I just can't even get myself to engage with this person.
Speaker 3: I might even go a step further. I think Polus
Speaker 3: might have done the right thing. Sentence down.
Speaker 2: Wow, or I gotta go excuse me, boys, if you
Speaker 2: an email, be at the fucking bullwork where the real
Speaker 2: lives are now go on.
Speaker 1: I'm not I don't feel strongly. I'm more into I'm
Speaker 1: closer to Tommy's camp. But like, here's the thing. She
Speaker 1: was sentenced to nine years, right, so she's a non
Speaker 1: violent first time offender, and three appellate judges who were
Speaker 1: appointed by a Democrat. They were Democratic judges. They all
Speaker 1: just ruled that they threw out the sentence, the nine
Speaker 1: year sentence, so that was never going to happen, and
Speaker 1: they recently threw it out. Is because they thought that
Speaker 1: the judge, basically, in giving her a nine year sentence
Speaker 1: as opposed to a smaller sentence, violated her free speech rights,
Speaker 1: because the judge basically said, the reason I'm making your
Speaker 1: sentence longer is because you spouted election conspiracy theory, which
Speaker 1: is a horrible thing to do, spouting elections conspiracy theories.
Speaker 1: But that is protective First Amendment speech. I think we
Speaker 1: have to be consistent.
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, but that's but hold on, hold on. I
Speaker 2: appreciate that. But we understand that if someone were to say,
Speaker 2: hit somebody with their car and then publicly say that
Speaker 2: bitch deserved it, that that is free speech of the
Speaker 2: right to say that. But it does potentially inform the sentence.
Speaker 3: Sorry does it?
Speaker 1: Of course?
Speaker 2: Of course it does. Of course, we allow remorse in
Speaker 2: people's uh uh uh motivations and feelings about the crimes
Speaker 2: they committed, what they've learned from it.
Speaker 1: That's the well she was she was, I mean, but
Speaker 1: the no remorse thing was already factored in because she
Speaker 1: didn't she she was not remorseful right when she was sentenced.
Speaker 1: But that's what he didn't say, you didn't show remorse,
Speaker 1: He said, it's because you have these these theories, not.
Speaker 2: Just first that there are we take people's uh uh
Speaker 2: motivations and and and expressions. I agree that people are
Speaker 2: the right to believe elections are stolen. I'm just saying
Speaker 2: it's a little bit more than just first continue.
Speaker 1: Sorry, I guess I'm saying, if we believe that that
Speaker 1: there is an incarceration problem in this country, and that
Speaker 1: people are incarcerated for too long, and that prison is
Speaker 1: it is a deterrent, and yes, people should be jailed
Speaker 1: and they should be kept from society, but that unusually
Speaker 1: long sentences are bad, especially for first time non violent offenders,
Speaker 1: Like don't we have to extend that belief to people
Speaker 1: whose political beliefs we detest.
Speaker 2: So I would say the answer is we should allow
Speaker 2: a process to play out that she would have been
Speaker 2: re sentence. Why is why did this become a big
Speaker 2: public controversy? It is because the President United States is
Speaker 2: publicly pressuring the governor of Colorado to commute Tina peter sentence. Now, look,
Speaker 2: I am sure Jared Poulis would say that the pressure
Speaker 2: had nothing to do with it. Obviously the fact that
Speaker 2: Donald Trump was threatening Colorado unless he did something right.
Speaker 2: Donald Trump was saying this woman should be pardoned. He
Speaker 2: is saying it's some kind of press pushback against Trump,
Speaker 2: that it's only a commutation. I like, she has kind
Speaker 2: of done the bare minimum of acknowledging that what she
Speaker 2: did was wrong. But if you go to her Twitter feed,
Speaker 2: her allies were saying as recently as I believe last week,
Speaker 2: I have to go look the exact timing that if
Speaker 2: Trump that if that, if Tina Peters isn't released, Trump
Speaker 2: should invade the state of Colorado. It is a non violent.
Speaker 1: Effen Yeah, I mean, I don't think that should happen.
Speaker 2: Well, right, but it just it goes to like the
Speaker 2: the the reason somebody who even commits a Look, there
Speaker 2: are a lot of first time offenders who do something
Speaker 2: that are part of a that are part of something
Speaker 2: so dangerous that you have to say, wait a second, Yes,
Speaker 2: is a non violent offense. But it goes to the
Speaker 2: core of what we are a society or the safety
Speaker 2: of our democracy, and so he has given into that
Speaker 2: pressure from Trump rather than let the process play out.
Speaker 2: So that I think is like a huge problem. Like
Speaker 2: it just I don't know that we'd be having this
Speaker 2: conversation if if Donald Trump hadn't personally intervened to try
Speaker 2: to get the governor to do something, and then it
Speaker 2: seems as though he did it.
Speaker 3: After listening to this thoughtful debate, I still don't give
Speaker 3: a shit, you know, I might care less actually than one.
Speaker 3: I would say that it is interesting.
Speaker 1: I would say that it's yeah, it's more interesting to me,
Speaker 1: and that like I think that I think he might
Speaker 1: have been the right thing. I do think. I would
Speaker 1: like to hear Jared Poulis answer the question why didn't
Speaker 1: you just wait for the resentencing of the three appellate judges?
Speaker 1: Like what made you not want to just wait for
Speaker 1: their decision if they were going to throw out the
Speaker 1: sentence anyway? I would like to know that question.
Speaker 2: I'd also say too that the Republican prosecutor was against
Speaker 2: this and said that you should talk to the people
Speaker 2: that were impacted by Tina Peters schemes before you'd make
Speaker 2: the decisions the.
Speaker 1: Cost prosecutor or well that's how prosecutors are, but community.
Speaker 1: But yeah, there's also a defendive and plag guilty to
Speaker 1: almost the same charges in the Georgia Rico case and
Speaker 1: was sentenced no time and probation. Yeah.
Speaker 2: I mean, look, there's all kinds of unfairnesses and unequal
Speaker 2: application of sentences all across the country all the time. Like, yeah,
Speaker 2: that if that were the case, you go and say, oh,
Speaker 2: well there's somebody else who was given less. You can
Speaker 2: commute most most sentences that way.
Speaker 3: But I think look, in.
Speaker 1: This one computed it. It wasn't just her he commuted
Speaker 1: like you know, it's like thirty five or fifty commutations
Speaker 1: or something like that in the same day.
Speaker 2: I think he has the answer for whether or not
Speaker 2: he gave into Trump's political pressure. And we are in
Speaker 2: a moment where like Donald Trump is threatening elections again,
Speaker 2: like this is a grave threat to the republic. Why
Speaker 2: does our generosity, our sense of justice, our our empathy
Speaker 2: turned for Tina Peters when there are so many others
Speaker 2: who have who deserve it.
Speaker 1: That's all. Yeah, And I don't think it should. I
Speaker 1: don't think it should I don't think we should give
Speaker 1: be generous or empathetic at all. I think we should
Speaker 1: just be like, what is the what is the standard?
Speaker 1: Like is there a process to reach the decision? And
Speaker 1: it didn't meet a standard? I do think that like
Speaker 1: criticizing polls for it is completely fine, Like you can
Speaker 1: criticize them for it, you can say it's fine. Some
Speaker 1: people are and people who I like in politics too
Speaker 1: and support or like calling for his impeachment over this,
Speaker 1: And I'm like, I don't. I just I do not
Speaker 1: think it rises to the level.
Speaker 3: Of everybody's at nine all the time these days.
Speaker 1: I can't get there. I can get there, I can
Speaker 1: get I can get to like your criticism, for sure.
Speaker 1: I can't get to he should be impeached over this.
Speaker 1: I don't know if you guys saw that. Trump's latest
Speaker 1: financial disclosures show that he and or his financial advisors
Speaker 1: made more than thirty seven hundred stock trades in the
Speaker 1: first quarter of this year, bought one million dollars each
Speaker 1: in companies with business before his administration, like Nvidia, Oracle, Microsoft, Boeing,
Speaker 1: and Pallenteer, which he bought right before he praised the
Speaker 1: company on truth social in a post that, if you recall,
Speaker 1: even included the company's tick our symbol. Now, I know
Speaker 1: this may look suspicious, but the White House did say
Speaker 1: that Trump's asked that are in a blind trust man
Speaker 1: by his children, so there are quote no conflicts of interest.
Speaker 1: Seems fine, right?
Speaker 3: This is did they really I thought there was no
Speaker 3: blind trust. I thought they had already previously said there
Speaker 3: wasn't a blind either way managed your children.
Speaker 1: It's a blind trust that doesn't yet that's not howl like.
Speaker 3: Again, this is part of the political smash and grab job.
Speaker 3: I mean, they're making money everywhere. It's this is crazy
Speaker 3: like so, Bloomberg reported Trump had trades that involved Tesla, Nvidia, Apple, Meta,
Speaker 3: Visa City, Boeing, Qualcom, and ge Top Executives from all
Speaker 3: of those companies were on his trip to Beijing to
Speaker 3: meet with Chinese President Chijinbang. So you don't think he's
Speaker 3: getting insider information having that access, talking to them, cutting
Speaker 3: deals with them. Some of the stock trades included up
Speaker 3: to six hundred and eighty grand worth of Eli Lilly.
Speaker 3: Right as the administration was preparing policies that would benefit
Speaker 3: their GLP one business, he took a huge position a
Speaker 3: couple huge positions in Nvidia right before they announced major news.
Speaker 3: There was one five million dollar position a week before
Speaker 3: they announced a partnership with Meta. Then there was a
Speaker 3: half a million to a million dollar position a week
Speaker 3: before the Commerce Department announced some you know, determinations to
Speaker 3: do with Nvidia. They're buying and selling Intel stock, which
Speaker 3: the US government took a ten percent stake in the company.
Speaker 3: This is insanity.
Speaker 1: He's such a incident.
Speaker 3: Paul Pelosi somewhere is like, what the fuck?
Speaker 1: Man?
Speaker 3: I could have been doing this so much better.
Speaker 2: Like we're sort of pat every single Jesus. I'm like,
Speaker 2: Jim Kramer, Now do you see the clip of.
Speaker 1: Jim Can we drop it in here?
Speaker 2: Let's drop it in The president's been trading some Intel
Speaker 2: in the quarter. Yeah, yeah, I put it.
Speaker 1: Yeah you need to trade you got nothing.
Speaker 2: But yeah yeah, whoo yeah.
Speaker 1: All right, don't worry. We're not having technical difficulties here, everybody.
Speaker 2: What's funny about the Jim Kramer clip is that it's
Speaker 2: like people are like, oh, wow, he's so he's stammering
Speaker 2: because he can't figure out what to say about this.
Speaker 2: But when I was watching it was like, is he
Speaker 2: stammering because he can't forget to say about this or
Speaker 2: is he making a joke about how it's so beyond
Speaker 2: the payout? But he doesn't want to be critical of
Speaker 2: Trump in this moment.
Speaker 3: Like I didn't know what what? What are we?
Speaker 1: What are we?
Speaker 2: Why is he stammering? He knows what's going on but
Speaker 2: head But we're no live in rent free inside of
Speaker 2: Jim Kramer's head. But the like there, we're at a
Speaker 2: new level of brazen corruption because every step along the way,
Speaker 2: nobody has stopped him to get to this point, right,
Speaker 2: like he can't. The thing that I find stunning about
Speaker 2: all this is that there's no like the level of
Speaker 2: brazenness is going up, but the dollar amount isn't. Always
Speaker 2: it's like why are we doing five hundred grand stock trades?
Speaker 2: Billion dollar crypto theft and the watches? Like why like
Speaker 2: why you know what I mean?
Speaker 3: Like that bothers me.
Speaker 1: It just it's just all of it's like left over
Speaker 1: from the old world, right you had to just do
Speaker 1: corruption well, like the watch, the hotel rings, we're getting
Speaker 1: you the Trump phones, but they're not coming.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that part doesn't make sense. But the aggregate stock
Speaker 3: trades was a range between two hundred and eleven and
Speaker 3: six hundred and eighty seven million dollars, So that's a
Speaker 3: pretty good quarter.
Speaker 1: It's also like the just the volume of trading. Bloomberg
Speaker 1: interviewed this guy, Eric Dighton, who's the president manager director
Speaker 1: at at the Wealth Alliance, and he said, I'm baffled.
Speaker 1: In the forty plus years of my time on Wall Street,
Speaker 1: this is an unusual amount of trading by any standards.
Speaker 1: We need to see the actual trades to try and
Speaker 1: understand why anyone would want to do that much trading.
Speaker 2: So this is just like the practical, like the practical
Speaker 2: way in which this is being done. Like is there
Speaker 2: a team that is doing this? Is it suns through
Speaker 2: their Like it feels like they've got like like Christopher
Speaker 2: Malta Sante trying to like push what this days Like
Speaker 2: he's got like some fucking back office in New Jersey
Speaker 2: somewhere with computers.
Speaker 3: It's just Baron Trump in the outer Oval with a
Speaker 3: shitload of adderall and like the experien Yeah.
Speaker 2: Just like minority reporting it like I can see the future.
Speaker 2: I know it's going to happen at the Commerce meeting
Speaker 2: next week. I know that I have the BLS down.
Speaker 1: That's just because he's got the briefing book.
Speaker 3: Yes, but again, they took like seven transactions related to Boeing,
Speaker 3: one between one to five million dollars. Like the biggest
Speaker 3: deliverable of the China trip was to get the Chinese
Speaker 3: to buy a bunch of Boeing planes. And by the way,
Speaker 3: the announcement was so underwhelming that the stock went down
Speaker 3: because they did a shitty job. And we're still uses
Speaker 3: proof that c we see it was a good announcement.
Speaker 3: It's like, yeah, you got it, tried to trade on
Speaker 3: inside information. It just turns out you suck at diplomacy.
Speaker 3: That was the problem.
Speaker 1: You're good at the crimes, you're bad diplomacy to deliver
Speaker 1: on that show, all right. So Trump's also doing his
Speaker 1: best to drag the Republican Party down with him. On Saturday,
Speaker 1: he sent yet another message that dissent will not be
Speaker 1: tolerated when his chosen primary challenger, Congressman Julia Letlow, took
Speaker 1: out Louisiana Senator Bill Cassidy, who sin was voting to
Speaker 1: convict Trump in the January sixth impeachment trial. Cassidy went
Speaker 1: down in flames. He got third in Louisiana's primary, the
Speaker 1: first time an incumbent senator has come in lower than
Speaker 1: second place since nineteen forty four. Trump's next target is
Speaker 1: Thomas Massey, who's trying to unseat in Tuesday's Kentucky primary.
Speaker 1: Massy has been the strongest and kind of the only
Speaker 1: Republican in the House, breaking with Trump on Epstein, Iran
Speaker 1: and the Big Beautiful Bill. Trump has been posting about
Speaker 1: Massey NonStop. I think right before recorded he did like
Speaker 1: a a video from the Oval, which is very legal
Speaker 1: and normal, Uh, to just to just tell people to
Speaker 1: vote against Thomas Massey.
Speaker 2: We worried run the midterms on the Hatch actuy, right, Yeah,
Speaker 2: that's yeah.
Speaker 1: He says he's he's grabbing the two billion dollars for
Speaker 1: his slush fund and then trading on Nvidio and Boeing.
Speaker 3: Yeah, Pete Hegseth was doing an event in Kentucky today.
Speaker 3: His personal capacity and his personal capacity. And then Trump
Speaker 3: announces that he's delayed an imminent military assault on Iran
Speaker 3: that was supposed to happen tomorrow.
Speaker 1: Yeah, what was Peka to do?
Speaker 3: This seems like bad timing. Becus like you need him
Speaker 3: for that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you don't. Maybe maybe who's gonna drink the boots
Speaker 1: to early to say what will happen in the in
Speaker 1: the Massi race. But it certainly seems like Massy himself
Speaker 1: is staying loose.
Speaker 3: Here.
Speaker 1: He is on Sunday doing his best Trump impression.
Speaker 2: Whatever, call him. I got a schedule a minute for
Speaker 2: the first thing.
Speaker 4: He tells me every time I call him, Messy your shot, Cookie,
Speaker 4: You went to m I T You know, my uncle
Speaker 4: is Professor John G.
Speaker 3: Trump. He was in one years.
Speaker 2: It's a record.
Speaker 4: And you know, I'm into work, which is basically the
Speaker 4: hardest school.
Speaker 3: In the world too.
Speaker 1: That's terrible. You know, I kind of wanted to lose
Speaker 1: now that was. I was rooting for him until just
Speaker 1: then He's going for it, you know, put that accent
Speaker 1: Trump depression. You know, don't don't do it unless you
Speaker 1: really feel good.
Speaker 2: There's just too many people doing it and it's too
Speaker 2: too it's too big a target.
Speaker 1: Anyway. Anyone have thoughts on the primary? Yeah, look, I mean,
Speaker 1: how big of a deal.
Speaker 3: On Bill Cassidy? Like fuck that guy, you know, like
Speaker 3: he thought he could like appease Maga by voting for
Speaker 3: Robert of Kennedy Junr and ended up kind of like
Speaker 3: selling his soul and his credentials as a doctor and
Speaker 3: being worst of all worlds. And he knew better and
Speaker 3: we know it because he told us as much before
Speaker 3: he flip flopped. And so would I rather have him
Speaker 3: in the Senate than his replacement, Yes, I would, But
Speaker 3: ultimately I don't think it'll make a big difference. Thomas
Speaker 3: Massey is a different story. Like he's the reason we
Speaker 3: have the Epstein files because he worked with Rocana to
Speaker 3: get him released. He's a principal vote against wars and
Speaker 3: militarism and lots of other things. I don't agree with
Speaker 3: him on everything, and on you know, like you don't
Speaker 3: share the same worldview. I don't send out, you know,
Speaker 3: Christmas cards with me and my kids with machine guns
Speaker 3: like I think he did one time. But yeah, you know,
Speaker 3: it would be a big loss. And I think it
Speaker 3: tells you everything you need to know about Donald Trump's
Speaker 3: political worldview that he will not lift a finger to
Speaker 3: help his party build, but he will take down anyone
Speaker 3: who criticizes him. It's all about punishing his own critics
Speaker 3: and the culture personality and protecting his personal power and
Speaker 3: not about the party or doing anything right.
Speaker 2: I think he's far more passionate about defeating his enemies
Speaker 2: than he is about helping his friends. Yeah, with Cassidy,
Speaker 2: you go back to that, to him approving RFK Junior
Speaker 2: and accepting his fake assurances and his private meetings, pretending
Speaker 2: that RFK didn't believe what he obviously believed in Like, no,
Speaker 2: you can't. You can't sell half your soul.
Speaker 3: He doesn't work like that.
Speaker 2: They're not divide him. They're not divisible in that way.
Speaker 2: And so these guys that end up being reluctantly for Trump,
Speaker 2: they don't. They're not better politicians. They're just worse whores.
Speaker 2: You know, So, are you know good Rid's I suppose.
Speaker 1: I will say this is there's a lot being made
Speaker 1: because we had Indiana and then Cassidy and then and
Speaker 1: then Massy. But this is sort of the last gasp
Speaker 1: of this.
Speaker 3: Well what are you like?
Speaker 1: This is Trump's last midterms, right, and do we think
Speaker 1: he's going to spend He's going to be spending time
Speaker 1: in twenty eight going around doing primary trologies? They maybe,
Speaker 1: but like also does it lose its force at some point?
Speaker 3: Right?
Speaker 1: Like that Trump's like he's already a lame duck, Like
Speaker 1: he clearly has the juice to do it now, but
Speaker 1: as we get to twenty eight and then beyond that,
Speaker 1: like what is this is what we learned from that?
Speaker 3: Yeah? Yeah, he's a vindictive prick who only cares about himself.
Speaker 1: And you know, and I think we also learned that,
Speaker 1: like you know, the nothing's breaking, the fever in the
Speaker 1: Republican Party. The party's broken, and you have massive that
Speaker 1: You've just got to defeat them at every level because
Speaker 1: all the ones who are left are completely loyal to
Speaker 1: deer leader. And that's about that. And I do think
Speaker 1: also he might have he might have fucked himself a
Speaker 1: little because now you've got angry Cassidy who's still got
Speaker 1: votes left to take between now and the end of
Speaker 1: the year, mass mass he loses. Tillus has already been
Speaker 1: doing it, and so they can make his life more difficult.
Speaker 1: And I do wonder now, between now and November, if
Speaker 1: this makes it like harder for Republicans to break away
Speaker 1: from Trump even though primaries are over, because they'll they're
Speaker 1: they're gonna they worry that they're gonna get punished.
Speaker 2: I don't know, it's just Look, it remains sort of extraordinary.
Speaker 2: Right Bill Cassidy like, uh could not persuade his own voters.
Speaker 2: You would have voted him multiple times in the past
Speaker 2: to stick with him once Trump turned right, Like, it
Speaker 2: just tells you telling about the vote, the voters showing
Speaker 2: up in these Republican primaries and what they what they want,
Speaker 2: And there is no the fact that Cassidy was a
Speaker 2: vote for impeachment and that Trump had fully turned against him.
Speaker 2: There was nothing he could do to convince them that
Speaker 2: he was worth saving. Nothing.
Speaker 1: Yeah, PADS America is brought to you by HIMS. Edy
Speaker 1: is way more common than most guys think. Millions of
Speaker 1: guys deal with it at some point, and that's exactly
Speaker 1: why HYMS offers a straightforward way to handle it. HYMS
Speaker 1: connects you with licensed healthcare providers online, giving you simple
Speaker 1: access to legitimate ED treatments from home. I want some
Speaker 1: illegitimate d treatment for right in my office.
Speaker 2: The other day I saw John googling a real Chinese
Speaker 2: rhino horn. I thought, Jesus, that's terrible.
Speaker 1: Yeah, same on you. No awkward appointments with Hyms, no
Speaker 1: pharmacy lines to see a pharmacy line out the door.
Speaker 1: Everyone's looking for their boner pills. Yeah, it's wild right.
Speaker 1: Just complete a simple online inte and a provider will
Speaker 1: review your information to determine if treatment is right for you.
Speaker 2: If you're to pick up the medicine for people who
Speaker 2: have a too big of a penis.
Speaker 1: Uh yeah, mine has lasted more than three hours.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: If prescribed, your treatmentships directly to your door in discrete
Speaker 1: packaging that includes sil dentifhil.
Speaker 2: I know how to pronounce that for the record, thank you, Yeah,
Speaker 2: that's what I figured out. Pundits on it, Oh, it's
Speaker 2: on it.
Speaker 3: Not for a rectile this function.
Speaker 1: It's also heart medicine, also known as generic for viagra.
Speaker 1: There we go available through hymns it up to ninety
Speaker 1: five percent less than the brand name version. And if
Speaker 1: that option isn't right for you, there are additional treatment
Speaker 1: options available so you can find what works best for
Speaker 1: your body. It's straightforward, transparent design to make getting care
Speaker 1: feel easy. To get simple online access to personalized, affordable
Speaker 1: care for ed, weight loss and more, visit hymns dot
Speaker 1: com slash crooked. That's hymns dot com slash crooked for
Speaker 1: your free online visit hymns dot com slash crooked prescription required.
Speaker 2: See website for details and important safety information. Sil dentifhil
Speaker 2: is the generic version of Viagra. Viagra is a registered
Speaker 2: trademark of Viatrice Specialty LLC. Hymns is not affiliated with
Speaker 2: or endorsed by Viatrice.
Speaker 1: It's been a bit since we talked about the stalemate
Speaker 1: in Iran. Trump posted on Sunday that quote, the clock
Speaker 1: is ticking for Iran to make a deal, but by
Speaker 1: Monday the clock apparently restarted. Trump posted that the US
Speaker 1: quote will not be doing the scheduled attack of Iran
Speaker 1: tomorrow aka Tuesday, the day you're listening to this, because
Speaker 1: the leaders of Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE asked
Speaker 1: him to hold off due to serious negotiations that are
Speaker 1: now taking place. Trump did add that the US is
Speaker 1: prepared to attack Iran quote on a moment's notice, in
Speaker 1: the event that an acceptable deal is not reached. On Monday.
Speaker 1: It was also reported that Iran sent its latest peace
Speaker 1: proposal through Pakistan to the US, which the White House
Speaker 1: seems likely to reject, even as the Pentagon in Israel
Speaker 1: are quote engaged in intense preparations the largest since the
Speaker 1: ceasefire took effect for the possible resumption of attacks against Iran.
Speaker 1: According to The New York Times, what do you make
Speaker 1: of the back and forth here, Tommy? Like any chance
Speaker 1: that Trump's latest threat to destroy Iran got them closer
Speaker 1: to a deal, scare them into it?
Speaker 3: I don't think so. But can we just talk about
Speaker 3: these statements where he named checks a bunch of autocrats.
Speaker 3: They're so weird, you don't have to do that. But
Speaker 3: he's always like on behalf of the great and highly
Speaker 3: respected field Marshal Assam Munyear, I've decided not to like
Speaker 3: terminate Iran. You know what.
Speaker 1: The delivery date for that plane is supposed to be
Speaker 1: the fourth, but he once moved up for his birthday
Speaker 1: for the kuitar, so he wants the guitaris to get
Speaker 1: that plane there fast.
Speaker 2: It's the same way that he does the like, you know,
Speaker 2: personality stuff with g Like he enjoys the idea that
Speaker 2: governing doesn't involve anyone except the people in the room,
Speaker 2: Like there's no people decided, right, They're just great men
Speaker 2: making big decisions together at a collaboration and friendship. And
Speaker 2: so he's not doing it for the good of the country.
Speaker 2: He's doing it because he was He has this great
Speaker 2: rapport with these leaders.
Speaker 3: The Pakistani's in particular, like they cut a big crypto
Speaker 3: deal with the World Liberty Financial so that's why he
Speaker 3: likes them. But like, you do five seconds of research
Speaker 3: into the great and respected Field Marshal and you find
Speaker 3: the UK authorities have charged him with torture and crimes
Speaker 3: against humanity. That's a guy who's like name checking. But
Speaker 3: regardless of course they're No, I don't think they're any
Speaker 3: closer to a deal. I like, I don't know. I
Speaker 3: assume we're in the same place. Iron thinks they have
Speaker 3: a lot of leverage because they can close the trade
Speaker 3: oh horor moves. They know Trump is weakened politically, they
Speaker 3: know that he wants out of this, he doesn't want
Speaker 3: to go back to war, and so they're gonna wait
Speaker 3: for the United States to walk back some of the
Speaker 3: more maximuist positions or just get sick of the ship
Speaker 3: to move on.
Speaker 2: Just to imagine, it's sort of some sort of Iranian
Speaker 2: underling kind of going down the stairs into the into
Speaker 2: the bunker where the where Then the recuperating Ayatola is
Speaker 2: like pointing at the Ciena numbers and saying like, look,
Speaker 2: look we got them, We got them right where we're
Speaker 2: got they come.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and cross tabs Iran.
Speaker 3: There's all these leaks still, Like Lebron reportedly has up
Speaker 3: to seventy five percent of its missile stockpile, all of
Speaker 3: it's basically almost all of its infrastructure along the Straight Oh,
Speaker 3: Hormoves is operational for them to shut it down so
Speaker 3: they could always make things worse straight.
Speaker 1: Up for her. Moves also now has its own Twitter account.
Speaker 1: Doesn't see that, Yeah, like Carl the fog in San Francisco. No, Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's that they're calling it, you know, something more official.
Speaker 1: But it's like the Iran is the Iranian government, you know. Yeah, No,
Speaker 1: They've just made an official Twitter account so we can
Speaker 1: get updates from the Straight.
Speaker 3: Just personifying the strainings. Yeah, that's kind of cool.
Speaker 2: With like sort of red green yellow ladder of red
Speaker 2: like sort of when you get the like Sigolerts in
Speaker 2: like California traffic, it's like, oh my god, the Straighter
Speaker 2: Moves is red today. Fuck, I'm gonna be honey, I'm
Speaker 2: gonna be light.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna have traffic helicopters over reporting on the nines
Speaker 1: and five. Uh NBC report last week, the administration is
Speaker 1: considering changing the name of the war from Operation Epic
Speaker 1: Fury to Operations Sledgehammer. We have to get a little
Speaker 1: more phallic again or something else entirely in order to
Speaker 1: quote effectively restart the clock with Congress. Is that how
Speaker 1: it works? New operation name? Now they can't get you no.
Speaker 1: Now you can do whatever wars you want.
Speaker 3: Like it's I love this idea that you know, the
Speaker 3: World War Powers Act is such a weak piece of
Speaker 3: legislation that you can just do like a bureaucratic tweak
Speaker 3: and get around it. I mean, it's just crazy. It's
Speaker 3: obviously the same conflict, Like changing the name doesn't matter.
Speaker 3: Every price since next In has claimed that the War
Speaker 3: Powers Act is unconstitential. They all hate it, but it
Speaker 3: was enacted over Nixon's veto in nineteen seventy three, and
Speaker 3: so Congress has leverage here if they want to use it.
Speaker 3: Republicans refuse to use it. Maybe they'll man up now,
Speaker 3: but we'll see.
Speaker 1: Trump also wants us to know that he's not just
Speaker 1: focused on wars far away from home. He's focused on
Speaker 1: wars right in our own backyard. Still, there have been
Speaker 1: a bunch of rumblings about the long rumored regime change
Speaker 1: move in Cuba. Sources told The ap last week that
Speaker 1: the administration is looking to indict former Cuban president Rol Castro,
Speaker 1: brother of Fidel, even though he's no longer in power.
Speaker 1: Then over the weekend, Markapudo reported that, according to classified
Speaker 1: US intel, Cuba has over three hundred drones and has
Speaker 1: recently considered launching them against US military targets and even
Speaker 1: Key West Florida, which could serve as a handy pretext
Speaker 1: for an invasion. Cuba's current president mcgal Diaz Canal responded
Speaker 1: on social media on Monday, writing the quote Cuba poses
Speaker 1: no threat, nor does it have aggressive plans or intentions
Speaker 1: against any country, including the US, and that a US
Speaker 1: attack would quote trigger a blood. What do you make
Speaker 1: of the Cuba stuff? It seems like he's, uh, it
Speaker 1: seems like he's gearing up.
Speaker 3: You want to kick us off on Cuba.
Speaker 2: I don't think we should go to war with Cuba
Speaker 2: right now. In the in the Times poll there was
Speaker 2: a question that was something like when do you believe
Speaker 2: the US should launch war against countries that have not
Speaker 2: attacked US, and it was like seventy percent or like,
Speaker 2: don't do that. Never, don't do that unless someone has
Speaker 2: attacked us, we shouldn't go to war. Whatever Trump had
Speaker 2: come to believe about killing SOLEMANI, the getting Madia out
Speaker 2: of Venezuela and how fun that was. He sees the
Speaker 2: polls showing how unpopular the war in Iran is. I
Speaker 2: hope that that has at the very least chastened them
Speaker 2: from their kind of idea that they could be regime
Speaker 2: topplers without it kind of consuming their politics.
Speaker 3: But it's terrifying.
Speaker 2: It's serifying to imagine that they were gonna see what
Speaker 2: they're doing in the Middle East and decided that it
Speaker 2: needs to be broadly closer down.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 3: I mean, look, I'd read the story. It was such
Speaker 3: an obvious pretext to me. But I mean, look, I
Speaker 3: don't doubt the intel, like, is Cuba acquiring drones? Well,
Speaker 3: it's twenty twenty six. In every military has or is
Speaker 3: acquiring drones. It would be like not getting rifles or
Speaker 3: you know, machine guns in World War One. So it
Speaker 3: also says, like the intelligence suggests the Cubans would respond
Speaker 3: to a US attack with drones, which again I.
Speaker 1: Was gonna say this axiou story, you have to get
Speaker 1: way down to reality check, which is three paragraphs four
Speaker 1: paragraphs from the bottom till you find out that, oh,
Speaker 1: by the way, that the intel is that it's retaliator.
Speaker 3: This is not a preemptive strike on Miami. This is
Speaker 3: what they would do if we attacked them, because we
Speaker 3: all know if they did a preempt strike on Miami
Speaker 3: that would be suicidal because you would fucking flatten the country.
Speaker 2: So I also just would like to think that if
Speaker 2: we are on the verge of going to war with
Speaker 2: another country, that the evidence would not be laundered through
Speaker 2: anonymous sources into a daily tip sheet that perhaps they're going.
Speaker 3: Well a word with that was the New York Times.
Speaker 1: Yeah, sorry're right, You're right.
Speaker 3: I do think though every indicator light is flashing when
Speaker 3: it comes to possible regime change operations. Because there's this
Speaker 3: leak which creates the pretext of this being an imminent threat.
Speaker 3: There was CI director John Ratcliffe just went to Cuba
Speaker 3: and had this message from Trump. There is the indictment,
Speaker 3: the rumored indictment of Raul Castro, which was a very
Speaker 3: important part of the case for why they had to
Speaker 3: do what they did against Maduro, which was extract him
Speaker 3: from Venezuela and bring him to New York for prosecution.
Speaker 3: There's been all these reports of a huge increase of
Speaker 3: intelligence overflights by the US, So I would be very
Speaker 3: worried if I were a Cuban official. And meanwhile, if
Speaker 3: you're a Cuban human being or citizen, like the United
Speaker 3: States has a blockade on that's allowed no oil and
Speaker 3: gas into your country and people are starving to death.
Speaker 3: They have one to two hours of electricity a day,
Speaker 3: hospitals can't operate. What we're doing is criminal. It is
Speaker 3: absolutely evil. You're starving a population of people to death,
Speaker 3: and the most likely outcome is that the government collapses
Speaker 3: and there's a mass exodus in migration crisis to the
Speaker 3: United States, which MAGA has told us they do not
Speaker 3: want to happen. I don't understand what these lunatics are
Speaker 3: fucking doing here, but it is just it is utterly immoral,
Speaker 3: just a horrific, horrific policy.
Speaker 2: Right now.
Speaker 1: I think that the insane thought running through Donald Trump's
Speaker 1: head is his response to launching a disastrous war in Iran.
Speaker 1: That is unpopular that has cost US billions of dollars
Speaker 1: that it's spiked gas prices everywhere. Is I got to
Speaker 1: launch a war that's more popular and easy. I got
Speaker 1: to go back to the Venezuela model, because they all
Speaker 1: think that Venezuela was some big fucking success, right, and
Speaker 1: so it's like that was an easy one. So I
Speaker 1: got to get my mojo backed by going to invade
Speaker 1: Cuba now that Irun's a big fucking mess. The same.
Speaker 2: Did you see uh Rubio in his Maduro tracks?
Speaker 3: Yes, like this all just a game, it's all just trolling,
Speaker 3: it's all content.
Speaker 1: I don't think it was that flattering.
Speaker 2: No, I think it was. I talked to him to
Speaker 2: leave it, but I do think Maduro wore it better.
Speaker 2: But the and not even joking, like it just looked
Speaker 2: more comfortable, a like Rubio looked like the suit was
Speaker 2: wearing him. But I was looking at it as like
Speaker 2: why are you doing this?
Speaker 1: I forget? Like it was a little posed too.
Speaker 2: It wasn't like something there was a lot pos a
Speaker 2: lot post but but like I was looking at him
Speaker 2: like what what are we supposed to?
Speaker 3: Okay, look what is this meant?
Speaker 2: Top?
Speaker 3: The boy you're tough.
Speaker 2: You're wearing the same close like who what what? What
Speaker 2: was the message? And I now I'm like, oh, it
Speaker 2: was just about how how like what happened? We'll do
Speaker 2: this again, like we're going to do this? Is it
Speaker 2: a Cuba thing?
Speaker 4: Like?
Speaker 2: What the fuck was the outfit? What am I meant
Speaker 2: to take from this photo?
Speaker 3: Stephen Chung, Yeah, that's a good question. I agree with you.
Speaker 3: I do think Trump wants to change the channel and
Speaker 3: kind of get us onto a new topic that isn't Iran.
Speaker 3: That makes him sound tough again. I do think though,
Speaker 3: that Cuba falls in the Venezuela or on Cuba access
Speaker 3: of vivil bucket of like Yo Kan's telling him, sir,
Speaker 3: he'll be historic figure, Sir if you make big changes
Speaker 3: here and he's down, it will gardle your balls. Well,
Speaker 3: I mean, you don't need to do something else to
Speaker 3: get that. That's already happening, that's priced in. But you know,
Speaker 3: he's also in Florida surrounded by a bunch of very
Speaker 3: like rich hard line you know, Miami Cubans who you
Speaker 3: know have been waiting for this for a long time
Speaker 3: and you know want their real estate assets back on
Speaker 3: the Island. So I don't. I hope I'm wrong. Maybe
Speaker 3: it'll fucking Cubano or you know, like whatever, Wall Street
Speaker 3: will make up a new term for it. It's act stupid,
Speaker 3: but like it does seem like it's nerve wracking.
Speaker 1: Well, if he doesn't do Cuba, then there's always Greenland.
Speaker 1: Remember the critical national security issue of Greenland. A quick
Speaker 1: refresher that back in January, after threatening to invade, Trump
Speaker 1: did a taco and announced to the quote framework of
Speaker 1: a future deal with respect to Greenland and in fact,
Speaker 1: the entire Arctic region. Well, the New York Times is
Speaker 1: now reporting that the negotiations around that framework have Greenlandic
Speaker 1: officials quote worried as US proposals quote amount to a
Speaker 1: major imposition on greenland sovereignty. Yeah, I bet Greenland specifically
Speaker 1: concerned about Trump's June fourteenth birthday and July fourth is
Speaker 1: upcoming dates where Trump's attention could swing back around to
Speaker 1: them as he starts thinking about his legacy. Unfucking real.
Speaker 1: What do you think those concerns well founded? What do
Speaker 1: you think about the Greenlandic concerns expressed in the New
Speaker 1: York Times piece?
Speaker 2: Let's just pause and sit in the idea that the
Speaker 2: Danes are concerned that Trump will will get more bellicose
Speaker 2: around his birthday. That's where we're at.
Speaker 3: That's what we do.
Speaker 1: Turn in eighty, He's turned America's turn in two fifty,
Speaker 1: and they're not going to They're not going to be
Speaker 1: content with just the fireworks. No, No, you're gonna want
Speaker 1: to get to the Greenland.
Speaker 2: Somebody's got to give him a little. He wants to look.
Speaker 2: He wants to the great at the end of his name.
Speaker 2: He knows that that when the when, the when the
Speaker 2: Russians got more territory, they got to be the great.
Speaker 2: So we just got to find some fucking chunk of
Speaker 2: land somewhere.
Speaker 1: Cuba, get me Greenland. Just say Venezuela, the fifty first stay.
Speaker 2: He's something. We got to expand the map.
Speaker 3: I can't believe we're talking about this again. This sucks.
Speaker 3: It's so crazy. It's like that. Do you guys see
Speaker 3: that the Tim Dillon did. We said, we're not the
Speaker 3: high school bully anymore. We're the weird kid who may
Speaker 3: or may not have a gun. Yes, not the quarterback.
Speaker 3: We're not the jock. We're the college kid who keeps
Speaker 3: going to high school parties. It might be a pedaphract
Speaker 3: and has a gun. That is us. That's a country.
Speaker 3: Good work everybody?
Speaker 1: That is it? That is it?
Speaker 2: I think we've made a mistake electing this guy.
Speaker 1: Yeah well.
Speaker 2: This podcast is sponsored by Squespace. Squarespace is the all
Speaker 2: in one website platform designed to elevate your online presence
Speaker 2: and drive your success. Squares Space revise all the tools
Speaker 2: you need to remote and get paid for your services
Speaker 2: in one platform. Whether you offer consultations, events, or other experiences,
Speaker 2: Squarespace can help you grow your business. Squarespace offers a
Speaker 2: complete library of professionally designed and award winning website templates
Speaker 2: with options for every use and category, no matter where
Speaker 2: you start. Your website is flexible with intuitive drag and
Speaker 2: drop editing, beautiful styling options, unrivaled visual design effects, and
Speaker 2: more ways to list what you offer. No experience required.
Speaker 2: Every dream needs a domain. Squarespace Domains makes it easy
Speaker 2: to find the best name for your business at one fair,
Speaker 2: all inclusive price, no ded fees or add ons required.
Speaker 2: Every Squarespace domain comes with advanced privacy and security tools
Speaker 2: included to ensure your domain remains online and protected. Make
Speaker 2: smarter business decisions with square spaces intuitive built in analytics tools.
Speaker 2: Review your website traffic, learn where to focus engagement, track
Speaker 2: revenue from bookings, invoices or product sales, all from one place.
Speaker 2: Do squarespace dot com for a free trial when you're
Speaker 2: ready to launch, go to squarespace dot com slash crooked
Speaker 2: to save ten percent off your first purchase of a
Speaker 2: website or domain that squarespace.
Speaker 3: Dot com slash crooked.
Speaker 1: Now that we just talked about Trump up potentially trained
Speaker 1: to conquer several additional nations, possibly because it would look
Speaker 1: cool on a map, it's probably a good time to
Speaker 1: mention that there's been a revival of the debate about
Speaker 1: Trump's age and fitness for the job, and whether Democrats
Speaker 1: should be making a bigger deal about it. Laura and
Speaker 1: Egan at The Bulwark and Jonathan Lamier at The Atlantic
Speaker 1: are both out with big pieces arguing that it's time
Speaker 1: for Democrats to make it a bigger issue. We get
Speaker 1: subscriber questions about this a lot. We also see a
Speaker 1: lot of folks on social media making the argument that
Speaker 1: if you're not making as big of a deal about
Speaker 1: Trump's age as you were about Biden's, you're being hypocritical.
Speaker 1: So in the spirit of open dialogue, I guess we're
Speaker 1: going to debate it. It's debated, that's debating Austin. Austin's
Speaker 1: bringing out a vote Save America mug with three positions
Speaker 1: in it.
Speaker 2: So I'm not gonna let's I'm not gonna look to
Speaker 2: we all let's all open every the same.
Speaker 1: Time, pro meaning it's something we should talk about more
Speaker 1: anti you can guess what that means. And moderator, Okay, great,
Speaker 1: I am the moderator.
Speaker 3: I am anti. Fow, I'm pro bitch. Uh gets fucking owned?
Speaker 2: Can I get a little UMBC music tonight? All right,
Speaker 2: I'll be moderating this debate. John, you will be arguing
Speaker 2: that Democrats must make a greater issue out of Donald
Speaker 2: Trump's age. Tommy will take the con Uh, you have
Speaker 2: the opening statement, you have thirty seconds.
Speaker 3: Uh.
Speaker 1: Did did Joe Biden lose the last election or have
Speaker 1: to drop out of the last election because he was
Speaker 1: too old?
Speaker 3: Yes? Yes?
Speaker 1: Was it the biggest concern of every voter everywhere because
Speaker 1: everyone made a big issue and Republicans made a big
Speaker 1: issue of his age? Yes, yep. So Donald Trump's hands
Speaker 1: are falling off right, now he looks like he looks
Speaker 1: like there was like a fucking bad morgue job on
Speaker 1: his hands before he got in the casket. Sure, he's
Speaker 1: basically melting before our eyes. He's got all kinds of
Speaker 1: bruises all over the place. Aaron Rupar's feeds full of it.
Speaker 3: All.
Speaker 1: It's just purple, okay all And yet, and yet Democrats
Speaker 1: are out there just talking about affordability and not talking
Speaker 1: about the fact that the President United States is decomposing
Speaker 1: before our eyes, and Democrats won't talk about it, even
Speaker 1: though these were the same Democrats that tried to push
Speaker 1: Joe Biden out of the race.
Speaker 2: Wow, a powerful argument, Tommy, your counter.
Speaker 3: John, you ignorant slut. I don't want to get in
Speaker 3: between you and Aaron Ruppar's feed and your little hand
Speaker 3: job issue there with the Trump.
Speaker 1: But Trump is a good one.
Speaker 3: Trump is not running again, so none of this matters.
Speaker 3: Democrats have a zero credibility on this issue, after spending
Speaker 3: years pretending that they couldn't see Joe Biden's physical decline
Speaker 3: as he was shuffling around in sneakers and falling over sandbags.
Speaker 3: Every minute we spend talking about makeup on this decrepit
Speaker 3: old man's hands is a minute we are not spending
Speaker 3: talking about stock trades, the ballroom, medicare cuts, things that
Speaker 3: actually matter to people. And uh yeah, the napping is weird.
Speaker 3: Admittedly it's also very funny when the White House says
Speaker 3: that he blinked for ten seconds.
Speaker 2: Yeah, long blank, long, these are long blanks.
Speaker 3: Admittedly that's weird. But he still does a lot of events.
Speaker 3: He's out there all the time, he's doing rallies. He
Speaker 3: looks vibrant.
Speaker 1: He's a big looks vibrant. What are you talking about?
Speaker 1: He can't even stand up a murderer?
Speaker 3: All right, so let me let me just throw some
Speaker 3: questions in any trigger direction.
Speaker 2: I'll start. I'll start with you, Tommy. You do notice
Speaker 2: that there's a significant decline in how he communicates from
Speaker 2: today to how he communicated even four or eight years ago,
Speaker 2: That that his cadence has changed, That he's not as clear,
Speaker 2: he is more meandering. He's posting all hours of the night,
Speaker 2: like these are things that are should be a liability.
Speaker 3: I think he's always done these things. I think he's
Speaker 3: always been kind of incoherent. I think he's always posted,
Speaker 3: he's never slept.
Speaker 2: But I'm curious how you would explain the difference right
Speaker 2: like he is. Yes, you're right, he has always been
Speaker 2: this way. But I think it's indisputable that it is
Speaker 2: all worse, like he is rambling more he is, Uh,
Speaker 2: it's the weave, but the weave is getting worse? Do
Speaker 2: you do you think it's getting like changing? Depending on
Speaker 2: I think I like jokes aside.
Speaker 3: I think I don't know that I noticed him that
Speaker 3: much more rambly than he used to, because I think
Speaker 3: he's always been rambling like he does look tired, he's
Speaker 3: legitimately falling asleep in events. It's noticeable. The hand stuff
Speaker 3: is weird. And by the way, they're clearly lying about
Speaker 3: the hand stuff because they initially said it was his
Speaker 3: handshaking hand, and then the other hand had the bruising too.
Speaker 1: So he also he also keeps going to the dentist and.
Speaker 3: No one, dude, how many annual dentist trips?
Speaker 1: A lot of dentist trips. Yeah, he's doing a lot
Speaker 1: of things that no one's telling no one's telling us
Speaker 1: why his health is the way it is, and there's
Speaker 1: no one's asking questions.
Speaker 3: And there's the doctor's office in the west wing so
Speaker 3: you would only go to Walter Reed or Bethesda wherever
Speaker 3: he's going now to get like specialized equipment.
Speaker 2: There's also dental. There's also the dentist office in the House.
Speaker 2: Just got to go to a special dentist. So John
Speaker 2: questioning you, how would a Democrat who was somebody who
Speaker 2: defended Joe Biden's ability to run again make this argument
Speaker 2: without seeming like they're full of shit.
Speaker 1: I was wrong about Joe Biden, and I should have
Speaker 1: said something earlier. And that's what I'm doing this time around,
Speaker 1: because Donald Trump is in bad shape and he should
Speaker 1: not be a lead in the country, and any Republican
Speaker 1: that still supports him and that doesn't want to pressure
Speaker 1: the cabinet to invoke the twenty fifth Amendment, then they
Speaker 1: are just feeding into this cover up for Donald Trump's
Speaker 1: age in his dementia, and he is just putting us
Speaker 1: all at risk and Republicans won't do anything about it.
Speaker 1: And so even though he's not running again, when we
Speaker 1: go into the midterms, we know that Donald Trump's approval
Speaker 1: rating is highly correlated with how Republicans are going to
Speaker 1: do in the midterms. And by talking more about how
Speaker 1: he has dementia and he is losing his marbles, then
Speaker 1: we could get his approval even lower, and that Democrats
Speaker 1: can then do better in the midterms.
Speaker 2: Last question for you, Tommy, Joe Biden's age and Joe
Speaker 2: Biden's disapprove on the economy became link. The fact that
Speaker 2: the economy was bad was a sign he wasn't up
Speaker 2: for the job. The fact that he was up for
Speaker 2: the job made people doubt that he could fix the economy.
Speaker 2: We're trying to make an argument that Republicans we have
Speaker 2: to win the House in the Senate, and that Republicans
Speaker 2: refuse to tell the truth about Donald Trump. Shouldn't the
Speaker 2: fact that Donald Trump is to put decomposing four our eyes,
Speaker 2: rambling at all hours, falling asleep in meetings. Shouldn't we
Speaker 2: be saying these Republicans won't be honest about that? That
Speaker 2: Who Why are they not telling the truth about this?
Speaker 2: What are we not knowing about this? Shouldn't we be
Speaker 2: making this one of the lines of argument that we
Speaker 2: use when we try to accuse Republicans of not only
Speaker 2: Trump accountable.
Speaker 3: Yeah, so, allow me to flip flop on the issue
Speaker 3: to respond to your leading question. Clearly, they're covering up
Speaker 3: something right, Like the guy's the multiple annual doctor visits,
Speaker 3: Like this is crazy, it's all pretext. We should push
Speaker 3: for more information. There is muscle memory here, right, Like,
Speaker 3: I think we get people to like a critical, massive
Speaker 3: concern about this, they can they will care. I also
Speaker 3: just like I think Truble hate it. If we call
Speaker 3: him a sad, sick old man, he would hate that.
Speaker 3: So it's just working that in there could be fun.
Speaker 3: Now now you argue the other side.
Speaker 1: Yeah, no, I'll argue the other side because I've Tommy's
Speaker 1: best point was he's not running again, Like and so
Speaker 1: what difference as Hillary Clinton once said, what difference does
Speaker 1: it make if if he's if he is decrepit, if
Speaker 1: they are covering something up he's Like the reason this
Speaker 1: was a potent argument against Joe Biden is because Joe
Speaker 1: Biden was asking voters for four more years in office.
Speaker 1: Donald Trump will never ask voters for four more years
Speaker 1: in office. He might try to say no, he won't.
Speaker 1: He might try to stay in office, but he's not
Speaker 1: gonna ask voters for four more years.
Speaker 3: I mean he might run for a third term.
Speaker 1: That's he's going to try that. He's going to try
Speaker 1: to just sit there and be like, I got the
Speaker 1: military in the park. Yeah, no one's gonna let him run.
Speaker 1: But so he's not gonna ask for you. So what
Speaker 1: is the purpose of Trump? What is the if we're
Speaker 1: trying to win a midterm, what is the story we're
Speaker 1: trying to tell about Donald Trump that is most true?
Speaker 1: And the story that is most true is what you
Speaker 1: said at the beginning of this uh at this episode,
Speaker 1: which is this whole term is a smash and grab.
Speaker 1: He wants to make as much money as he can.
Speaker 1: He's a meglomaniac who thinks that now he needs this
Speaker 1: legacy in history where he like conquers half the globe
Speaker 1: and he doesn't give a shit about people. He doesn't
Speaker 1: give a shit about people, and he's never given a
Speaker 1: shit about people, and that's a consistent story through time.
Speaker 1: And whether he has dementia now or he's losing his
Speaker 1: marbles or not, like doesn't really matter.
Speaker 2: So I think the way that I would square this
Speaker 2: is I think that's right Democrats to be more passionate
Speaker 2: about the dact.
Speaker 3: Now.
Speaker 2: Democrats paid a political price for defending Joe Biden and
Speaker 2: when people had concerns about his age, even after he
Speaker 2: dropped out because it came to be evidence that Democrats
Speaker 2: couldn't be trusted more broadly, And my argument would only
Speaker 2: be no, age should not be the central argument we
Speaker 2: make against Donald Trump. But if we can make the
Speaker 2: fact that Republicans refuse to be honest about not just
Speaker 2: Trump's corruption and and unaccountability and brazen theft, but also
Speaker 2: just his rambling and crazy nonsense, and you make every
Speaker 2: time he does that part of a story about how
Speaker 2: he's unfit in including because he's getting old, then that's
Speaker 2: part of why these Republicans can't be trusted. To me,
Speaker 2: that's the best. I'm not the best I can do.
Speaker 1: Even that, As you say that, like you kind of
Speaker 1: just like threw in corruption there, but it's like, so
Speaker 1: he's he doesn't know what he's doing. He's crazy, but
Speaker 1: he's also smart enough to be out there stealing all
Speaker 1: the money.
Speaker 3: I just think like the incoherence is priced in, Like
Speaker 3: the weave is a thing that's like a joke, but
Speaker 3: it's also not a joke, you know what I mean.
Speaker 3: Like people know he's a goofball, he's all over the place,
Speaker 3: he says weird shit, but also like he's funny, he's
Speaker 3: big and imposing, he seems sharp at events a lot
Speaker 3: of times, and like the handshit is very odd, but like,
Speaker 3: it's also weird.
Speaker 1: It's weird to make an argument that he used to
Speaker 1: be sharp when we were all saying he's been fucking
Speaker 1: crazy since he came on the scene in twenty sixty. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's weird. It's weird for Democrats to be in the
Speaker 1: bits and be like, you know what, he's just not
Speaker 1: up for the job. He used to be, but now
Speaker 1: he's not up for the job.
Speaker 2: I think, look, I think I don't think anyone should
Speaker 2: make that that argument. I think you go back and
Speaker 2: look at even about like the the debates with Jeb
Speaker 2: Bush versus the debate with Comma Harris, like there's been
Speaker 2: a crazy to find. But even putting that aside, here's
Speaker 2: the thing that I find very annoying about all this
Speaker 2: this it's the same kind of practiced like obtuseness that
Speaker 2: some people on our side love to do. Like how
Speaker 2: could you say this If you won't say the same
Speaker 2: exact thing about Trump that you said about Joe Biden,
Speaker 2: then you're being a hypocrite. As if we can't see
Speaker 2: the difference between the way Joe Biden looked and the
Speaker 2: way Donald Trump, the fact that Joe Biden was disappearing
Speaker 2: from the public. Look, if you think Donald Trump is
Speaker 2: too old for the job, I'm I'm I'm sure sure.
Speaker 1: He's too selfish. He's too He's too much of a
Speaker 1: fucking dictator for the job.
Speaker 2: He's also the most accessible president we have ever had.
Speaker 2: He is on camera every fucking day. He's answering questions
Speaker 2: every day, and like he seems vital. Yeah, nuts loses
Speaker 2: the thread all the ways in which he's terrible and
Speaker 2: shouldn't be in office. He should be impeached and removed immediately.
Speaker 2: I'm not in charge of this, but like to to
Speaker 2: act as if there isn't a big difference between the
Speaker 2: way Donald Trump is aging the way the way Joe
Speaker 2: Biden is aging is to once again deny what we
Speaker 2: can see with their own fucking eyes.
Speaker 3: Ye.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but to me, that is like all beside the point.
Speaker 1: Even if you can argue that back and forth, whoever
Speaker 1: thinks you know Joe Biden was worse Trump was worse, whatever,
Speaker 1: But it's again, the question is to what end is
Speaker 1: a second term president? If Donald Trump was sitting here
Speaker 1: saying I'm want four more years, and we were trying
Speaker 1: to figure out how to defeat the two one.
Speaker 3: That answer is you try to drive down his negatism,
Speaker 3: or you make it an issue that other Republicans need
Speaker 3: to speak to you, and like suddenly they're vouching for
Speaker 3: him not being senile or old or whatever. I think
Speaker 3: we're a long way from here to there.
Speaker 1: Yeah. And it's also because if you had, if you
Speaker 1: had a choice between what Republicans need to answer for,
Speaker 1: would you rather it be they're covering up for Donald
Speaker 1: Trump being too old or they're saying nothing about the
Speaker 1: fact that he's literally stealing from taxpayers out of their
Speaker 1: pocket and launched a war that's shot up gas price
Speaker 1: hand to make up or I think you'd rather do
Speaker 1: that one. And if he really both okay, well, you
Speaker 1: only have so many things that you can say out
Speaker 1: of your mouth.
Speaker 2: And if it was so clear, right like if he
Speaker 2: was really like, look, I agree, he's in decline. There's
Speaker 2: not some magic words that Democrats can use to make
Speaker 2: something more. They can make it more of an issue,
Speaker 2: but they can't make it the issue. If Donald Trump
Speaker 2: was as having the kind of muttering debate that that
Speaker 2: Joe Biden had I guarantee you would be a big
Speaker 2: political issue, and it wouldn't be because Chuck Schumer decided
Speaker 2: it was on some given day.
Speaker 3: That's a calm, a sad sickle man.
Speaker 2: Go to town. Let's go to town.
Speaker 1: Get a man figure. If you got the right words,
Speaker 1: I won. Okay, Congress, Good for you, Congress to our winner,
Speaker 1: John love It. That's our show for today, Dan and
Speaker 1: I will be back with a new show on Friday.
Speaker 1: Pots America is a cricket media production. Our show is
Speaker 1: produced by Austin Fisher, Saul Ruben, McKenna Roberts, and Ferris Safari,
Speaker 1: with Reed Jerlin, Elijah Cone and Adrian Hill. Our team
Speaker 1: includes Matt de Groat, Ben Hethcote, Jordan Cantor, Charlotte Landis,
Speaker 1: Carol pel Avive, David Toles, Mia Kelman, Ryan Young, and
Speaker 1: Naomi Seingle. Our staff is probably unionized with the Writers
Speaker 1: Guild of America East