Speaker 1: Hello, and welcome to another episode of the Federalist Radio Hour.
As always, you can email the show at radio at
the Federalists dot com. I'm your guest host, Tristan Justice,
and joining me today again for this episode of the
book Club podcast is our DC correspondent Eddie Scary. Last month,
we read and reviewed Kamala Harris's memoir and The Truth
We Told We Hold, And this month we read former
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's new book, The Art of Power,
My story as America's first woman Speaker of the House.
Speaker 2: Eddie, thanks again for reading with me this this month. Well,
just just to be upfront with our listeners, I do
the audio books I did. I did digest still count
it still count. And also get I get the benefit
or the bonus, I guess of having Nancy Pelosi herself
read it to me.
Speaker 1: You know, I actually I did half in half this time.
I read half the book in my hands and then
I listened to half of it. I just I think
it's so much more effective when it's a memoir for
the author to read it themselves.
Speaker 2: I just think it's so much more interesting. Yeah, I
agree with you, and that that was kind of my thought.
I mean, I do put it you kind of. I
kind of don't notice it anymore after a little bit,
but I have to speed up the audio to get
through the book faster, so it's like it's, you know,
Nancy Pelossi talking very very fast, which kind of makes
it funny. And it can be comical at certain parts
where maybe she's supposed to be a little bit more
serious or like she's like trying to land a joke,
and then it kind of just comes off awkward. But no,
I agree with you. I actually prefer listening to it
when it's I think for the same reasons.
Speaker 1: Well jumping jumping into the substance of the book. I
asked you this question after we reviewed the Vice President's
book last month, and I think it's a good question
to start off with on this one. What did you
think of Nancy Pelosi before you read this book and
what do you think of her now?
Speaker 2: Well, I Nancy Pelosi is actually I think the most
fascinating member of Congress during my like adult my adult
career in journalism and political media. I find her to
be the most interesting person because I'm not really sure
what it is about her that really that she just
she is able to really rule her caucus, the Democrats
in the House, with an iron fist. And she also
is just very like she is not a stupid person whatsoever.
You might disagree and hate everything that she stands for,
she is a very smart person, adept. She once called
herself a master legislator. I don't think that's an overstatement.
That is someone who if she wants to get something passed,
she gets it passed. And I mean there are some
things that I guess maybe just not be possible that,
you know, if you could wave a magic wand to
get everything your way. But when she's when the when
the not even the stars, but when there's when there's
a sliver of enough power for Democrats because you know,
like wow, when they had the White House, they had
the Senate, they had the House. You know, that was
for the first couple of years of Obama's presidency and
then also for Biden's legacy. She's able to muscle through
some major legislation. So I do find her just like
a really fascinating character in the House. As far as
did my opinion change really much after No, there were
some things in there that I was I was, you know,
intrigued by in the sense of, oh, I've never heard
her say that out loud. One being I know we're
going to get to this, but one being she was
actually somewhat critical of President Obama and you know, talking
about you, and also feeling like she didn't that the
White House didn't fully understand how Congress worked and how
much effort the House Democrats, which I'm sure she really
just specifically meaning herself, how much effort she has to
put into passing the White House agenda, the Obama agenda.
I thought that was interesting just because I've never heard
her be critical like that of Obama ever. But my
opinion really didn't change anything after reading the memoir.
Speaker 1: She's definitely a legacy lawmaker, and I think this book
was really a way a vehicle to cement her. I
guess legacy as a legacy a lawmaker because she was
I mean, look more nearly forty years in the House,
nearly more than twenty of which were in House leadership.
She was there post nine to eleven, IRAQ, two thousand
and eight financial crisis, the Obamacare fight, twenty ten, Tea
Party takeover, and then of course he emergeres as Donald
Trump and then to impeachments, and so this book was really,
to me, seemed like a vehicle for her to try
to narrate her own story in House leadership as she
gets ready to retire. I don't know how much longer
she'll stay in Congress. It just seems like she's going
to stay there forever at this point, even in a
post speakership status. But obviously she's pulling so many strings
behind the scenes. She's been a very she was very
powerful speaker, especially in two thousand and seven, two thousand
and eight, thousand and nine, you know, shepherding through that
colossal healthcare legislation. But I feel like her second stint
as speaker was a lot less. I feel like she
heard her power really waned in that speakership. And I
don't know if that's just by virtue of I think
a narrower majority, But their majority by the time she
reclaimed the speaker's gable under Donald Trump was still relatively large,
especially considering the majority that House Republicans suffer with today.
As looking at the latest numbers, it's like Reprobalicans have
only like eight more seats than Democrats in the House
right now, with all these vacancies and resignations, and it's
really demoralized a lot of people the capital. But even
Nancy Pelosi, I think she really bungled, especially that first impeachment.
I think the country really saw that for what it was,
which was a political circus that was really the end
result of every other strategy that the Democrats pulled out,
failing with the Russia hoax, with efforts to impeach Donald
Trump under the emolument's clause, that really felt like a
political leized resort for them to finally take him out.
And so I think Plancy almost I think Pelosi probably
almost knew that. But I just think she also became
victim of this this kind of Trump derangement syndrome that
the entire party seems to be infected with, and that
is she has this vm and hatred that really I
think guided her through that impeachment. I think that came
out through the book. I really really felt like reading
through those her stories on both impeachments, it felt like
a hatred of Donald Trump more than more than anything else.
Speaker 2: I agree with you on that her Her real personal
hatred towards Donald Trump, I think is like it kind
of it makes her seem small. I think because there's
someone who, as you were saying, like was it has
been such a powerful speaker. The only other one that
I can think of that was closed was new Gingrich.
And actually she might we might not have a Nancy
Pelosi if it wasn't for New Gingrish, because he's kind
of the one who consolidated so much power into that position.
But reading the book, yeah, I think you really do
pick up on just how much. And it's a lot
of it's unnecessary too. She makes She talks a lot
about these private calls and private meetings she had with Trump,
and it's just kind of she can't ever mention him
without it very clearly showing what her dislike is and
her comments, her snide remarks to him, the way she
felt like she had a put him in his place.
That is is something you that is like you know,
repeated throughout the book anytime she talks about Donald Trump,
I think I would I would somewhat disagree with you
that her power anyway kind of waned or seemed to
kind of dim at really any point. I think that
maybe when you had the what they called the what
do they call themselves, the squad when the Squad came in.
I do think that was the first time you saw
a real challenge to her and pushed to her from
her own party, and that was something you kind of realized,
I think actually was a struggle for her, Like you know,
everyone else just kind of falls in line. But then
you have ilan Omar and AOC coming in saying they're
not voting for her, and they've got a lot of
energy behind them. They very passionate supporters, and the media
loved them. Of course. I think that that kind of
that was the first and maybe only real time that again,
at least in my my career, my adult lifetime, where
she seems to have a have to really grapple with something,
but everything else, I mean, even if it was just uh,
you know, her her going toe to toe with Trump
and just handicapping his presidency via the impeachments, it seemed
like maybe my impression, my impression at the time, was
that she never really wanted to do it. She never
really wanted to impeach him. But because you know, there
was again the squad, the rise of the Squad wanting
you know, really pushing for that, she may have. So
maybe that is to your point that that she was
somewhat losing control, but otherwise it's all she's done as
it has solidified power of the or solidified rather the
the the coherence, not coherence, but the cohesive. It's very cohesive.
She has made the Democrat Party far more more cohesive,
and it's never really waned in the time that she's
that she's been in power. At least I haven't seen it.
Speaker 1: I thought it was interesting how she didn't actually and
maybe she did and I just missed it. But I
don't think she actually talked about the challenges to her
speakership the second.
Speaker 2: Time from her own party.
Speaker 1: I mean, did she talk about Tim Ryan running against
her and getting several votes and facing these challenges from
the AOC led caucus to her?
Speaker 2: Because if she did, I don't recall it. No, that's
interesting you say that because there were things that I
noticed that there was something that she may have I
noticed as I was listening. I'm like, hm, that's interesting,
she's not bringing these things up. She eventually did, and
I would say, like COVID was something she didn't really
talk about much in the book. At certain points you
did see it, but she didn't. There was not one
big chapter on it. When you're talking about the parts
where there were there were any kind of like mutinies
within the party challenging her hour from the left within
our party, she didn't talk about that at least. I
also don't recall that she didn't really talk about George Floyd.
And like twenty twenty was kind of a tiny cloth.
What's that the cloth she wore in the capitol? Yeah, yeah, yeah,
I thought that exact thing. I thought about that. I
was like, all of twenty twenty is kind of missing,
or to the extent that it's brought up at all,
it's kind of glossed over. And you know, you remember
when she went to the there were the lockdowns, and
she went and got her hair done against all ordinances everywhere,
but in particular where what if she said San Francisco,
she goes and gets her hair done at a a
long that was supposed to be closed. All those things
that would reflect poorly on her, which I mean, I
get it why you would maybe not bring those things up,
but also I would say that reflect poorly on the
party at large. COVID is not something that Democrats want
to talk about. BLM rioting in twenty twenty not something
that Democrats like talking about. So I noticed that those
were missing. And yet you bring up another really good
one that she did not really talk about challenges to
her power from within her party.
Speaker 1: And maybe it was just too late in the in
the publication process, but I kind of wish she had
been able to talk about Joe Biden this summer. I mean,
the book still came out, uh, you know, more than
a month after Biden had stepped down from being denominee.
I feel like there still could have been time to
write about that in here. And I don't know with
her publisher what their what their calendar was, but and
maybe she's she's given enough interviews on that to where
we kind of mean she talked about in her interview
with Bill Maher and some other outlets. But I guess
for a political legacy book, I was kind of surprised.
I guess she she would want that in there, but
again that could be it's like a publisher calendar issue.
Speaker 2: But well, also also just to say, something I was
mindful of is that this is coming out at the
you know the second half of an election year, you know,
just before the election. I think that there were a
lot of there were a lot of calculations that do
not distract in some way from the race and how
you know, how important and critical it is for their
electoral chances. I do think that the timing of the
book's release is why you didn't see. Like I said,
I think that COVID was deliberately deliberately left out same
thing for BLM pretty much all of twenty twenty, just
like you said, the challenges to her speakership. And then also, yeah,
that's another good one you raised as because she talks
about Biden, but and only in good ways, only positive ways,
only talks about how great of a president he was
and the most consequential president in history. But I really
think that that was a calculation because it's it came
out so close to the.
Speaker 1: Election, right In some of this stuff, I just wasn't
really politically plugged in for I mean, she's talking about
like the two thousand and eight financial crisis.
Speaker 2: I was a year old. She talking about the invasion
of I Rock.
Speaker 1: I was five, So it was kind of interesting to
kind of look back at. You know, I still watch
the news as a child, so I generally knew that
things were going on so I just thought that was
really interesting to get kind of a behind the scenes account,
even if it was still a book by a politician
making political points. But I think more than twenty years removed,
she probably gave those issues a different picture. I guess
without some of the political considerations that she would have
written about Donald Trump in January sixth, for example. And
I love how she framed the impeachment Donald Trump as
this like bipartisan triumph. At the end of her book,
she writes it was quote and she cites Liz Cheney
as an example of this. It granted, Cheney at the
time was number three Republican House leadership, but you talk
to any Republican party today, no one's going to say
she was disallowed from her own party in Wyoming. She
lost overwhelmingly in that state. I'mary, but Pelosi writes, quote,
it was the most bipartisan impeachment vote in US history,
and she got I think it was what a dozen
Republicans in the House to support that impeachment. So it's
by no means this this big broad bipartisan triumph that
she put on. I guess it really seems to me
that this was what we were at the Federals calling
it five years ago an asterisk impeachment meant to uh
to sneer Donald Trump as this you know, convicted felon
that was a villain of the Democratic Party and then
their eyes a villain of the country.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the the impeachment stuff, she did get into a
lot of that. Something that I thought was then I
just thought about this as you were talking about about that,
but not to change the subject, but it was just
I didn't want to lose it. It was kind of
we read the Kamala book and what I the similarity
between the two that I really saw, And I'm wondering
if this is all women Democrat books where there's so
much of this like reprimanding other men. So there was
this one scene in Pelosi's book where so well, first
I'll just say with Kamala, it was a lot of
like her time as Attorney General in California, and like
she's taking on the big corporations and it's a room
full of men and she has to and like all
these little like nappy comebacks, she has to, like people
write that was Kamma's for this. This was like a
lot of her dealing with the senior leadership before she
became speakers, a senior leadership of the Democrat Party, which
was always men and dealing with men from the White House.
Whenever she's dealing with the Bush White House or the
Obama White House, whatever, it's always men. There was this
one scene that I thought was like, just again, I'm
wondering if it's like, if it's a Democrat woman thing
that they have to like they have to assert themselves
in a way where they were and they do that
by like talking about some man that they reprimanded. And
again I kind of think it's it's unbecoming in a
large way, like it it leaves a bad taste in
my mouth. But there's this one scene where she's I
can't remember his name, but I think it was like
either an economic advisor or the Treasury secretary under the
Bush and this is about about the economic collapse that
we had in two thousand and eight, where he's coming
and telling them we need like a rescue package and
it's got to be it's like it's gonna it's got
Henry Polson, Yes, exactly, that was who was he was
he the Treasury?
Speaker 1: Yeah, he was a Treasury secretary for Bush during during
the crisis.
Speaker 2: Okay, right, So she's meeting with him and also like
the Senate Senate leadership, and he's saying, like how much
money they need? And I guess I don't know if
it was if it was I think it was Harry
Reid that's like, well, do you need this amount? Or
maybe it was Schumer. I can't remember, but it was like,
do you is this the amount that you think you're
gonna need? And I guess the Treasury Secretary says, we're
getting warmer, and Pelosi is she you know, it's supposed
to be this dramatic moment where she's really asserting herself
to a man in the room in front of other men,
and she says that she said to him, mister Secretary,
that is not how you address the Senate leader when
we're talking about you know.
Speaker 1: It was just like this whole thing that she was like,
you're getting warmer, You're getting warmer, You're getting warmer. And
she was like, that is not how to talk to
the Senate.
Speaker 2: Which is just I don't know. Again, it was just
a similarity I found between Kamala's book and Pelosi's book,
And I'm just wondering, is this how all Democrat women
have to like they've got something to prove, and it's
always done by way of like. And here's this man
that I put in his place, and here's another man
that I reprimanded.
Speaker 3: Right now, is Kamala trying to earn the dumb vote?
The watched Alton on Wall Street podcast with Chris Markowski
Every day Chris helps unpack the connection between politics and
the economy and how it affects your wallet. Kamala Harris
is pitching twenty five thousand dollars for first home buyers
while trying to build millions of new homes with government funds,
all while using small businesses as straw men. Whether it's
happening in DC or down on Wall Street, it's affecting
you financially.
Speaker 2: Be informed.
Speaker 3: Check out the Watchdot on Wall Street podcast with Chris
Markowski on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcast.
Speaker 2: Well, I think the.
Speaker 1: Currents of identity politics are so strong in the Democratic Party,
and the two books we read were, to their credit,
women figures who are becoming first Right, So, Nancy Pelosi
is the first woman Speaker of the House, Kamala Harris
first woman vice president, and could be first woman president.
But I think you're right in that it was very
much there is. There's definitely a tone to that, right,
And so i'd be curious, I guess, I guess, I
guess we have to read some books by liberal men. Now, right,
does m Hoff have a book?
Speaker 2: I have no idea that though, gosh, I don't know
that one that we'd really want to torture ourselves with.
But now, I mean, that's a that's a good point.
Maybe maybe there are other figures who like the you know.
And again I got because it could this could be
something that's just like a political like type book. I mean,
I think that the most like recent thing I might
compare it to who is not a liberal woman? What's
her name? Christine nome uh and you know, one of
her the way she the way she kind of like
asserts herself is with that stupid story about shooting the dog.
I think that, you know, and I read Sarah Palin's
biography back in two thousand, was like two thousand and
nine or ten or something, and I didn't feel that
there's this like angry need to like assert their dominance
or or at a very least assert that they're they're
like equality that they have that they feel like they
need to to prove or something. I don't I don't know.
But I also didn't read Christine Noman's book. But it
just seems like, Okay, well she shot a dog that's
also pretty stupid in crane or she says she did.
I actually have real doubts about whether the story is true.
But you know, I don't know the difference. Oh that
is totally true, she shocks me. It's true. Oh, totally
totally well or dog. But anyway, that's that was just
the closest comparison I could make, Like maybe that's the
there's a difference there, but maybe not. Well, we will be.
Speaker 1: Reading Mania Trump's book next month, and of course I
would invite our listeners to send us any recommendations that
they want to hear us breakdown again. Email is Radio
at the Federals dot com. But next book we are
definitely doing is is Milania Trump's books. So I'm kind
of curious. I'm curious about that book for a whole
host of reasons.
Speaker 2: But they're not a picture book. I thought it was
like a coffee table book. It's not, Oh is it?
Speaker 1: It was?
Speaker 2: It was thirty dollars. I thought picture books are usually
a little bit more. Maybe I don't know, because yeah,
I didn't look. But but also she well I guess
maybe it is more because didn't when she's like done
little like ads for it on social media has been
more like she's kind of like did doesn't she mention
like the assassination attempts on her husband, and like she
mentioned something else, and it's like, so maybe she it
is like a memoir and she's getting through. That'll be
that'll be an interesting read for sure.
Speaker 1: Yeah, because I mean she's not to distract from the
Pelosi book too much, but she does. She's a very
quiet person. I mean, she doesn't she didn't really have
this big public profile that previous first ladies have had.
Speaker 2: She's such just like mysterious.
Speaker 1: Figure and and and I mean I think the Trump
family I've seen reporting that Donald Trump apparently likes kind
of the palace intrigue. But I think the book is
going to be fascinating to come out a month before
the selection from someone who has really largely remained silent
except for talking to gay Republicans.
Speaker 2: Oh right, Yeah, that's such a that's such a thing. Yeah,
we don't need to get off too off topic of
the policy book, but I will say I think that's
one of the most interesting things about how, you know,
the media doesn't really talk about it. The media does
not talk about how Milania is. Yes, very uh withdrawn
from a lot of things book, especially politics, but that's
not the case. She is very much involved with like
advancing gay Republican gay Republican groups and that kind of thing.
And that's actually really interesting. But anyway, let's get back
to anyway, and.
Speaker 1: I actually love that because it ties back to the book,
is that, you know, the left is so obsessed with
calling Donald Trump and anyone. So she with Donald Trump
this big dad threat to democracy, the republic in the country,
and you know it's going to be the second coming
of Hitler in the twenty first century.
Speaker 2: I mean, Nancy Pelosi.
Speaker 1: She writes about Trump, and of course extensively writes about
Trump and her book she writes, the threat to our
democracy is real, present and urgent.
Speaker 2: But no one, no one can explain.
Speaker 1: On the Democratic Party exactly how Donald Trump is a
threat to our democracy. I mean, no one articulates what
he's going to do direct the Republic. Everyone just says
well January sixth, Okay, well he lost in twenty twenty,
and then you see this kind of turmoil with the
you know, objecting to the electoral College, and it's like okay,
and they're saying, well, especially if Donald Trump wins, he's
a threat to democracy. It's like, okay, why don't how
And so it's kind of like the same thing with
mind talking to gay Republican is that they want to
they need homophobia to exist on a plane that just
doesn't because otherwise they don't really have much to campaign on.
It's kind of like when they so when they're calling
Donald Trump this you know, threat to gay people, and
it's like, okay, this is a Manhattan businessman who is
the first president to come into office support a gay marriage.
Speaker 2: And I'm so I'm so.
Speaker 1: Happy the Republican Party finally kind of put this issue
to rest this summer when they changed the platform to
remove the explicit endorsement for traditional marriage from it. It's
like this, this is like the most gay friendly president
we've had in decades, who uh, you know, didn't change
his position in office on the whims of public opinion.
And so Nancy Pelosi I looked throughout her book. You know,
where where does she say that, you know, Donald Trump
hates it is bad for gay people in Bachelor of Republic.
Speaker 2: She can't explain how.
Speaker 1: And I think that's a very big meekness Democrats have,
because it's it's like the way Pride Wolf, you know,
every time I think it's it's gonna become very numbing
that I mean, it's it's becoming a little bit like
white noise. It's just this kind of frequent talking point.
No one really believes it, and Americans are really becoming
numb to that messaging well because they rely so heavily
with good reason. Uh, they have every reason to believe
they can rely on the media. The media just is
just full of you know, CNN, MSNBC, The New York Times,
Washington Post, just just this constant wall, just giant monolith
is just coming at you telling you that he's that
Trump and everything you know it's and all his supporters
are white supremacists, and they're all.
Speaker 2: Uh, you know, these primitive bigots. You know. So the
Democrats they don't even have to make that case. They
just say things like follows the Inner Book, like it's
a threat to democracy and uh, you know, we're going
to lose our democracy if if Trump is enough and
like and that you there, if you were to try
and like follow it to its logical end, it never
really makes sense. One time I was on the phone
with this, I forget. I think it was like the
Telegraph or so it was on like British British or no,
actually I think it might have been Swedish because I
think it was in a different language. This is this
is back I think before before the election, before twenty twenty. No,
we were in twenty twenty, but it was before the
actual election. And she asked me, do you think there's
any chance that like Donald Trump won't give up power?
And okay, does that sound that sounds scary? I guess
when you put it that way, But you got to
think how does that work in practice? And I said, okay,
is this the theory that he like, you know, he
won't leave the presidency and that you know, he stays
past and like, because you know, there's if he can
if he doesn't physically leave the White House, they will
drag him out. But also everyone else in his cabinet
is leaving. They're all leaving. William Barr he said, who
they You know, they thought was this like this total
like dude who did everything as the attorney general for
Trump and did all his like dirty or legal dirty work.
He said. He said, I'm leaving. I'm leaving. He's like,
I don't you're asking me about Donald Trump. I'm telling
you I'm leaving at the end of this term. Uh.
And pretty much every every other cabinet member like they're
they're going. So what does it mean that he's he's
gonna hang on to power? Like no, everyone knows that
their time is done. Okay, time to go.
Speaker 3: Uh.
Speaker 2: But you know, you've got the Democrats. They just they
can come out and say something like Pelosi, which is
threats democracy and just expect fully expects, uh for the
media to repeat it, for them to kind of make
the case that, you know, you've got that that one
lawyer who's always in the New York Times Elios or whatever.
He's like Marcus, Yeah, he's the one who they just
in the New York Times Prime whatever he says, and
it's always just ridiculous. But you know, because he's a lawyer,
it's supposed to be authoritative. But yeah, no it is.
It's just Democrats. You couldn't expect them to actually make
a case to back up any any such claim calling
you know, trumpel white supremacist or any of that. But
the media will do it. They do it for him
every time.
Speaker 1: Right, and the media will even give Democrats their talking points.
I mean, they'll just kind of create these stories out
of thin air, whether it was the Russia hoax or
something else. And actually a fair amount, a fair amount
of that fake news made into Pelosi's book. I mean,
she's talking about how all these officers died on January sixth,
and then she names them, including Brian Sickness, Brian Sicknick,
who is at Capitol police officer who died of natural
causes like days later.
Speaker 2: But everyone's blaming the riot.
Speaker 1: That's even after a medical examiner published their report on
him saying that he did not die from a fire sting,
which you're hitting him in the head.
Speaker 2: Of course, we have January six tapes from the Capitol.
Speaker 1: They were released by Tacher Carlson showing he's just walking around,
you know, brilliant, fine around the Capital after he was
supposed to be, you know, bludgeoned to death by this
fire extinguisher and of course it's she talks about early
in the book how Donald Trump is calling I'll just
I'll just read straight in the book, Trump may think
that Americans died in the war, and she's talking about
one of the world wars. Here are quote suckers and losers,
as he told his then chief of staff John Kelly,
which is like some of the fakest news from twenty twenty.
Speaker 2: It was this anonymously sourced story from.
Speaker 1: The Atlantic that you had more than you had, like
more than thirty Trump officials come out on the record
saying Trump did not say that, including you know, Sarah
Huckabee Sanders, and then even people who are who are
not Trump's biggest fans, John Bolton was there coming out
and calling the story a complete lie. But because John
Kelly said it, it came out and apparently confirmed what
he probably said anonymously to the Atlantic.
Speaker 2: You know, the media just just picked it up and
reign with it. Yeah, and it's so cartoonish. And what's
weird about stories like that? This is what kind of
continues to like fascinate me about when when Democrats repeat
these stories, not so much the media, because I don't
I really feel like you just see their their credibility
is like it's not there. I think people really get
their news now from I mean, it's still very powerful.
It's still very very powerful the media, the legacy media,
if you want to call them that. But I think
that it's just that it's really just petering out at
such a rapid race. But when Democrats repeat these lies,
like uh, when Biden said he was at the White House,
I believe this is during a briefing with reporters and
or like a press conference something he mentioned, how how
you know that thing? Trump told people during COVID to
inject themselves with bleach as treatment. And I hear that,
And I'm thinking, does anyone watching, even the most passive
uh consumer of news, did they hear that and take
it seriously? Because I would want to. I if that
was news to me, I would go, wait he said that?
Where did he say that? And then I'd look it up.
I would actually look it up and wanted to. Maybe
maybe I don't give every like the average person that credit.
I mean, people are busy, they don't want, they don't
they don't have time to look things up. Maybe they
just believe it. But I'm like something that sounds so outlandish.
Don't you actually want to look it up and see,
like where where did they? Where did he say that?
Where did he call them sockers and losers? Where is
the video of that? Where's the audio? Where? Okay, well,
here's the video of Trump saying supposedly inject them with bleach,
which is literally not what he said. What he said
was they found that it disinfectants work. We could maybe
replicate that, right, Like he's talking to what's her name,
Birch or whatever her name was, U, yeah, Burks, Yeah,
you know he's it was. It was such an innocuous
comment that it's like, you know, do you like for
you to you're repeating this thing that like just sounds
so absurd. Do people not look it up? But but
I don't know. Again, it's kind of like, well, well,
the media will continue, they will continue talking about it.
And you're right, this is kind of something that has
been somewhat somewhat of a new revelation for me. You
said that the media will give democrats talking points. Yeah,
because for a long time was kind of understood or
taken for granted that the media work for democrats. But no,
it works more like a partnership. They both work. Neither
of them is superior to the other one or inferior.
It depends on what the goal is, and they're constantly
working towards the same goal because they will. They will.
The media will take a Democrat out, case in point,
removing Biden as the nominee. They will take a Democrat
out if it if it means, you know, getting them
closer to power, making their chances to get to hold
on to power more likely. So yeah, like you said,
they will, they will hand it will work and divorce
the reverse. Rather, the media will hand democrats talking points.
And here's another. I just add the book in front
of me, and you're talking about her Caddie remarks. This
is I think one of one of my favorite times
instances of that happening. She writes, Trump made the remark,
and she's talking about the suckers and losers quote. Trump
made the remark after having reviewed refused to visit an
American cemetery near Paris. But the only loser is him.
I can just remember I was actually listening to her
to say that, and she said it in such a
way that was just so starky. But of course it
was like it was bad weather.
Speaker 1: And of course this is the whole story was debunked
by Sony people who went on the record to say that.
But but, and you just wrap up, what are some
of your last thoughts on this and and what do
you expect to hear from Malania Trump in a week?
Speaker 2: I am interested to hear about the Malania Trump thing.
I would hope that you know you're asking for a lot,
because it's, like you said, it's kind of like people
trying to put themselves in the best light, and you know,
this is this is my version of events that I
want you to believe about me and my legacy. The
books would make so much of a more interesting, lively,
better read if they were more forthcoming and honest about
their thoughts. I think again, like I maybe we'll see
some of that in Malanie's book. But with Pelosi, the
really only lasting parts that I thought were newsworthy or
remember is again she's talking about the process to get
through legislation under Obama, and it was the first time
I really heard her kind of criticize him and feel it.
And what's funny about that is actually that anytime publicly
from the time that they passed it until now. Obama
is always saying I couldn't have done it without Pelosi.
He always says that. But what kind of made me
what I think I realized now after reading that part
of the book is that she nagged him and the
staff so much about feeling like she wasn't getting the credit,
and that her colleagues in the House, the Democrats, weren't
getting the credit, but mostly her. That they've told me
that Obama's people have told him, please make sure to
thank Pelosi, Please say that she helps you with this
and you couldn't have done it without her. Otherwise we're
going to keep hearing from her so that I don't know.
That was maybe my favorite part of the book, But
otherwise they're all kind of they just don't tell enough
of they don't spill the tea, you know, well, I am,
I am. I'm hoping that Malania Trump spilled some tea.
Speaker 1: But with Eddie, you've been listening to another edition of
Federal Austradio. Our i'mterest in Justice will be back soon
with more. Until then, be lovers of freedom and anxious
for the fray