Latest / The Chuck ToddCast / Chuck’s Commentary - Are We About To Go To War With Iran? + Jasmine Crockett Loses From The Talarico & Colbert Interview

Transcript

Chuck’s Commentary - Are We About To Go To War With Iran? + Jasmine Crockett Loses From The Talarico & Colbert Interview · The Chuck ToddCast

0:00
Speaker 1: This episode of the Chuck Todcast is brought to you
0:02
Speaker 1: by Wild Grain. Wild Grain is the first bake from
0:06
Speaker 1: frozen subscription box for sour dough breads, arteisonal pastries, and
0:11
Speaker 1: fresh pastas, plus all the items conveniently baked in twenty
0:14
Speaker 1: five minutes or less. Unlike many store brought options, Wild
0:18
Speaker 1: Grain uses some simple ingredients you can pronounce and a
0:22
Speaker 1: slow fermentation process that can be a lot easier on
0:25
Speaker 1: your belly, little gut health there right, and richer in
0:28
Speaker 1: nutrients antioxidants. There's also no preservatives and no shortcuts. The
0:32
Speaker 1: Wild Grain boxes are fully customizable. In addition to their
0:35
Speaker 1: variety box, they have a gluten free box, a vegan box,
0:39
Speaker 1: and a new protein box. I will tell you I
0:42
Speaker 1: have done the gluten free box. I have done it
0:44
Speaker 1: a second time. I have also used the code the
0:48
Speaker 1: todcast code. You use the promo code toodcast at checkout
0:52
Speaker 1: you get thirty dollars off. I've already used it as
0:55
Speaker 1: a gift to somebody else who loves this bread. It
0:59
Speaker 1: is hard to find good gluten free bread. It is fantastic.
1:02
Speaker 1: They give you step by step instructions. I really dig this.
1:06
Speaker 1: There is nothing like having an artesion bakery in your
1:09
Speaker 1: freezer to chase away the winter chill. Now is the
1:12
Speaker 1: best time to stay in and enjoy some comforting homemade
1:15
Speaker 1: meals with Wild Grain. I obviously highly recommend it. It
1:19
Speaker 1: is worth giving Wild Grain to try. Right now. Wildgrain
1:22
Speaker 1: is offering my listeners thirty dollars off your first box
1:25
Speaker 1: plus free croissants for life. Come on when you go
1:28
Speaker 1: to wildgrain dot com slash podcast to start your subscription today.
1:33
Speaker 1: That's thirty dollars off your first box and free croissants
1:36
Speaker 1: for life when you visit wildgrain dot com, slash podcast,
1:39
Speaker 1: or simply use the promo code podcast at checkout. This
1:43
Speaker 1: is a sponsor I absolutely embrace, so use that code.
1:50
Speaker 1: Hello there, Welcome to the Thursday edition of the Chuck Podcast.
1:54
Speaker 1: I'll give you a quick rundown of where we're going first.
1:56
Speaker 1: I've got a few stories that I feel like me,
2:00
Speaker 1: some framing, reframing, a few ways that I'm thinking about
2:05
Speaker 1: him that I think you ought to be thinking about him.
2:07
Speaker 1: When it comes to are we about to go to
2:10
Speaker 1: war with Iran? All things Texas, Senate, we are inside
2:14
Speaker 1: of two weeks. This is there are a lot of
2:17
Speaker 1: moving parts here. I also want to spend a few
2:21
Speaker 1: minutes on the h on the back and forth about
2:23
Speaker 1: the FCC equal time and all of that business with Colbert,
2:30
Speaker 1: and then I want to get to two stories that
2:33
Speaker 1: are way under the radar but epitomize I think what's
2:37
Speaker 1: wrong with our politics at the moment. Collectively, One has
2:41
Speaker 1: to do with crypto and a warning from Chuck Schumer
2:45
Speaker 1: to Democratic senators on you know, basically he's basically admitting
2:54
Speaker 1: principles are for sale, and I'll get to where he's
2:57
Speaker 1: going there. It all has to do with fear of
2:59
Speaker 1: crypto money. And then finally, you know what happens when
3:03
Speaker 1: local news dies in darkness. It's a little tribute to
3:06
Speaker 1: the Washington Post and the fact that we have a
3:09
Speaker 1: messed up situation involving a burst sewer pipe where there's
3:13
Speaker 1: a lot of finger pointing, but what we don't have
3:16
Speaker 1: is a reliable news organization to focus and cover this thing,
3:19
Speaker 1: Thank you, Jeff Bezos. Then, of course we'll do a
3:23
Speaker 1: few questions, and I want to get at the issue
3:26
Speaker 1: of unregulated sports gambling in this country and how we're
3:34
Speaker 1: devolving even quicker thanks to an aggressively las A fair
3:40
Speaker 1: if that's possible to be federal government. But let me
3:44
Speaker 1: begin with a question frankly, that I woke up to
3:48
Speaker 1: from a variety of just friends. These are not your normal.
3:54
Speaker 1: This wasn't just sort of the cable booker question of
3:56
Speaker 1: the day or the podcast question of the day. Was
4:01
Speaker 1: in response to watching what we've seen overnight, this massive
4:05
Speaker 1: moving of military personnel, artillery, fighter jets, aircraft carriers to
4:12
Speaker 1: the Middle East. Are we about to go with Iran? Well,
4:16
Speaker 1: I don't think any of us have an answer to
4:18
Speaker 1: that question, other than I think, to quote Donald Trump,
4:23
Speaker 1: our current president, I guess we have to stay tuned.
4:28
Speaker 1: I think the better way to frame this is that
4:30
Speaker 1: it I expect that we are drifting into something without
4:34
Speaker 1: fully admitting it, which, of course, you know should should
4:39
Speaker 1: be a lot more concern about unintended consequences here than
4:44
Speaker 1: we are, because we may end up essentially launching some
4:50
Speaker 1: sort of military campaign against Iran without any conversation with Congress.
4:55
Speaker 1: And I actually think Congress would probably give him some
4:58
Speaker 1: authority if he asked for it. Iran is not unpopular
5:02
Speaker 1: in Congress. I think you might even get some bipartisan
5:04
Speaker 1: votes for it. But the fact that that isn't happening,
5:07
Speaker 1: that there isn't and this is some military adventurism perhaps,
5:13
Speaker 1: So let me explain why I think why people are
5:16
Speaker 1: nervous about this and it feels like it feels like
5:20
Speaker 1: sometime this weekend I may come back on and we
5:22
Speaker 1: may talk about what are the consequences there? Because there,
5:27
Speaker 1: Because here's the situation. We have moved so much of
5:31
Speaker 1: our military assets to the Middle East. It doesn't appear
5:33
Speaker 1: we're looking at something that's quick. We're looking at something
5:37
Speaker 1: that could be not so quick. So let me summarize
5:42
Speaker 1: some of the details here. We have two carrier strike
5:43
Speaker 1: groups there now. The USS Abraham Lincoln has been in
5:46
Speaker 1: the Arabian Sea for some time. We've now had the
5:48
Speaker 1: USS Gerald R. Ford, which is the largest worship in
5:51
Speaker 1: the world, been redirected to also join the Lincoln in
5:57
Speaker 1: the region. We've moved over one hundred military aircraft in
6:01
Speaker 1: recent days. Sixteen's have thirty five have twenty two's. We've
6:04
Speaker 1: moved tankers, surveillance aircraft. Look, these are things that you're
6:08
Speaker 1: doing if you're prepared, preparing for sustained operations. Again, this
6:12
Speaker 1: is not a quick strike. This is not supporting Israel
6:17
Speaker 1: getting rid of Iran's nuclear weapons or attempting to get
6:20
Speaker 1: rid of their nuclear laboratories and things like that. So
6:24
Speaker 1: something there seems to be a bigger plane here. Then,
6:30
Speaker 1: you know, I'm like, hey, Congress, are you going to
6:33
Speaker 1: ask for a briefing? Hello, are you going to try
6:36
Speaker 1: to get some information here? Because we're all lacking a
6:38
Speaker 1: lot of information. But it is worth noting that you've
6:43
Speaker 1: had some blind quotes that said, hey, I'd think twice
6:45
Speaker 1: about flying in the region this weekend. I know some
6:49
Speaker 1: people have been warned about that that live in Israel.
6:51
Speaker 1: You know, be careful of your flight plans this weekend.
6:54
Speaker 1: You could see some airspace get shut down. So it's
6:57
Speaker 1: something afoot, and if so, what is Meanwhile, Iran has
7:01
Speaker 1: been conducting live fire navy drills. They partially closed the
7:05
Speaker 1: straight of or moves for these exercises, and the Supreme
7:10
Speaker 1: Leader has been threatening American carriers. Now, look, maybe this
7:15
Speaker 1: is all posturing, right, maybe this is gunboat diplomacy, because
7:20
Speaker 1: we do have these indirect talks right now in Geneva
7:22
Speaker 1: on some sort of nuclear deal. The Vice President went
7:25
Speaker 1: out there and publicly claimed that progress incremental, but progress
7:29
Speaker 1: was made even even though he admitted that Iran has
7:33
Speaker 1: not accepted what the US red lines are in their
7:36
Speaker 1: nuclear program. But you have Iran's foreign minister calling the
7:41
Speaker 1: talks constructed and that both sides are agreed unquote guiding principles,
7:47
Speaker 1: and apparently we are in a two week This is
7:50
Speaker 1: where it's confusing, because if you just follow the Geneva talks,
7:53
Speaker 1: we're in a two week window for Tehran to offer
7:56
Speaker 1: some detailed proposals, and yet we have moved on all
8:00
Speaker 1: of these military assets into the region for something that
8:02
Speaker 1: appears to be more imminent than in the next two weeks. Now,
8:06
Speaker 1: you throw two weeks out there. For those of you
8:08
Speaker 1: you Trumpologists out there, two weeks is a is a
8:12
Speaker 1: code word because it's it's a presidential crutch. When Trump
8:15
Speaker 1: says two weeks, you know that it's meaningless, that it's
8:18
Speaker 1: a punt, that it's you know, he wants two weeks
8:21
Speaker 1: before he has to deal with it deal with this
8:22
Speaker 1: issue again. That's really what he's saying. The question is
8:26
Speaker 1: whether what do these two weeks mean he is There
8:30
Speaker 1: have been head fakes in the past of no, we're
8:32
Speaker 1: still talking, and then the bombs were dropping and we know,
8:36
Speaker 1: the President enjoys sort of trying to do head fakes
8:39
Speaker 1: because they're so they're more obsessed about media leaks than
8:43
Speaker 1: they are about what's in the best interest of America's
8:45
Speaker 1: national security. But I digress. So that's the question. Now,
8:51
Speaker 1: if if this is what it looks like, in what
8:54
Speaker 1: we would say it looks like under a normal administration,
8:57
Speaker 1: then this would we would probably call this coercive diplomacy.
9:00
Speaker 1: Move the carrier, squeeze the regimes, see if you can
9:02
Speaker 1: get a deal. And you know, you could argue that
9:06
Speaker 1: Trump they might fear a threat from Trump since Trump
9:11
Speaker 1: has dropped bombs on Iran, since Trump did order the
9:14
Speaker 1: killing of Soul the money, so you can't refer to
9:17
Speaker 1: him as taco man when it comes to Iran. He
9:20
Speaker 1: didn't always chicken out when it came to quote threats
9:23
Speaker 1: to Iran, which means, though, does that mean he has
9:27
Speaker 1: room to back down here or does that mean we
9:30
Speaker 1: are likely about to escalating even further? And what is
9:33
Speaker 1: the rationale? Are we putting these folks in the region
9:37
Speaker 1: to make sure they don't attack their own people again,
9:41
Speaker 1: and if they do, we're coming, then we're going to
9:43
Speaker 1: do that. You know, the President rhetorically said that he
9:48
Speaker 1: had the protesters back at this point that he has
9:52
Speaker 1: not had their back now as far as America's national
9:56
Speaker 1: interests are concerned, perhaps that was the right call. That
9:59
Speaker 1: maybe that was isn't the right time if you're if
10:02
Speaker 1: the goal is regime changed, but that is the goal here.
10:05
Speaker 1: I don't think anybody thinks keeping the regime in place
10:09
Speaker 1: is the goal. I don't think if the Iranians, I'm sure,
10:12
Speaker 1: and they be idiots if they believe that they somehow so.
10:17
Speaker 1: Are the Iranians simply trying to buy time to see
10:19
Speaker 1: if they can fortify themselves against an attack. I'm skeptical
10:25
Speaker 1: that they can do that. Or maybe they look at
10:27
Speaker 1: what happened in Venezuela and see that Donald Trump is
10:30
Speaker 1: not serious about a democracy and that if you capitulate
10:35
Speaker 1: enough and you give him control of an important asset,
10:39
Speaker 1: you know, maybe they think give him control of some
10:41
Speaker 1: of their Iranian oil business and that Trump will back off.
10:47
Speaker 1: I know that sounds absurd, but is it right? Is
10:51
Speaker 1: that totally out of the realm of possibility, And yet
10:55
Speaker 1: at the same time, when you've moved this many assets,
10:58
Speaker 1: it's hard to believe you're not going to do something.
11:00
Speaker 1: And in fact, this is where history. He is on
11:03
Speaker 1: the side of some sort of military hot military intervention
11:07
Speaker 1: is coming. The question is what does it look like?
11:10
Speaker 1: And and I guess I would say, yeah, it's not
11:13
Speaker 1: miss right, But let's we've been here before, right. Iraq
11:18
Speaker 1: began as inspectors and pressure, and then we went in
11:23
Speaker 1: when when we wanted to make the point that no,
11:26
Speaker 1: we were going to you didn't accept these terms, there
11:28
Speaker 1: would be consequences. Libya, of course, was a limited intervention,
11:32
Speaker 1: that's how it started. Afghanistan began as targeted conter terrorism.
11:36
Speaker 1: So you know, this is why I think there's going
11:40
Speaker 1: to be plenty of skeptical people left and right about
11:42
Speaker 1: what's happening here in Iran, because America has a history
11:45
Speaker 1: of incremental escalation that feels tactical in the moment, like
11:48
Speaker 1: maybe we're just trying to squeeze for a deal or
11:51
Speaker 1: maybe we're trying to help the protesters, and then in
11:55
Speaker 1: hindsight it's not so strategic, and then we're caught up
11:58
Speaker 1: in something it and if we get involved in regime change,
12:03
Speaker 1: then we own it, right, and we've got to help
12:05
Speaker 1: Aroan build what a new government is going to look like.
12:08
Speaker 1: That's what we're in the middle of here with Venezuela,
12:11
Speaker 1: which I think is kind of a potential disaster when
12:14
Speaker 1: when you're dealing with any you know, just because the
12:19
Speaker 1: authoritarian is agreeing to all your terms in the moment
12:21
Speaker 1: doesn't mean they're an ally. But I fear we're starting
12:24
Speaker 1: to treat the Venezuela viceroy there as as some sort
12:30
Speaker 1: of coerced ally because she's doing everything he wants her
12:34
Speaker 1: to do in the moment. Is that the situation that
12:38
Speaker 1: we're willing to take over in Iran and if we strike,
12:43
Speaker 1: what if we don't get rid of the regime, then
12:47
Speaker 1: what and then do you cut a deal? I mean?
12:51
Speaker 1: So my point is is that I I will be
12:58
Speaker 1: surprised if we back down. It feels as if we're
13:03
Speaker 1: we've almost gone too far to back down now without
13:06
Speaker 1: it being perhaps weakening our influence and position within the region.
13:15
Speaker 1: Right now, we have in some ways a very you know,
13:20
Speaker 1: we're extraordinarily influential with our with the coercive measures that
13:26
Speaker 1: he's been using of late, as well as the financial
13:31
Speaker 1: deals he's cut with the Gulf States. So there's no
13:33
Speaker 1: doubt there is a There is a part I think
13:36
Speaker 1: of Trump that loves sort of how this region, more
13:40
Speaker 1: than any other in the world, is willing to be transactional,
13:44
Speaker 1: which of course is where Trump wants to be in general,
13:47
Speaker 1: with sort of any situation he's in. But I am
13:51
Speaker 1: so to go back to end on this topic where
13:55
Speaker 1: I started. Are we about to go to war with Iran?
13:59
Speaker 1: I seem scenarios that indicate military escalation is more likely
14:06
Speaker 1: than I see scenarios where we're not going to do
14:08
Speaker 1: anything at all? Are we really? Is Donald Trump going
14:11
Speaker 1: to be the guy to cut now? Is this really
14:13
Speaker 1: we're supposed to assume this is a Nixon to China moment?
14:15
Speaker 1: Donald Trump's going to cut a nuclear deal with the
14:19
Speaker 1: Iranian Supreme Leader, and is the Iranian Supreme Leader going
14:23
Speaker 1: to suddenly be his best friend? The way this thug
14:26
Speaker 1: is in Venezuela now that he put into office, So
14:31
Speaker 1: it is I think we have a lot more on
14:34
Speaker 1: the line here then then we fully appreciate. But it
14:40
Speaker 1: does feel like we've passed the point of no return,
14:42
Speaker 1: so we're going to intervene again militarily in Iran. The
14:46
Speaker 1: unintended consequences of this If you've been a listener of
14:49
Speaker 1: this podcast. Over the last couple of months, I've gone
14:51
Speaker 1: through them a lot. Our interventions in Iran have all
14:56
Speaker 1: gone horribly long term, right, And arguably that there is
15:02
Speaker 1: an iatola there in the first place is because of
15:05
Speaker 1: how supportive we were of a of an authoritarian regime
15:09
Speaker 1: that certainly was pro West, but the way they treated
15:13
Speaker 1: their people wasn't necessarily synonymous with the values of the West.
15:21
Speaker 1: So it's it's troubling. And look, I can't wait for
15:33
Speaker 1: a small, d democratic Iran. It's going to be an
15:36
Speaker 1: amazing There's an amazing opportunity here. We should do whatever
15:42
Speaker 1: we can to support democracy in Iran and to support
15:45
Speaker 1: those people that want democracy. But we better be careful
15:50
Speaker 1: and how well we think we can dictate outcomes. Every
15:53
Speaker 1: time we've tried to dictate an outcome does not go
15:57
Speaker 1: according to plan. Do you hate hangovers? We'll say goodbye
16:05
Speaker 1: to hangovers. Out of Office gives you the social buzz
16:07
Speaker 1: without the next day regret. Their best selling out of
16:10
Speaker 1: Office gummies were designed to provide a mild, relaxing buzz,
16:13
Speaker 1: boost your mood, and enhance creativity and relaxation. With five
16:16
Speaker 1: different strengths, you can tailor the dose to fit your vibe.
16:19
Speaker 1: From a gentle one point five milligram micro doose to
16:23
Speaker 1: their newest fifteen milligram gummy for a more elevated experience.
16:27
Speaker 1: Their THHC beverages and gummies are a modern, mindful alternative
16:31
Speaker 1: to a glass of wine or a cocktail. And I'll
16:33
Speaker 1: tell you this, I've given up booze. I don't like
16:36
Speaker 1: the hangovers. I prefer the gummy experience. Soul is a
16:40
Speaker 1: wellness brand that believes feeling good should be fun and easy.
16:43
Speaker 1: Soul specializes in delicious HEMP derived THHD and CBD products,
16:47
Speaker 1: all designed to boost your mood and simply help you unwine.
16:51
Speaker 1: So if you struggle to switch off at night, Soul
16:53
Speaker 1: also has a variety of products specifically designed to just
16:56
Speaker 1: simply help you get a better night's sleep, including their
16:58
Speaker 1: top selling Sleepy gum. It's a fan favorite for deep
17:02
Speaker 1: restorative sleep. So bring on the good vibes and treat
17:05
Speaker 1: yourself to Soul today. Right now, Soul is offering my
17:08
Speaker 1: audience thirty percent off your entire order, So go to
17:11
Speaker 1: get sold dot com use the promo code toodcast. Don't
17:15
Speaker 1: forget that code that's get sold dot com promo code
17:19
Speaker 1: toodcast for thirty percent off. All right, let me move
17:25
Speaker 1: domestically here to the You know, I'm a political junkie
17:29
Speaker 1: at heart, and there is this Texas Senate race is
17:32
Speaker 1: quickly becoming an all timer to me. When you've got
17:36
Speaker 1: you know, let's see what happens in November. But my goodness,
17:40
Speaker 1: you've got two incredibly contentious primaries that have developed on
17:45
Speaker 1: the Republican side and the Democratic side. You have a
17:49
Speaker 1: ton of money, you have all sorts of great sort
17:55
Speaker 1: of soap opera type plot twists, everything that you've wanted
18:00
Speaker 1: if you're just a consumer of a great political story
18:04
Speaker 1: and fascinating political tactics, campaigns, all sorts of things. Texas
18:09
Speaker 1: has everything. And guess what, we're going to have a
18:12
Speaker 1: runoff at least in one of these primaries. So you
18:14
Speaker 1: know we're going to get more cow bell going at
18:16
Speaker 1: least a Memorial Day. And as a consumer of campaign politics,
18:24
Speaker 1: that's a lot more popcorn. We're going to have to
18:26
Speaker 1: pot pop to enjoy this one. But let's get into
18:30
Speaker 1: some things, because look, I want to get into the
18:32
Speaker 1: FCC issue in Colbert in a minute. But there's a
18:36
Speaker 1: bigger story developing in Texas that I think is part
18:41
Speaker 1: of a larger trend that I think is about to develop.
18:44
Speaker 1: The two candidates that are spending the most money are
18:47
Speaker 1: currently not leading in the polls, John Cornet and James Tollerico.
18:52
Speaker 1: Now the polling on the Democratic side, there's you know,
18:56
Speaker 1: what we've seen publicly, you know has been, but there's been.
18:59
Speaker 1: You know, it seems like Jasmine, it's very close, but
19:02
Speaker 1: I've seen more. I don't. I've seen more polls with
19:04
Speaker 1: crack of ahead lately than I've seen with Tallary Cohead.
19:07
Speaker 1: But the financial gap between the two is very lopsided,
19:10
Speaker 1: not as lopsided as Cornyn Paxton. My goodness, Right, Paxton
19:15
Speaker 1: has withstood sixty million dollars dropped on his head. Right
19:21
Speaker 1: the Senate, John with John Thune controls the Senate. Republican essentially,
19:27
Speaker 1: Campaign Kitty has done everything they can to stop Ken
19:31
Speaker 1: Paxton because they view Ken Paxton as unelectable, and they've
19:35
Speaker 1: said so many things that it may be sort of
19:39
Speaker 1: they may have. They've they've made the case so well
19:44
Speaker 1: that Paxton is un is is ethically and morally unfit
19:49
Speaker 1: to serve in office, let alone in the United States.
19:52
Speaker 1: Senate that I don't know how the party comes back
19:55
Speaker 1: to trying to help support him. They will, well, because
20:00
Speaker 1: we know how power is the most important currency in Washington.
20:05
Speaker 1: Not your morals, are your ethics, and they will close
20:09
Speaker 1: their eyes and support him if Paxton ends up the
20:13
Speaker 1: Republican nominee. But they have spent sixty million dollars right
20:18
Speaker 1: They have hit him with ads on the fact that
20:20
Speaker 1: he was impeached in the Texas House but then acquitted
20:23
Speaker 1: in the Texas Senate, which also included his wife. Then
20:27
Speaker 1: there was the high profile divorce where his wife publicly
20:31
Speaker 1: said she was divorcing on biblical grounds, essentially saying he
20:34
Speaker 1: committed adultery, he cheated, and all sorts of financial scandals
20:40
Speaker 1: that actually fed into the impeachment. These attack ads have
20:46
Speaker 1: hit Paxton all over the place, and he's still leading.
20:51
Speaker 1: He barely has aired any ads, and in fact, the
20:53
Speaker 1: first ad that I saw was him just putting the
20:56
Speaker 1: other cuts of Donald Trump praising him over the years,
20:58
Speaker 1: so implying that he has Trump's indors. We know that
21:00
Speaker 1: Trump right now has said he's for all of the
21:03
Speaker 1: three candidates, including the Congressman Wesley Hunt, but a few
21:07
Speaker 1: observations here on this money issue and the fact that
21:13
Speaker 1: you know, there's a point, there's a point where look,
21:16
Speaker 1: money matters, but there's diminishing returns the more money you
21:20
Speaker 1: drop on something, especially if you especially if the propose,
21:25
Speaker 1: if if the side you're trying to help isn't very popular, right,
21:28
Speaker 1: And John Cornyn's not very popular, right. He's not popular
21:31
Speaker 1: with the base of the Republican Party, and he's certainly
21:33
Speaker 1: not popular with swing voters in the middle. They sort
21:36
Speaker 1: of they certainly like him better than they like Paxton,
21:39
Speaker 1: but he himself is not popular. So I think that's
21:41
Speaker 1: that's a that's I think that explains why Paxton what
21:45
Speaker 1: these ads have done is Paxton has not been able
21:47
Speaker 1: to grow any support. His negatives continue to rise. But
21:51
Speaker 1: it is not a crude to the benefit of Cornan.
21:54
Speaker 1: If anything, what we've seen is Paxton's numbers have gotten
21:58
Speaker 1: worse in general election matchups. So the irony to this
22:01
Speaker 1: is that the Senate Republicans have essentially made Paxton even
22:06
Speaker 1: more unelectable in the general election. But it is not
22:11
Speaker 1: persuaded Republican primary voters that he's so unelectable they should
22:15
Speaker 1: abandon him. But they've made him more unelectable. They have
22:18
Speaker 1: both Crockett and Talla Errico regularly now lead Paxton in
22:22
Speaker 1: matchups across the board. That is less to do with
22:26
Speaker 1: their candidacies and more to do with how much negative
22:29
Speaker 1: ads have been dropped on Paxton already. I mean, normally,
22:34
Speaker 1: this is what makes this Texas Senate seat so appetizing
22:37
Speaker 1: for Democrats as a pickup. Normally, when you're trying to
22:40
Speaker 1: pick off a seat, if you're you know, the National
22:43
Speaker 1: Party or the Senate Committee is going to spend a
22:47
Speaker 1: bunch of money to try to soften up the you know,
22:49
Speaker 1: especially during these primary phases. But you actually are getting
22:52
Speaker 1: the Senate Democrats are getting help from Senate Republicans and
22:56
Speaker 1: essentially softening up the likely Republican nominee go going forward.
23:01
Speaker 1: And I think that that's what this money has done. It.
23:05
Speaker 1: You know, we saw sort of a lesser extent of this,
23:07
Speaker 1: but like you know, APAC spent a bunch of money
23:10
Speaker 1: to trying to defeat a specific candidate in New Jersey.
23:13
Speaker 1: They successfully made sure that candidate didn't win that special
23:17
Speaker 1: election den primary, but the candidate that ended up benefiting
23:22
Speaker 1: was not the candidate that APAK preferred. It was another
23:25
Speaker 1: candidate who actually was arguably further further away from APAX
23:29
Speaker 1: position than Tom mon Alawski, the former member of Congress
23:33
Speaker 1: that that they were trying to stop in the primary.
23:37
Speaker 1: So when you you know, you never know the unintended
23:41
Speaker 1: consequences on negative ads sometimes and who it benefits definitely
23:45
Speaker 1: hurts the candidate you're going after. Doesn't always accrue to
23:48
Speaker 1: the benefit of the candidate you're hoping to help. And
23:51
Speaker 1: what has happened is Cornan has just not you know,
23:55
Speaker 1: there's been more negative unpackst than trying to reassure Republicans
23:59
Speaker 1: that Cornan is one of them. I guess is basically
24:01
Speaker 1: the issue. And you know, I think it's welcome to
24:06
Speaker 1: the vice grip of the Trump Republican controlled Republican Party. Right,
24:11
Speaker 1: John Cornyn is a Bush Republican. John corn is a
24:13
Speaker 1: Romney Republican. John Corner is a McConnell Republican. John Cornyn
24:17
Speaker 1: is not a Trump Republican. And you know who knows it,
24:19
Speaker 1: Republican primary voters. And I think that's what we've seen here.
24:24
Speaker 1: Let's see if he gets into the runouf I suspect
24:27
Speaker 1: he will. I don't I assume Wesley Hunt does not
24:29
Speaker 1: have the infrastructure to drive turn out to early vote.
24:35
Speaker 1: Corn's been on the ballot so many times, Paxton's been
24:37
Speaker 1: on the ballot a number of times. Both of them
24:39
Speaker 1: know how the early vote works, both of them know
24:41
Speaker 1: how to bank votes. So I suspect that you'll actually
24:45
Speaker 1: see Hunt underperform his poll numbers. You know, if he's
24:48
Speaker 1: polling right now in the mid to low twenties, if
24:51
Speaker 1: you told me he ended up at seventeen or eighteen,
24:53
Speaker 1: it wouldn't surprise me. What's the path for cornan and
24:57
Speaker 1: fifty percent plus one? Especially, you know, we remember a
25:03
Speaker 1: Republican primary about a decade ago with that featured Thad
25:05
Speaker 1: Cochrane against somebody on the right. Well, Thad Cochrane had
25:09
Speaker 1: the benefit of some Democrats willing to go into the
25:11
Speaker 1: Republican Party to prop him up, and he was able
25:13
Speaker 1: to survive in a runoff in a primary because you know,
25:18
Speaker 1: the part of it was Democrats didn't expect to, you know,
25:22
Speaker 1: have a competitive candidate. This is a different situation, and
25:26
Speaker 1: it's I think it's pretty clear that all of this
25:34
Speaker 1: money on Paxton has certainly heard Paxton, but it has
25:37
Speaker 1: been it is it has had a bigger impact on
25:40
Speaker 1: him as a general election candidate, and it's had a
25:43
Speaker 1: very limited impact on him as a primary candidate. And
25:49
Speaker 1: in defense of the nation, NRSC and the and the
25:51
Speaker 1: Senate Republican packs that have been trying to stop Paxton.
25:56
Speaker 1: You know, it's it's funny, you know, they it's easy
26:01
Speaker 1: to say now they've they've got the wrong messaging. Obviously
26:03
Speaker 1: they got the wrong messaging because it's not work it.
26:08
Speaker 1: Paxton has some sort of Trumpian teflon and it may
26:12
Speaker 1: be that it for Republican primary voters to understand how
26:17
Speaker 1: awful Paxton could be for them, they probably have to
26:20
Speaker 1: lose the election before they sober up on this. But
26:23
Speaker 1: we'll see. Now let's go to the Democratic side and
26:26
Speaker 1: the interview that everybody has heard about. Now, if you
26:29
Speaker 1: were a political jungk of you listen to this podcast,
26:31
Speaker 1: I know you know the story. James Tolerco goes on Colbert,
26:35
Speaker 1: we're about two weeks for the primary in the scheduled interview,
26:37
Speaker 1: so I want to get to that in a minute.
26:40
Speaker 1: The interview somehow gets pulled and there's in and what's
26:44
Speaker 1: interesting here, by the way, and also a reminder of
26:46
Speaker 1: our changing media landscape in another era, if showing up
26:52
Speaker 1: on Colbert and tall Erico's hope was to go there
26:54
Speaker 1: on the first day of early voting to sort of,
26:56
Speaker 1: you know, maximize attention for his campaign. Having that interview
27:00
Speaker 1: polled would have been devastating. But instead, right, they turned
27:04
Speaker 1: it into a controversy and then you could get a
27:07
Speaker 1: bootleg version of it on YouTube, and then suddenly it
27:10
Speaker 1: gets more views on YouTube than it ever would have
27:11
Speaker 1: gotten on legacy television in the first place. Oh and
27:15
Speaker 1: he got to raise two and a half million dollars by
27:19
Speaker 1: claiming that this is the interview Donald Trump didn't want
27:21
Speaker 1: you to see. But I'm going to get to that
27:23
Speaker 1: in a minute. Boyd reminder that just grievance is a
27:27
Speaker 1: great fundraising tool left or right, obviously, and we also
27:31
Speaker 1: are living in a political ecosystem that where perceived censorship
27:36
Speaker 1: is actually more powerful than the airtime itself. Right, without
27:40
Speaker 1: the without the victimhood of the censorship, this would have
27:43
Speaker 1: actually gone. It would have been a nothing burger. But
27:49
Speaker 1: it does lead me to this next piece of the puzzle.
27:51
Speaker 1: And I want to be very careful here. Let's talk
27:56
Speaker 1: about the equal time rule. I'm very familiar with it.
28:00
Speaker 1: I've had to deal with it when I was at NBC,
28:02
Speaker 1: and it is all about whether your show is considered
28:06
Speaker 1: on the news side or the entertainment side. So let
28:10
Speaker 1: me get it to it. So let's start with this.
28:11
Speaker 1: Here's the equal time room, section three fifteen A of
28:14
Speaker 1: the Communications Act of nineteen thirty four. And by the way, yes,
28:18
Speaker 1: all of these rules are out outdated. I know this. Okay,
28:23
Speaker 1: that's a summary judgment. As my friend George Conway will say,
28:27
Speaker 1: those are accepted facts. We got it. But at the moment,
28:31
Speaker 1: this is the policy. And Section three fifteen A of
28:36
Speaker 1: the Communications Act of nineteen thirty four says that if
28:38
Speaker 1: a broadcast station gives airtime to a legally qualified candidate,
28:42
Speaker 1: it must afford equal opportunities to other candidates for that office.
28:45
Speaker 1: Here are the caveats. It applies to broadcast licenses only,
28:49
Speaker 1: so not to anything on anything that's called cable or
28:51
Speaker 1: any digital platforms like YouTube. It applies to candidates, not packs,
28:57
Speaker 1: and there are exemptions for bona fide news, bona fide news, interviews, documentaries,
29:02
Speaker 1: and on the spot coverage. It's why a show like
29:05
Speaker 1: The View, which sits under the news division at ABC
29:09
Speaker 1: can qualify for those exemptions. Late night entertainment shows don't
29:13
Speaker 1: automatically qualify for that protection because they're not under the
29:17
Speaker 1: news umbrella. At most of these news stations, they are
29:20
Speaker 1: under the entertainment umbrella. And usually, and this matters, equal
29:24
Speaker 1: Time issues are triggered by a candidate complaint, not by
29:29
Speaker 1: the regulators proactively nudging a network. So this is where
29:34
Speaker 1: I'm gonna just be honest here. I don't I don't
29:38
Speaker 1: know if I'm getting the full story out of Colbert
29:42
Speaker 1: or out of CBS. I feel like the both sides
29:45
Speaker 1: are cherry picking rather than getting at the core issue here,
29:49
Speaker 1: So let me get there. So when this tallar Rico
29:52
Speaker 1: segment gets pulled and the explanation is legal caution around
29:55
Speaker 1: equal time, I get how immediately grievance filled the vacuum
29:59
Speaker 1: and it became opportunity. So was it censorship? Was it
30:01
Speaker 1: lawyers being cautious? Was it someone gaining the narrative? Well, sadly,
30:06
Speaker 1: in this era it doesn't matter because grievance is the
30:08
Speaker 1: currency and both parties know how to spend it. But
30:12
Speaker 1: do keep in mind that here's what I don't understand
30:18
Speaker 1: and why I'm not jumping on anything here, but I'll
30:22
Speaker 1: tell you who the real loser is here, and it's
30:25
Speaker 1: Jasmine Crockett. And let me explain. So, like I said,
30:29
Speaker 1: normally the equal time provisions are triggered when a candidate complains,
30:33
Speaker 1: the FCC looks into it, lawyers end up. So I've
30:35
Speaker 1: been on this side Saturday Night Live. And by the way,
30:40
Speaker 1: timing of when an election is and some of this
30:44
Speaker 1: has to do with that. Had Jazz had the taller
30:49
Speaker 1: Rico interview aired, and Jasmine Crockett or her, and there's
30:54
Speaker 1: another candidate on the Democratic ballot went to CBS and said, hey,
31:00
Speaker 1: one equal time. I know what the CBS lawyers, the
31:05
Speaker 1: smart lawyers would have said, Okay, we will give you
31:07
Speaker 1: the length of the segment was this, we will give
31:10
Speaker 1: you airtime after eleven thirty at night or I guess
31:14
Speaker 1: Central time after ten thirty at night, and maybe it
31:18
Speaker 1: would have been a you know, they could count up
31:20
Speaker 1: the minutes of the interview itself, you know, eight minutes,
31:23
Speaker 1: ten minutes, and you get ten minutes on the CBS
31:26
Speaker 1: affiliates in the state of Texas. So, for instance, I
31:32
Speaker 1: believe sometime between Iowa and South Carolina memory served Saturday
31:38
Speaker 1: Night Live, had some I can't remember which candidate was.
31:42
Speaker 1: Had a major candidate do a pop in. I think
31:44
Speaker 1: it was on the Republican side. Somebody filed for equal
31:48
Speaker 1: time provisions and essentially to comply with the FCC, NBC
31:54
Speaker 1: agreed to give five minutes on its network affiliates in.
31:59
Speaker 1: I think it was the state to South Carolina because
32:02
Speaker 1: that was the next primary up. It was not you
32:05
Speaker 1: were not given equal time across the country itself, just
32:09
Speaker 1: in the areas where their voters were going to go
32:11
Speaker 1: to the polls. This is why it would have just
32:13
Speaker 1: applied to the state of Texas. So here are the
32:16
Speaker 1: questions I have that we don't have good answers for,
32:18
Speaker 1: because it does feel as if here's what we don't know.
32:22
Speaker 1: Was Barry Wise instructed CBS lawyers trying to essentially spook
32:28
Speaker 1: Colbert from even putting on Tyler Rico and they just
32:31
Speaker 1: wanted to keep out of this. Did Colbert only here
32:36
Speaker 1: they're trying to stop me from putting on Tallerrico? Screw them,
32:38
Speaker 1: God damn it. You know this equal time stuff. I've
32:41
Speaker 1: had Jasmin Kracken on and he didn't listen to the details, right,
32:45
Speaker 1: You know, I don't know the answer to these things,
32:49
Speaker 1: and I'd like more clarity here. It feels like there
32:54
Speaker 1: were a lot of people interested in hurrying up and
32:57
Speaker 1: pointing fingers than getting at to Okay, did anybody file
33:02
Speaker 1: a grievance here? Did any candidate ask for equal time?
33:07
Speaker 1: You know? Did Colbert and tol Rico? Were they just
33:10
Speaker 1: simply looking to for a moment. Did they stumble into something?
33:13
Speaker 1: Because now Colbert has done more to help Taalerico's primary
33:17
Speaker 1: campaign than simply airing the interview themselves. So, like I said,
33:27
Speaker 1: the loser hears Jasmine Crockett because taal Rico has been
33:30
Speaker 1: trailing in the polls. Tall Rico has been not been
33:33
Speaker 1: as good of a candidate since Crockett got into the race.
33:37
Speaker 1: We've seen multiple polls show that Crockett is no more
33:42
Speaker 1: or less of a threat to winning that Senate seat
33:45
Speaker 1: in a general election. Right. The perception is she can't
33:48
Speaker 1: she's going to do worse than Talerrico in a general election,
33:52
Speaker 1: but there's no polling evidence to back that up. And
33:55
Speaker 1: she's leading the primers and I'm running two different races, right,
33:58
Speaker 1: And there's been this fumble that tall Rico got himself
34:01
Speaker 1: into where he seemed to trap bad mouth, you know,
34:05
Speaker 1: sort of knock the candidacy of Colin all Red. But
34:08
Speaker 1: he used you know, he used Colin all Red's identity
34:14
Speaker 1: in his way of sort of putting down his candidacy.
34:19
Speaker 1: And he seemed to imply that if Jasmin Crockett had
34:21
Speaker 1: already been in the race, he wouldn't have run that race.
34:23
Speaker 1: Now you've heard me say a million times, I'm convinced
34:26
Speaker 1: taller Rico was never thinking about running for Senate, but
34:28
Speaker 1: a bunch of consultants out of Washington in New York
34:31
Speaker 1: talked him into it and begged him to do it, saying,
34:33
Speaker 1: this is a race you can win. You can't win
34:35
Speaker 1: the governor's race. What would have been in the best
34:37
Speaker 1: interest of the party probably would have been Tallerrico running
34:39
Speaker 1: for governor and letting either all Reader or Crockett run
34:42
Speaker 1: for Senate because ultimately it you know, well, it all
34:47
Speaker 1: depends on what your focus is. Do you really think
34:50
Speaker 1: you can win that Senate seat or do you really
34:51
Speaker 1: want to rebuild the Democratic Party in Texas. Maybe you
34:55
Speaker 1: could have done both at the same time. But I
34:58
Speaker 1: will tell you this, the sum total of this controversy
35:02
Speaker 1: has been it is a bigger boon, and in some
35:04
Speaker 1: ways Colbert overreaction perhaps or aggressive reaction. That was the
35:13
Speaker 1: biggest in kind contribution he could have made to James
35:16
Speaker 1: Tollerico's primary campaign. So I wouldn't be shocked if a
35:20
Speaker 1: lot of Crockett folks are quietly fuming at this, fuming
35:25
Speaker 1: at Colbert, upset about the timing. After all, Colbert was
35:29
Speaker 1: willing to put him on at the at a critical
35:32
Speaker 1: moment in his campaign, the start of early voting. So
35:35
Speaker 1: it's let's just say, I like, I said, I'd like,
35:41
Speaker 1: I'd like more on this story. I'm very aware of
35:46
Speaker 1: how and again and the other thing this is exposed
35:48
Speaker 1: is these equal time rules are just outdated, silly and
35:53
Speaker 1: frankly need to go away. This episode of the Chuck
36:00
Speaker 1: Podcast is being brought to you by Quints. As you know,
36:03
Speaker 1: a well built wardrobe is about the pieces that work together,
36:06
Speaker 1: hold up over time, and frankly allow you to be
36:08
Speaker 1: flexible and sort of business casual to say social casual.
36:13
Speaker 1: Quints does this really well. They have premium material, thoughtful design,
36:17
Speaker 1: and some everyday staples that feel easy to wear, easy
36:19
Speaker 1: to rely on. Even as the weather shifts. I've got
36:22
Speaker 1: some sweaters from Quints. I love them. I can use
36:25
Speaker 1: them for here on the podcast. I can do a
36:27
Speaker 1: business meeting with them. They have every day essentials. I
36:30
Speaker 1: love the quality so far. It's lasting really well. I've
36:33
Speaker 1: had it for a while. They have organic cotton sweaters,
36:35
Speaker 1: polos for every occasion. They have some nice jackets, including
36:38
Speaker 1: you know, lighter jackets as things I hope warm up
36:41
Speaker 1: at some point down here in the mid Atlantic. The
36:43
Speaker 1: list goes on. All of it is built to hold
36:45
Speaker 1: up for you to wear this stuff all the time, right,
36:48
Speaker 1: Not just something you pull out once a quarter to
36:50
Speaker 1: look nice at work. No stuff that you might wear
36:53
Speaker 1: every week. They only partner with factories that meet some
36:55
Speaker 1: rigorous standards for crashmanship and ethical productive automne. I wear it.
37:01
Speaker 1: I'm happy. It's been really good. It isn't going to
37:03
Speaker 1: break the bank. So refresh your wardrobe with Quints. Go
37:07
Speaker 1: to quins dot com slash chuck for free shipping on
37:11
Speaker 1: your order and a three hundred and sixty five day
37:13
Speaker 1: opportunity to return it. Now available in Canada too. That's
37:16
Speaker 1: q U I n C dot com slash chuck free
37:21
Speaker 1: shipping three hundred and sixty five day returns quints dot
37:24
Speaker 1: com slash Chuck, Now, I want to get to another
37:32
Speaker 1: story here that sometimes you read it. You read a
37:36
Speaker 1: story and you just go, oh, my god, the system's
37:39
Speaker 1: more broken than I then even I know how to
37:42
Speaker 1: explain it. But here it is, and somehow, yes, this
37:51
Speaker 1: is a cryptos story, but it's bigger than that. It's
37:52
Speaker 1: about power. Let me tell you a number. One hundred
37:54
Speaker 1: ninety three million dollars. This This was a nugget that
37:59
Speaker 1: came across in deal Book, the Andrew Rossorkin newsletter from
38:03
Speaker 1: the New York Times today. I was an item on
38:07
Speaker 1: Wednesday that talked about how very quietly Chuck Schumer's been
38:11
Speaker 1: begging Senate Democrats to find a way to get to crypto's,
38:16
Speaker 1: to the crypto industry's side on these on this, you know,
38:21
Speaker 1: in the stable coin bill, and he basically said, Hey,
38:25
Speaker 1: you're the folks around a super pac network called fair Shake,
38:29
Speaker 1: a pro crypto network of donors and its affiliates have
38:35
Speaker 1: one hundred and ninety three million, and you better just
38:37
Speaker 1: get in line or they're going to financially destroy you.
38:42
Speaker 1: And it was like Wow, this isn't lobbying anymore. This
38:48
Speaker 1: is financial coercion, this is this is mob. This is
38:54
Speaker 1: a mob sort of a TV mobster like tactic. Let
38:57
Speaker 1: me explain. So fair Shake hasd has this war chest
39:01
Speaker 1: of one hundred and ninety three million dollars. Right, that's
39:05
Speaker 1: not just influence money, right, that's electoral air superiority money.
39:10
Speaker 1: And here's the thing. Chuck Schumer has concluded, and some
39:15
Speaker 1: Democratic strategists have concluded that be and Shared Brown is
39:19
Speaker 1: the one who I think is told said that if
39:21
Speaker 1: it wasn't for the crypto pro crypto money that Bernie
39:24
Speaker 1: Moreno got in Ohio, that Shared Brown would have could
39:29
Speaker 1: have won that center race. But Crypto decided that Shared
39:33
Speaker 1: Brown was an enemy of crypto and they were going
39:34
Speaker 1: to do whatever it took, and that in some ways
39:38
Speaker 1: Crypto wanted to use Shared Brown as an example to
39:44
Speaker 1: anybody else that wanted to get in their way about
39:47
Speaker 1: about regulation. So Shared Brown, who was one of the
39:52
Speaker 1: most vocal skeptics of the crypto industry when he was
39:55
Speaker 1: in the US Senate, loses after tens of millions of
39:57
Speaker 1: dollars flood that race. The lesson that Chuck Schumer took
40:01
Speaker 1: away was the following, if you cross the industry, you
40:05
Speaker 1: may not survive politically. So here we are in twenty
40:07
Speaker 1: twenty six and a fair Shake affiliate announces right now,
40:11
Speaker 1: they've put out they have a one point five million
40:13
Speaker 1: dollar effort against a Democratic can come a congressman named
40:17
Speaker 1: Al Green, and it's explicitly tied because he voted against
40:21
Speaker 1: crypto legislation that the super pac wanted to see pass.
40:27
Speaker 1: So they're going to make sure they primary anybody that
40:30
Speaker 1: votes against them, because they want to prove to Washington
40:34
Speaker 1: that they know their money isn't just about thanking people
40:38
Speaker 1: that help them. Their money will punish those that don't.
40:45
Speaker 1: In a healthy system, a party leader whips for votes.
40:49
Speaker 1: But in this system, at the moment, party leaders are
40:52
Speaker 1: essentially been coerced by a super pack to then tell
40:56
Speaker 1: their own members, hey, we can't protect you from these guys.
41:01
Speaker 1: If you've got principles and you want to stand up
41:03
Speaker 1: to them, good luck. They're going to beat the living
41:05
Speaker 1: daylight out of you. So they're basically saying, just find
41:10
Speaker 1: a way to support this. It's deterrence. And what's scary
41:16
Speaker 1: is that this is now, I mean, this is what
41:19
Speaker 1: Silicon Valley has figured out, and there's so much money.
41:22
Speaker 1: So's why we're going to have to figure out a
41:23
Speaker 1: better way to deal with money in politics. Because if
41:26
Speaker 1: you can make dissent too expensive, you don't have to
41:30
Speaker 1: win a policy argument anymore. All you have to do
41:35
Speaker 1: is raise enough money to threaten those that may get
41:38
Speaker 1: in your way. And if people care more about staying
41:41
Speaker 1: in office then doing something about then you know they
41:47
Speaker 1: shouldn't be there in the first place. So when Chuck
41:50
Speaker 1: Schumer flips on this and says Crypto is here to stay,
41:52
Speaker 1: we need to get it right, some people wouldn't say
41:57
Speaker 1: that was a corruption, that that's just reaction. Has been persuaded.
42:00
Speaker 1: Has he been persuaded because he now is convinced that
42:03
Speaker 1: this is a good financial instrument, or has he been
42:06
Speaker 1: persuaded because there's so much goddamn money got dropped on
42:10
Speaker 1: Shared Brown's head. That and all Chuck Schumer cares. You
42:13
Speaker 1: know that hey ends justifies the means, and Crypto's not
42:17
Speaker 1: the fight worth having in the moment, So screw it.
42:20
Speaker 1: I'll take their money and we'll worry about it later. Wow,
42:28
Speaker 1: we have a broken this again. And look, I am
42:34
Speaker 1: a cryptoskeptic. I've made that clear. I think we you know,
42:40
Speaker 1: it's just like anything I you know, you let something
42:44
Speaker 1: go without any regulation, and then it gets too big,
42:47
Speaker 1: and then you're trying to put regulation in. And then
42:49
Speaker 1: suddenly the industry that grew out of nowhere without any
42:53
Speaker 1: guard rails is going, well, we don't want any guardrails,
42:56
Speaker 1: and so they and they already have accumulated, and all
42:58
Speaker 1: they're trying to do is get the government essentially to
43:01
Speaker 1: legalize their wealth, a valuation that not everybody agrees is
43:08
Speaker 1: worth a thing. But they have now lobbied the government
43:12
Speaker 1: to essentially invent this regulatory structure in order to give
43:17
Speaker 1: credence to said system. And there are people who are
43:24
Speaker 1: skeptics of this. And the Senate Democratic leader is saying
43:29
Speaker 1: that when an opponent has enough money, do not oppose
43:33
Speaker 1: them anymore, find a way to appease them. Is that
43:38
Speaker 1: what you want in your elected leadership. It is talk
43:45
Speaker 1: about a reminder that money has too much influence and
43:47
Speaker 1: how weak the leadership of the Democratic Party has become. Finally,
43:57
Speaker 1: just a little grace note I sort of set it
44:01
Speaker 1: up top, but before we get to George Conway, and
44:03
Speaker 1: it's you know, it's an outrage filled interview. But this
44:07
Speaker 1: entire there's two things that sort of chat my ass
44:10
Speaker 1: about this. If you've read anything about what's happening locally
44:15
Speaker 1: here with this burst sewer situation with the Potomac, and
44:18
Speaker 1: when you drive over the American Legion Bridge and four
44:21
Speaker 1: ninety five, you can now smell thanks because now you
44:25
Speaker 1: know the ice is melting, so you know it's been
44:28
Speaker 1: there a while. And trust me, it's gross to pick
44:31
Speaker 1: up the the dog poop in my own backyard for
44:34
Speaker 1: the melting ice. Imagine a burst sewer pipe, right, and
44:37
Speaker 1: the smell and all of that. But there's two things
44:41
Speaker 1: that really sort of show what's wrong. You know that
44:44
Speaker 1: we've got we've got some problems to fix. One is
44:46
Speaker 1: we've gotten a president who's who never wants to help first,
44:51
Speaker 1: and he wants to blame somebody else. Look, this is
44:56
Speaker 1: one of those situations where there may be an entity
44:59
Speaker 1: to blame. How about fix the fucking problem first. How
45:02
Speaker 1: about everybody pick up a shovel, mister president, how about
45:06
Speaker 1: you get your EPA and you get Look, just offer
45:08
Speaker 1: a hand and help your fellow Americans. Don't instead say
45:13
Speaker 1: I'm not gonna help. I'm not gonna do shit until
45:16
Speaker 1: you come begging for my help and admit it's your fault.
45:21
Speaker 1: It just this is a continuation. This administration, more than
45:25
Speaker 1: any other in my lifetime, has wanted to condition helping
45:28
Speaker 1: Americans based on political blame. Whether you know FEMA's been
45:34
Speaker 1: weaponized this way, I've seen. I saw it happen in
45:37
Speaker 1: Florida when when Governor DeSantis refused to go deal with
45:40
Speaker 1: flooding issues in Broward County because it was a blue area.
45:44
Speaker 1: We cannot deal with disasters based on politics, and you know,
45:49
Speaker 1: you reap what you sew. You wouldn't want the other
45:53
Speaker 1: party to do this to your community. And you've seen
45:56
Speaker 1: the anger where people thought, and there was some evidence
45:59
Speaker 1: that a few people didn't help people in that north
46:02
Speaker 1: in North Carolina because they thought, oh, they're magot people.
46:05
Speaker 1: They're not gonna want they're gonna be afraid of FEMA.
46:07
Speaker 1: They're not going to like me. That's just as bad
46:10
Speaker 1: not offering potential help there. Then you, mister President, and others,
46:16
Speaker 1: trying to point fingers for a situation that may have
46:20
Speaker 1: a lot of fingerprints and who's to blame here? But
46:24
Speaker 1: can we not worry about the blame game? In the moment,
46:27
Speaker 1: and can we just fix the problem. There's a federal issue,
46:33
Speaker 1: there's state issues, there's city issues, there's EPA issues, there's infrastructure,
46:38
Speaker 1: there's all sorts of issues. There's certainly plenty of bureaucratic
46:42
Speaker 1: finger pointing, but stop the finger pointing, get off your ass,
46:46
Speaker 1: and just fix the goddamn thing. Rant two has to
46:55
Speaker 1: do with the impossibility to find out what the hell
46:58
Speaker 1: is going on with this situation. We used to have
47:02
Speaker 1: a very powerful local regional paper here called The Washington Post.
47:08
Speaker 1: They have decided to no longer be a major news
47:10
Speaker 1: organization and they've decided to just be a sort of
47:13
Speaker 1: trade publication covering Congress in national politics. God bless them,
47:20
Speaker 1: good luck with that business strategy. But it has really
47:23
Speaker 1: been difficult to piece together as just a simple resident
47:27
Speaker 1: to try to figure out what's the hold up, what's
47:30
Speaker 1: the break here, you know, And it's because we don't
47:34
Speaker 1: have a devoted news organization trying to, you know, help
47:40
Speaker 1: all of us in this community live our lives. So
47:47
Speaker 1: this is a case where local news dies in darkness.
47:51
Speaker 1: Thank you Jeff Bezos and Will Lewis for very early
47:56
Speaker 1: on showing us how valuable local news can be and
48:01
Speaker 1: what happens when you don't have an outlet anymore to
48:05
Speaker 1: figure out what's going on. Literally, we're all just trading,
48:09
Speaker 1: whether it's on nextdoor Arlington now Montgomery County. Look, there's
48:13
Speaker 1: a lot of people trying to piece things together, and
48:15
Speaker 1: we're trying to figure out what's happening. But it's a
48:18
Speaker 1: shame we don't have a local news organization like the
48:21
Speaker 1: Washington Posts focused on a story like this anymore. This
48:29
Speaker 1: episode of the Chuck Podcast is brought to you by
48:31
Speaker 1: American Financing. Let's be honest, the math just isn't adding
48:34
Speaker 1: up lately, between the grocery store and those skyrocketing insurance premiums.
48:38
Speaker 1: Even with a steady job, more families are being forced
48:40
Speaker 1: to rely on high interest credit cards to cover expenses.
48:43
Speaker 1: So if you're a homeowner caught in this cycle carrying
48:46
Speaker 1: balances with interest rates in the twenties, frankly even the thirties,
48:49
Speaker 1: it's time to get some relief. Right now, mortgage rates
48:51
Speaker 1: are at a three year low, and my friends at
48:53
Speaker 1: American Financing are helping homeowners pay off that high interest
48:57
Speaker 1: debt at rates in the low five Their salary based
49:01
Speaker 1: mortgage consultants don't just push loans on you. They build
49:04
Speaker 1: exit strategies from debts. On average, they're saving their customers
49:09
Speaker 1: eight hundred dollars a month, so if you start today,
49:11
Speaker 1: you may even delay the next two mortgage payments. There
49:14
Speaker 1: are no upfront fees or obligations. To find out how
49:16
Speaker 1: much you can save. American's Home for home loans is
49:20
Speaker 1: American Finance eight sixty six eight eight five ten eighty one.
49:26
Speaker 1: That's eight six six eight eight five ten eighty one
49:30
Speaker 1: or Americanfinancing dot net slash the Chuck Toodcast. Important disclaimer
49:36
Speaker 1: nm LS one A two three three four NMLS, Consumer
49:42
Speaker 1: Access dot Org APR for rates in the five start
49:45
Speaker 1: at six point one ninety six percent for well qualified
49:48
Speaker 1: buyers call eight six six eight eight five one zero
49:52
Speaker 1: eight one for details about credit costs and terms, or
49:55
Speaker 1: Americanfinancing dot net slash the Chucktodcast. I Good life insurance
50:01
Speaker 1: is incredibly important. I know from personal experience. I was
50:04
Speaker 1: sixteen when my father passed away. We didn't have any money.
50:08
Speaker 1: He didn't leave us in the best shape. My mother,
50:10
Speaker 1: single mother, now widow, myself sixteen trying to figure out
50:14
Speaker 1: how am I going to pay for college and lo
50:16
Speaker 1: and behold, my dad had one life insurance policy that
50:20
Speaker 1: we found. It wasn't a lot, but it was important
50:23
Speaker 1: at the time, and it's why I was able to
50:26
Speaker 1: go to college. Little did he know how important that
50:29
Speaker 1: would be in that moment. Well, guess what. That's why
50:33
Speaker 1: I am here to tell you about Etho's life. They
50:35
Speaker 1: can provide you with peace of mind knowing your family
50:38
Speaker 1: is protected even if the worst comes to pass. Ethos
50:42
Speaker 1: is an online platform that makes getting life insurance fast
50:45
Speaker 1: and easy, all designed to protect your family's future in minutes,
50:48
Speaker 1: not months. There's no complicated process, and it's one hundred
50:52
Speaker 1: percent online. There's no medical exam require you just answer
50:56
Speaker 1: a few health questions online. You can get a quote
50:59
Speaker 1: and as little as ten minute, and you can get
51:00
Speaker 1: same day coverage without ever leaving your home. You can
51:05
Speaker 1: get up to three million dollars in coverage, and some
51:07
Speaker 1: policies start as low as two dollars a day that
51:09
Speaker 1: would be billed monthly. As of March twenty twenty five,
51:12
Speaker 1: Business Insider named Ethos the number one no medical exam
51:16
Speaker 1: instant life insurance provider. So protect your family with life
51:20
Speaker 1: insurance from Ethos get your free quoted Ethos dot com
51:24
Speaker 1: slash chuck. So again that's Ethos dot com slash chuck.
51:29
Speaker 1: Application times may vary, and the rates themselves may vary
51:32
Speaker 1: as well, but trust me, life insurance is something you
51:35
Speaker 1: should really think about it, especially if you've got a
51:38
Speaker 1: growing family. Look, in all seriousness, I find the you know,
51:49
Speaker 1: George Conway's argument is incredibly persuasive when I look at
51:53
Speaker 1: it through the lens the Constitution, the durability of the Republic.
52:02
Speaker 1: And I will admit that I'll be equally persuaded by
52:05
Speaker 1: the political argument that says you got to get power
52:09
Speaker 1: before you can start to do these things. And it
52:11
Speaker 1: may be that the best way to get powers to
52:12
Speaker 1: talk more about affordability than in talking about a third impeachment. Uh.
52:17
Speaker 1: And Yet, if there's ever a congressional district where I
52:20
Speaker 1: think George Conway can have the conversation going, no, this
52:23
Speaker 1: is what we're going to focus on first, it's probably
52:27
Speaker 1: it's probably a district. It's probably a congressional district in Manhattan.
52:31
Speaker 1: Or I would argue what used to be the the Arlington,
52:36
Speaker 1: Alexandria Congressional district of you know, the Don Bayer District
52:40
Speaker 1: in northern Virginia. Though now it's all getting scrambled up,
52:44
Speaker 1: so we got we're gonna have some weird congressional districts
52:47
Speaker 1: now in Virginia. That Yeah, you want to talk about
52:53
Speaker 1: misleading ad campaigns, woo the yes I am. I'm not
52:57
Speaker 1: sure whether to be impressed with the messaging of the
52:59
Speaker 1: yes ads on the Virginia Constitutional Amendment, because literally, it
53:05
Speaker 1: makes you, it makes you think that the only way
53:08
Speaker 1: to create fairness is to have these new maps and
53:11
Speaker 1: it's it's and yet then they emphasize temporarily it's they
53:15
Speaker 1: do a good job of confusing the issue, and they're
53:20
Speaker 1: going to have more money on this because it's the
53:24
Speaker 1: rights had a tough time figuring out how to oppose
53:26
Speaker 1: these efforts in other states because you know who started it, right,
53:31
Speaker 1: This is a case where Democrats brought a gun to
53:34
Speaker 1: a knife fight. Normally it's the it's the Republicans that
53:39
Speaker 1: bring the guns to the knife fight. This time the
53:41
Speaker 1: Democrats brought the guns, and Republicans have been surprisingly caught
53:46
Speaker 1: flat footed on this. That's on the politics side of things,
53:50
Speaker 1: and it goes back to that's why I know I
53:52
Speaker 1: went down there but it goes back to I. I
53:59
Speaker 1: don't know if it is history will be kinder to
54:06
Speaker 1: us if the constitution is used to throw him out
54:10
Speaker 1: of office. But I don't know if you can get there,
54:13
Speaker 1: if our country is ready to get there politically yet.
54:17
Speaker 1: But he makes a very persuasive case. And what I
54:20
Speaker 1: admire about his candidacy is he is telling the voters
54:23
Speaker 1: this is what I'm going to do. So if you
54:27
Speaker 1: want this done, I'm your candidate. It's all we can
54:30
Speaker 1: ask for from people running for office. Tell us what
54:33
Speaker 1: mandate you plan to take away from your if you
54:36
Speaker 1: win this primary, and if you win this election, there
54:40
Speaker 1: you go. All right, let's get to some ass. Chuck
54:44
Speaker 1: ass chuck. All right, Ryan asked, I'm probably getting ahead
54:51
Speaker 1: of things here, but what if and hear me out,
54:53
Speaker 1: we just gave Trump what he wants. Legacy and treasure
54:55
Speaker 1: seem to be his goal, so maybe we use that
54:57
Speaker 1: to pass real policy. I want to keep your guitar
55:00
Speaker 1: jet great, Just sign a public health care option into law.
55:03
Speaker 1: Don't want another Epstein here in cool reform the Warpowers Act.
55:06
Speaker 1: I'm mostly kidding, but it's nice to dream about turning
55:09
Speaker 1: chaos into actual progress. Well, Ryan, I mean, Chuck Schumer
55:12
Speaker 1: tried this strategy arguably when he was willing to get
55:16
Speaker 1: codify DAKA for the Wall, and Trump almost took it,
55:21
Speaker 1: took the deal. In fact, the greatest fear that many
55:24
Speaker 1: Republicans in Congress have had is that Democrats might start
55:28
Speaker 1: being willing to cut deals directly with Trump if they
55:32
Speaker 1: do things like this, All right, you want your name
55:35
Speaker 1: on this. Double the amount of money, right, double the
55:40
Speaker 1: appropriation so that we can build this high speed rail
55:44
Speaker 1: here and we'll call it all the Trump high speed
55:47
Speaker 1: Rail System. I think we see that that Trump is
55:57
Speaker 1: if his base won't go along. I think it goes
56:01
Speaker 1: back to and I vacillate on this whether who controls.
56:06
Speaker 1: Does Trump have more influence on the magabase or does
56:08
Speaker 1: the magabase have more influence on Trump? And I think
56:13
Speaker 1: when you see how the Epstein files went, I think, uh,
56:18
Speaker 1: sometimes the megabase has more influence than Trump. Trump's had
56:22
Speaker 1: a hard time turning his base against the Epstein file release,
56:29
Speaker 1: so right, And I think there are some in the
56:34
Speaker 1: MAGA world who just don't ever want to cut deals
56:37
Speaker 1: with any Democrats. Own the Libs matters more than doing
56:39
Speaker 1: what's best for the country. And you know, with Trump,
56:44
Speaker 1: his narcissism is so strong that he can be, you know,
56:49
Speaker 1: persuaded in ways that even the Maga right wouldn't like.
56:53
Speaker 1: But ultimately I get what you know, and I know
56:58
Speaker 1: your sort of tongue in cheek. Ultimately, welcome to a
57:02
Speaker 1: kliptocracy because that's I think what you describe is exactly
57:07
Speaker 1: how Trump would like to run the government. All right.
57:10
Speaker 1: Next question comes from John ask, Glendale, Wisconsin. Damn, damn
57:15
Speaker 1: good guests the last few weeks. Thank you. When I
57:17
Speaker 1: was younger, I kept up on all the senators and
57:20
Speaker 1: most representatives, a bit of a political nerd back then.
57:22
Speaker 1: I've got it, I've gotten a bit lazy. Really appreciate
57:24
Speaker 1: you having candidates on. It brings my pessimism back to normal.
57:27
Speaker 1: Oh good, and gives me refreshing optimism about future leaders. Also,
57:30
Speaker 1: you can have such good listener questions. I hear them
57:32
Speaker 1: and a lot of times think I was just thinking
57:34
Speaker 1: about that. Keep up the good work, makes my morning
57:36
Speaker 1: walks fly by, nice go back, go by the way.
57:38
Speaker 1: Agree that Lafleur should have been fired? Wow? John asked
57:41
Speaker 1: from Glendale, Wisconsin. Look, I appreciate you saying that and
57:44
Speaker 1: I'm going to continue to have more candidates on. We're
57:46
Speaker 1: gonna have I know we're working on Molly McMorrow in Michigan.
57:49
Speaker 1: I've had Abdulsai ed so we want to get Molly McMorrow,
57:52
Speaker 1: and I want Hanley Stevens, and I want Mike Rogers.
57:54
Speaker 1: We're going to try to get them all. Matt Mahon,
57:58
Speaker 1: I think we're working on him, the mayriffsose he'll be
58:00
Speaker 1: coming soon. So we keep them up. We're going to
58:03
Speaker 1: keep doing it. We keep working on James tollerco. Maybe
58:06
Speaker 1: if we tell them that the FCC tail doesn't want
58:08
Speaker 1: him on here, he'll show up. One quick bit of
58:12
Speaker 1: Packer news, Rich Pisaci is finally gone. Sorry. Like us,
58:18
Speaker 1: Packer fans are sort of like, okay, if we're going
58:21
Speaker 1: to keep the floor. The worst special team's performance of
58:25
Speaker 1: the last three years belongs to the Green Bay Packers.
58:29
Speaker 1: Extraordinarily terrible when you think about the fact that they've
58:32
Speaker 1: been a playoff team and have had this piss poor
58:34
Speaker 1: special team's efforts. It has been fascinating to me watching
58:40
Speaker 1: the Packer beat Rioters and the Packer gms and all
58:43
Speaker 1: this stuff. The apologists for Bisacia Oh Here's what I'll
58:47
Speaker 1: tell you, John, if you're wondering, I've been obsessed with this.
58:51
Speaker 1: I think rich Pisacia is the best source for every
58:53
Speaker 1: Packers beat reporter because not all one of them wanted
58:56
Speaker 1: to say a negative thing about him, talk about how
58:59
Speaker 1: important he was for care in this and that it
59:02
Speaker 1: is a reminder just like in politics, you know, beat
59:06
Speaker 1: reporters don't want to screw their sources, and sometimes the
59:11
Speaker 1: bad actors are good sources. And I think Basacia is exactly.
59:17
Speaker 1: I mean, what was amazing is I mean, you got
59:19
Speaker 1: to give the packers what of course he was fired,
59:23
Speaker 1: but they were not yet. I guess I got to
59:25
Speaker 1: give the packers credit. No, no, no, no, he's chosen to
59:27
Speaker 1: move on and resign and all this stuff. But my goodness,
59:30
Speaker 1: we didn't do anything right in special teams. And when
59:33
Speaker 1: you look, the biggest you know, Hiddenn advantage that the
59:39
Speaker 1: Seahawks had over the rest of the league was their
59:42
Speaker 1: special teams. They had a terrific punter, a terrific field goalkicker,
59:47
Speaker 1: and an amazing thought returner. That is worth a lot,
59:54
Speaker 1: all right, mark for Mann Arbor rights. And did the
59:56
Speaker 1: Biden administration try to include in the Inflation Reduction Act
59:59
Speaker 1: really an environmental bill, some even really call it an
1:00:02
Speaker 1: energy bill. Mark the authority for the EPA to regulate
1:00:05
Speaker 1: greenhouse gasses and classify the gases the pollutant. Seems like
1:00:07
Speaker 1: that would have prevented the situation with the recent executive
1:00:10
Speaker 1: order and likely court cases on eps's environmental and endangement
1:00:13
Speaker 1: finding it is odd at the bill including on the
1:00:17
Speaker 1: incentives to combat GHG without creating legislation acknowledging the problem. Well,
1:00:22
Speaker 1: this gets it to the larger issue of I'm not
1:00:30
Speaker 1: going to get into the details of the bill. I
1:00:31
Speaker 1: want to get into the larger issue that actually George
1:00:34
Speaker 1: Conway and I got into, which is Congress is afraid
1:00:36
Speaker 1: to do its job right. And there had been this,
1:00:40
Speaker 1: there's been this accepted mindset among Congressional leaders in both
1:00:45
Speaker 1: parties that they're better off keeping language vague because then
1:00:50
Speaker 1: the Executive Branch and the administration and the agencies that
1:00:54
Speaker 1: then implement can you know, they basically get a second
1:00:58
Speaker 1: bite to then interpret how the policy gets implemented. Well,
1:01:03
Speaker 1: that always leads to court cases, which then leads to
1:01:05
Speaker 1: ambiguous language, which then leads to the court saying no
1:01:08
Speaker 1: Congress needs to expressly say what it wants. Ultimately, Congress
1:01:12
Speaker 1: is the problem on just about every issue. You may
1:01:16
Speaker 1: be frustrated. And I think this was the problem is
1:01:22
Speaker 1: that Congress has not been explicit enough in what the
1:01:26
Speaker 1: authority is. Congress wasn't explicit enough in what in what
1:01:31
Speaker 1: the in what exactly they wanted the EPA to regulate.
1:01:36
Speaker 1: They were essentially, you know, they in so many of
1:01:40
Speaker 1: these bills, it's sort of up to you know, up
1:01:44
Speaker 1: to the interpretation of the agency experts or you know,
1:01:47
Speaker 1: and I you know, it's this idea of well, you know,
1:01:51
Speaker 1: and I think in fairness, right, Congress doesn't know the
1:01:53
Speaker 1: specific Sometimes you've got to let experts sort of determine
1:01:57
Speaker 1: the best parts of implementation. But a lot of times
1:02:01
Speaker 1: Congress is just hiding so that they can they don't
1:02:04
Speaker 1: have to be declarative on what they've agreed upon in
1:02:07
Speaker 1: their bill. So I think that's the issue. And it
1:02:14
Speaker 1: is a lot harder to get certain members of Congress,
1:02:17
Speaker 1: like it was going to be easier to get Mansion
1:02:19
Speaker 1: to agree to something if you kept in ambiguous what
1:02:22
Speaker 1: exactly what exactly the authority of the APA would be,
1:02:26
Speaker 1: That implying that there was always going to be a
1:02:29
Speaker 1: second negotiation on the implementation process. The point is, gave
1:02:33
Speaker 1: the executive branch too much leeway. And when you gave
1:02:35
Speaker 1: that too much leeway, and then you change the party
1:02:37
Speaker 1: in the White House who has no interest in implementing
1:02:40
Speaker 1: the bill based on the way it was it was
1:02:43
Speaker 1: interpreted that when it was passed. So ultimately, the fear
1:02:49
Speaker 1: that members of Congress have for expressly saying what they
1:02:54
Speaker 1: hope the legislation does in the legislation itself creates these
1:02:57
Speaker 1: situations that just invites law suits and makes it easier
1:03:01
Speaker 1: for courts to intervene. And this is you know, look,
1:03:03
Speaker 1: I can go back. I think Congress has not been
1:03:05
Speaker 1: doing it. You know job arguably, you know, we keep
1:03:11
Speaker 1: we had to go to the courts to desegregate the schools.
1:03:13
Speaker 1: We get it's always you always had to go to
1:03:15
Speaker 1: the courts because of the ambiguous nature or the fear
1:03:20
Speaker 1: that Congress has of stepping out on certain things and
1:03:24
Speaker 1: trying to codify things in the law. So I know
1:03:29
Speaker 1: there's some specifics she wanted me to dive into on that,
1:03:32
Speaker 1: and there's a part of me that I got to
1:03:34
Speaker 1: I almost want to give this to my daughter and
1:03:36
Speaker 1: make her do it as a homework assignment, since she's
1:03:38
Speaker 1: my marine biology major on that front, and she's been
1:03:42
Speaker 1: studying this and and sort of all of this stuff,
1:03:46
Speaker 1: and it's a lot more conversant than I am on
1:03:49
Speaker 1: some of the stuff, Mark, So thank you. Next question
1:03:53
Speaker 1: comes from Jason An. He writes, Hey, I've heard you
1:03:55
Speaker 1: mentioned a few times that we do not teach the
1:03:58
Speaker 1: collapse of the Ottoman Empire enough in class to contextualize
1:04:00
Speaker 1: the Middle East today. You have articles, books to recommend
1:04:03
Speaker 1: to help a teacher better understand the situation and how
1:04:04
Speaker 1: the artificial borders led to the ethnic nationalism intentions we
1:04:08
Speaker 1: see in the region today. PS. Thanks for talking to
1:04:10
Speaker 1: my class at SJC in September October. Fun and turbulence
1:04:14
Speaker 1: certainly for y'all. A season for both of our football teams,
1:04:18
Speaker 1: all miss for me. Hey, Jason, thanks for saying that.
1:04:22
Speaker 1: And I look, man, I enjoy anytime bite me anytime,
1:04:27
Speaker 1: I will be there. Like I said, I actually you're
1:04:30
Speaker 1: not the first person to ask me for a few recommendations.
1:04:33
Speaker 1: So here are the two recommendations I gave. Both have
1:04:36
Speaker 1: been written in the twenty first century, which I think
1:04:38
Speaker 1: means you'll get the context you need. One is by
1:04:41
Speaker 1: Eugene Rogan. He's a prominent American historian, director of the
1:04:44
Speaker 1: Middle East Center at Saint Antony's College in Oxford. So
1:04:47
Speaker 1: Oxford to Oxford for you there, Jason. It's called Fall
1:04:50
Speaker 1: of the Ottomans. Rogan's central argument is that the Ottomans
1:04:53
Speaker 1: weren't merely passive victims or minor players, but fought a
1:04:57
Speaker 1: genuinely significant war across multiple fronts, and the book draws
1:05:02
Speaker 1: heavily on Ottoman, Arabic and Turkish sources alongside British and
1:05:06
Speaker 1: other Allied documents. Point is is that the reason this
1:05:09
Speaker 1: book is good is because it uses more Arab sources
1:05:11
Speaker 1: and Turkish sources, so much of how we've taught World
1:05:15
Speaker 1: War One and even the fall of the Ottoman Empires
1:05:17
Speaker 1: through the prism of the Brits right and the French
1:05:19
Speaker 1: and the European side of things, rather than from the
1:05:22
Speaker 1: essentially the Arab side of things. To get a more
1:05:24
Speaker 1: complete picture. The second book worth reading is another terrific one,
1:05:29
Speaker 1: The Ottoman Rode to War in nineteen fourteen by Mustafa Osakil.
1:05:33
Speaker 1: He's a respected Ottoman historian. He teaches at Georgetown, so
1:05:37
Speaker 1: here in my neck of the woods. His core argument
1:05:39
Speaker 1: is the Ottoman entry into the war was a calculated decision,
1:05:41
Speaker 1: driven by Ottoman leaders, particularly who saw the war as
1:05:45
Speaker 1: an opportunity to restore prestige to the Ottoman Empire after
1:05:51
Speaker 1: the devastating Balkan War losses. So what's good about that
1:05:55
Speaker 1: one again is that it is more from the perspective
1:05:58
Speaker 1: of the Ottoman side rather than noise from the perspective
1:06:00
Speaker 1: of the German side. But there's all sorts of you know,
1:06:04
Speaker 1: trying to understand sort of the post war of that.
1:06:07
Speaker 1: And like I said, a couple of drunk Brits and
1:06:10
Speaker 1: Frenchmen decided to draw these straight lines in the Middle East. YadA, YadA, YadA.
1:06:14
Speaker 1: We've had nothing but outbreaks of war ever since. But
1:06:17
Speaker 1: those are my two recommendations there for you, and I
1:06:20
Speaker 1: just wanted to stay consistent. It's also a pretty good
1:06:23
Speaker 1: hardcore history on this, Dan Carlin, He's done it. There's
1:06:26
Speaker 1: a few others. A good history podcast is sometimes better
1:06:30
Speaker 1: than some of the books. All Right, I got two
1:06:35
Speaker 1: more questions here, I'm gonna go three more questions. Well,
1:06:40
Speaker 1: we'll see. I got I gotta get out of here.
1:06:42
Speaker 1: I got a herd out on this recording moment here.
1:06:46
Speaker 1: But you don't need to do all of that stuff,
1:06:49
Speaker 1: Jay and New York Rights. You've done multiple top five
1:06:52
Speaker 1: lists on Senate and governor's vices. But I was wondering
1:06:53
Speaker 1: if you had a handful of house races that you
1:06:55
Speaker 1: were keeping an eye on. Even if it's just two
1:06:57
Speaker 1: or three house races, which ones are you watching closely?
1:06:59
Speaker 1: And why? Beyond the more well known toss up seats,
1:07:01
Speaker 1: I'm curious about races like North Carolina eleven, Tennessee five,
1:07:03
Speaker 1: and the safer red Colorado districts. I will tell you
1:07:08
Speaker 1: that my obsession is are the Iowa congressional districts one, two,
1:07:12
Speaker 1: and three. Iowa in general is, to me, is the
1:07:17
Speaker 1: Petrie Dish of whether the Democrats can be a full
1:07:20
Speaker 1: on national party again and whether they can get congressional
1:07:24
Speaker 1: majorities and they can get a Senate majority. Iowa sort
1:07:27
Speaker 1: of holds the key. Those three seats are swingy seats.
1:07:31
Speaker 1: You can't drum. You couldn't Jerry Manderum if you wanted to.
1:07:36
Speaker 1: But I think even you just couldn't figure out how
1:07:40
Speaker 1: to do it because all the population are in the
1:07:43
Speaker 1: bluer areas and stuff. So it is I think that
1:07:49
Speaker 1: those three are the best bell weathers because they're so
1:07:56
Speaker 1: closely contested by party, because they also include some rural parts.
1:08:03
Speaker 1: So you know, if Republican turnout is under under is
1:08:11
Speaker 1: sort of underwhelming in rural areas, democratic turnout is up.
1:08:16
Speaker 1: I always a place you should see it come to life.
1:08:19
Speaker 1: And then that's the difference between Democrats winning those congressionals
1:08:22
Speaker 1: and the districts and losing them. They when they've lost them,
1:08:25
Speaker 1: they narrowly lose them. When they win them, they narrowly
1:08:27
Speaker 1: win them. Right, So you know, look, we can I
1:08:31
Speaker 1: can cherry pick interesting races. I you know, I get
1:08:34
Speaker 1: why you're interested in Tennessee five. You know, maybe right
1:08:37
Speaker 1: there's if you're gonna find one competitive seat in Tennessee,
1:08:40
Speaker 1: it might be that one. I'm very curious to see
1:08:43
Speaker 1: what happens along the U on the other side of
1:08:46
Speaker 1: the Rockies. That's a seat that in really bad Republican
1:08:51
Speaker 1: years has flipped to the Democrats. So I get your
1:08:53
Speaker 1: interested in some of the redder Colifia, Colorado districts. I
1:08:59
Speaker 1: think those I if you're for what are the and
1:09:01
Speaker 1: I will get to that I will give you when
1:09:03
Speaker 1: we get closer, the five seats that will tell me
1:09:07
Speaker 1: that can help me directionally know which way the winds
1:09:09
Speaker 1: are blowing, and how you know, will the Democrats have
1:09:13
Speaker 1: a good night, great night, or an incredible night or
1:09:17
Speaker 1: a bad night? You know, not winning the House at
1:09:19
Speaker 1: this point would be considered a bad night. All right.
1:09:21
Speaker 1: Next question comes from email from Lenexa, Kansas. Anyway, Hey,
1:09:26
Speaker 1: in today's podcast, you are more optimistic than I am
1:09:28
Speaker 1: about Congress passing a pardon reform bill. Given Trump's veto
1:09:31
Speaker 1: power and the Republican Party's unwillingness to challenge him, I
1:09:34
Speaker 1: see little chance of its passing even if Democrats control
1:09:37
Speaker 1: both chambers in twenty twenty six. I stand by my
1:09:38
Speaker 1: earlier point. The only realistic path is fully eliminating the
1:09:41
Speaker 1: president's pardon powers I outlined in my prior email. I look,
1:09:44
Speaker 1: that's where I'm at. I think it's I think we
1:09:46
Speaker 1: had to get rid of I think we had to
1:09:48
Speaker 1: create a pardon board. But if you're asking me what's
1:09:51
Speaker 1: a constitutional amendment that I think could get two thirds
1:09:53
Speaker 1: a support in Congress, it's the one that's been outlined
1:09:57
Speaker 1: because it is a nullification. It is asking for a
1:10:01
Speaker 1: super majority in order to even trigger the nullification of
1:10:05
Speaker 1: the pardon. It it feels like and it and you
1:10:13
Speaker 1: know it's looked. President can't veto a constitutional amendment because
1:10:18
Speaker 1: it would in order for it to get out of
1:10:20
Speaker 1: Congress and has to get two third support, So it's
1:10:22
Speaker 1: essentially veto proof. So there's no there's no role there
1:10:25
Speaker 1: for the president for what it's worth on that. So
1:10:28
Speaker 1: that isn't the issue if you're worried about that. The
1:10:32
Speaker 1: question is whether Trump turns it into a litmus test
1:10:34
Speaker 1: against himself or is it something that you let sit
1:10:38
Speaker 1: there slowly gain support and the second there's a new president,
1:10:43
Speaker 1: you pass it and you send it to the states.
1:10:50
Speaker 1: This is where don't let the enemy of the enemy
1:10:54
Speaker 1: of the perfect. What is it? What's that phrase? Don't
1:10:58
Speaker 1: let the don't let the perfect be the enemy of
1:11:01
Speaker 1: the good. And that is why I might like that's
1:11:07
Speaker 1: I creating a check on the president's pardon power is
1:11:12
Speaker 1: better than nothing. And what I admire about that this
1:11:17
Speaker 1: pardon Reform bill is that it's clearly written in a
1:11:22
Speaker 1: way to try to get as bipartisan of a group
1:11:27
Speaker 1: of people behind this. As you possibly can all right.
1:11:31
Speaker 1: Final question Jim from Saint Paul, Minnesota. Hey, check, I
1:11:34
Speaker 1: love the podcast. I'm a full episode kind of guy.
1:11:36
Speaker 1: Like to hear that. I know which you know who
1:11:39
Speaker 1: you are. In your segment about one term president, you
1:11:41
Speaker 1: said that several loss because they were not politically astute,
1:11:43
Speaker 1: if they were not politically adept, how do they win
1:11:45
Speaker 1: in the first place? Because they won by being you
1:11:50
Speaker 1: know who, they weren't right, or you know, George H. W.
1:11:53
Speaker 1: Bush one because he wasn't Michael ducaccas. He made Michael
1:11:56
Speaker 1: Ducacca's unacceptable. Carter won because the country was just going
1:12:00
Speaker 1: to fire. Any Democrat was going to win in seventy six, right,
1:12:03
Speaker 1: And you know, we like the idea of electing a
1:12:06
Speaker 1: guy who promised he'd never you know, he'd never lie,
1:12:10
Speaker 1: and he'd always tell us the truth. So I think
1:12:13
Speaker 1: that you're not wrong. I mean, look, I think when
1:12:16
Speaker 1: you you know, if you're asking me, if we ever
1:12:18
Speaker 1: had a political Hall of Fame, anybody who won the presidency,
1:12:21
Speaker 1: to me, would automatically get entry. Right. It's like it's
1:12:24
Speaker 1: like hitting It's like hitting six hundred home runs. You
1:12:27
Speaker 1: know I'm going to put you in no matter what
1:12:29
Speaker 1: unless you really prove you cheated. And but a lot
1:12:35
Speaker 1: of times these one term presidents they won because of
1:12:38
Speaker 1: who they weren't, and that's usually why it's much harder
1:12:43
Speaker 1: for them to keep traction and stay in office. All right,
1:12:47
Speaker 1: with that, let's take a what are we looking at here?
1:12:52
Speaker 1: Seventy two hour break and, barring war with Iran before Monday,
1:12:57
Speaker 1: i'll see a Monday. Hey,