Latest / The Chuck ToddCast / Full Episode - The Redistricting “Race To The Bottom” + Winning A Landmark Case Against Big Tech

Transcript

Full Episode - The Redistricting “Race To The Bottom” + Winning A Landmark Case Against Big Tech · The Chuck ToddCast

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: This episode of the Chuck Podcast is brought to you
• 0:02
  Speaker 1: by Ethos and what Ethos does is it helps you
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: find life insurance. Let me tell you why life insurance
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: bailed me out. My father died when I was sixteen.
• 0:09
  Speaker 1: We didn't have a lot of money when it happened,
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: and we were in a pretty tough financial spot after
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: it happened. I'm an only child. Suddenly my mother's single,
• 0:18
  Speaker 1: single mother. She had a job, suddenly lost a job,
• 0:21
  Speaker 1: looking for another job, and we were struggling. You know,
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: my dad didn't leave us in the best financial situation,
• 0:27
  Speaker 1: but he did make one purchase. He bought a life
• 0:29
  Speaker 1: insurance policy. Wasn't a huge chunk of change, but it
• 0:32
  Speaker 1: was enough when we found it. And when I say
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: we found it, meaning we went through his desk and
• 0:36
  Speaker 1: we found, oh, look at this, let's see if there's
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: anything here. And it helped us out at a time
• 0:41
  Speaker 1: that we really needed it. And that's why I think
• 0:43
  Speaker 1: it's important that if you can, especially if you have
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: young children, if you can get life insurance, you should
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: get it. Life is full of unexpected emergencies, unexpected things happen.
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: It is an extra bit of security, something you can
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: leave and help out at a time when you're you're
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: not there to help. So what does Ethos do well.
• 1:03
  Speaker 1: Ethos makes getting life insurance fast and easy, and it's
• 1:07
  Speaker 1: one hundred percent online. You can get a quote in seconds,
• 1:09
  Speaker 1: you can apply in minutes, and you can get same
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: day coverage. They will find you the right fit. There's
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: no medical exam. You just answer a few simple health
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: questions online. You can get up to three million dollars
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: in coverage and some policies are as low as thirty
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: dollars a month and you'll get your lowest rate from
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: their network of trusted carriers. So take ten minutes to
• 1:27
  Speaker 1: get covered today with life insurance through Ethos. Get your
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: free quote at ethos dot com slash chuck. That is
• 1:34
  Speaker 1: ETOs dot com slash chuck. Application times may vary and
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: rates may vary. Hello there, Welcome to the Thursday edition
• 1:48
  Speaker 1: of the Chuck Podcast. You may see a different backdrop.
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: I am coming to you on the road. I am
• 1:54
  Speaker 1: at a gathering of people that are concerned about the
• 1:57
  Speaker 1: future of the democracy and want to do something about it,
• 2:00
  Speaker 1: whether it's getting rid of partisan primaries, figuring out how
• 2:04
  Speaker 1: to change incentive structures so partisan hackery doesn't rule the day.
• 2:12
  Speaker 1: You know, can we figure out a way to get
• 2:14
  Speaker 1: members of Congress to realize that Article one of the
• 2:17
  Speaker 1: Constitution is about them and a variety of other ideas
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: out there. But it's a great group. It's people that
• 2:29
  Speaker 1: are truly concerned. There's a bipartisan event, if you will.
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: There are Democrats here, it's really cross partisan. There are
• 2:36
  Speaker 1: Democrats here, there are Republicans here, and there are people
• 2:38
  Speaker 1: think we need a third party or an independent movement,
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: but everybody has the same concern that essentially what we
• 2:47
  Speaker 1: have learned in the last ten years of this experiment
• 2:51
  Speaker 1: that is Donald Trump. It's been one of the great Look,
• 2:54
  Speaker 1: I look at the Trump era as an MRI. I've
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: used that phrase every with you guys before, because it
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: certainly has exposed a slew of weaknesses in our system.
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: And we know what's whether it's you know how norms
• 3:11
  Speaker 1: are just you can't really rely on a norm. You're
• 3:14
  Speaker 1: going to have to if you care about it enough,
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: you're going to have to codify it. Right, You're going
• 3:18
  Speaker 1: to have to turn a norm into a law. Sometimes
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: you may need a constitutional amendment, whether it's a state level,
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: federal level, et cetera. But I am. I'm pretty this
• 3:31
  Speaker 1: is a really impressive group. I'm glad to be here
• 3:36
  Speaker 1: and trying to connect with people who want to do
• 3:40
  Speaker 1: solve real problems here and just want to make this
• 3:43
  Speaker 1: system function better and be majoritarian. Right, we are not
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: living in a majoritarian era, if you will, We've we've
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: you know, we've got essentially minority power, and that is
• 3:58
  Speaker 1: not what founders intended. You know, they intended to balance
• 4:01
  Speaker 1: on these things, and they certainly intended for the people
• 4:04
  Speaker 1: to have more of a voice than they currently do
• 4:06
  Speaker 1: not do now. So anyway, so that's why I'm here.
• 4:11
  Speaker 1: I'm gonna later I have a fascinating interview today. If
• 4:18
  Speaker 1: you've been following what's going on with big tech and
• 4:21
  Speaker 1: the civil litigation that has begun, whether it's state attorneys
• 4:26
  Speaker 1: generals that want a verdict against some of the big
• 4:29
  Speaker 1: ten companies in New Mexico or the big news last
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: month out of Los Angeles, when we had when both
• 4:38
  Speaker 1: Meta and Google basically because of Instagram and YouTube, were
• 4:43
  Speaker 1: found libel for essentially making a defective product. Rather than
• 4:49
  Speaker 1: going after these companies via section you know where they
• 4:52
  Speaker 1: could have protection under Section two thirty about their platform.
• 4:55
  Speaker 1: This was about how and it was essentially how this
• 5:03
  Speaker 1: platform was intentionally created to make young people addicted. So anyway,
• 5:14
  Speaker 1: it is with a federal government that is too paralyzed
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: to do its job when it comes to regulation, when
• 5:21
  Speaker 1: it comes to protecting consumers, the last the last resort
• 5:27
  Speaker 1: is the courts, and Mark Lanier and Rahu Ravapodi, who
• 5:31
  Speaker 1: are my guests today, are essentially overseeing a slew of
• 5:37
  Speaker 1: litigation against a variety of big tech companies that may
• 5:42
  Speaker 1: be after winning their first one. This could be the
• 5:47
  Speaker 1: beginning of what is big tech and social media's tobacco
• 5:52
  Speaker 1: big Tobacco moment. If you will, they've lost their first case,
• 5:58
  Speaker 1: if they lose the next four or five others, I
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: have a feeling these big tech companies are going to
• 6:02
  Speaker 1: try to figure out a way to settle like big
• 6:04
  Speaker 1: tobacco eventually did, because as you will hear, they basically
• 6:14
  Speaker 1: don't have a good defense because in they have their
• 6:18
  Speaker 1: own research that indicated what they were doing was in
• 6:21
  Speaker 1: fact what the plaintiffs suggests that they were doing, whether
• 6:25
  Speaker 1: it was to get young people addicted or then some
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: and so it's a if you want to understand where
• 6:34
  Speaker 1: this is headed, the legal strategy behind it, and frankly,
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: what maybe some ideas on what are elected officials if
• 6:43
  Speaker 1: they do care about protecting consumers, particularly those under eighteen,
• 6:48
  Speaker 1: from the predatory behavior of social media companies. Take a
• 6:53
  Speaker 1: listen to this interview. So I'm very excited about that conversation.
• 6:58
  Speaker 1: I really think you will learn a lot on that topic.
• 7:02
  Speaker 1: But I'm going to begin with more fallout from Virginia
• 7:06
  Speaker 1: a little bit and sort of. It has been an
• 7:08
  Speaker 1: interesting twenty four hours post Virginia. You've had an amazing
• 7:13
  Speaker 1: amount of gloating from the Democrats, and then you've had
• 7:20
  Speaker 1: a bit of a divided response among Republicans. You have
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: got a half of Republicans upset it Donald Trump and
• 7:27
  Speaker 1: other Republicans for not fighting, for not spending enough money
• 7:30
  Speaker 1: in Virginia, and then you have the other half just
• 7:33
  Speaker 1: lamenting that this happened in the first place. And there's
• 7:36
  Speaker 1: somehow have amnesia and forgetting that this all began with
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: the hackery that we saw in Texas, and actually people
• 7:45
  Speaker 1: seem to forget it was a re redistricting effort by
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: Ronda Santis in Florida in twenty twenty two that essentially
• 7:53
  Speaker 1: got Republicans the majority if he doesn't likely violate his
• 7:58
  Speaker 1: you know, well, look, the courts didn't say late to
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: the state constitution. But there's a lot of questions about
• 8:02
  Speaker 1: whether that redistricting followed the spirit of the of the
• 8:07
  Speaker 1: constitutional amendment that said you cannot redistrict in Florida for
• 8:11
  Speaker 1: partisan gain. But the fact of the matter is if
• 8:14
  Speaker 1: he hadn't done it, h Republicans wouldn't have wouldn't have
• 8:18
  Speaker 1: picked up the House. That's how you know we see
• 8:21
  Speaker 1: this narrow majority. It is thanks to redistricting. And so
• 8:23
  Speaker 1: now I guess you could say what's good for the
• 8:27
  Speaker 1: goose is good for the gander. But I'm not sure
• 8:29
  Speaker 1: this race to the bottom is a race that Democrats
• 8:32
  Speaker 1: ought to be gloating about winning. But I want to
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: address the Republican issue here a minute, because there's this
• 8:39
  Speaker 1: belief among some that if only they had spent more money,
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: if only Donald Trump had been more engaged, if only
• 8:45
  Speaker 1: there let me just tell you something, This is probably
• 8:48
  Speaker 1: as good as the no could have done in this circumstance.
• 8:52
  Speaker 1: And let me explain one. The more this became a
• 8:56
  Speaker 1: Republican effort, the more the more Independents were likely not
• 9:03
  Speaker 1: to vote. Now, that's one. Two. The more this became
• 9:06
  Speaker 1: red coated on the No campaign, the more likely people
• 9:09
  Speaker 1: were going to feel uncomfortable and either not vote or
• 9:12
  Speaker 1: vote for yes. You know Trump's involvement. You know, look
• 9:19
  Speaker 1: the Republican the No campaign could have tried a message
• 9:25
  Speaker 1: that was as follow us. Hey, you know, maybe Glenn
• 9:29
  Speaker 1: Youngkin gets on the air, my party is wrong about Texas.
• 9:32
  Speaker 1: What happened in Texas is a travesty. It shouldn't have happened.
• 9:36
  Speaker 1: It was a mistake. I was against it, and that's
• 9:39
  Speaker 1: why I'm fighting not to let it happen here. You
• 9:43
  Speaker 1: might have had a tad more credibility, but nobody of
• 9:47
  Speaker 1: significance on the right had the guts to essentially say
• 9:50
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump was wrong. Texas Republicans were wrong, and this
• 9:55
  Speaker 1: is why I think this referendum is wrong. Right. So
• 9:59
  Speaker 1: the fact is the No campaign played partisan politics. They
• 10:02
  Speaker 1: wanted to basically do a little Hey, pay no attention
• 10:05
  Speaker 1: what happened over here. We think what this is happening
• 10:08
  Speaker 1: over here is bad. Man. I'm happened to be one
• 10:11
  Speaker 1: of those things people that says what happened in Texas
• 10:14
  Speaker 1: is bad. What happened in Florida in twenty twenty two
• 10:17
  Speaker 1: is bad. What's happened in California's bad, and what happened
• 10:19
  Speaker 1: in Virginia's bad. But you know, I don't want to
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: hear from these fake outraged conservatives like the slaps and
• 10:28
  Speaker 1: that sort of you know, those that clown show that is,
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: those that pair who are lamenting all of this or
• 10:35
  Speaker 1: there's all these I've seen some concerns who just don't
• 10:38
  Speaker 1: acknowledge that this began with a ridiculous order from Donald
• 10:44
  Speaker 1: Trump to Republican governors and Republican held state legislatures. So
• 10:50
  Speaker 1: this is where we're at. This was potentially a winnable campaign,
• 10:53
  Speaker 1: but let me tell you, more involvement from the Republican
• 10:56
  Speaker 1: Party and Donald Trump would have actually made this worse.
• 11:00
  Speaker 1: One could argue him getting involved twenty four hours before
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: was probably a mistake. And this is the trap that
• 11:06
  Speaker 1: the Republican Party is in with Donald Trump everywhere, and
• 11:09
  Speaker 1: it's actually a bit of a preview of coming attractions
• 11:13
  Speaker 1: for Republicans that are on the ballot. You can't separate
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: yourself from Donald Trump. And then at the last minute
• 11:20
  Speaker 1: try to get Donald Trump to get his people to
• 11:22
  Speaker 1: come out and support you, right, you can't do both
• 11:25
  Speaker 1: things right. This is the you know, he took over
• 11:28
  Speaker 1: the Republican Party. He has become synonymous with the Republican Party.
• 11:32
  Speaker 1: And you know he even laments anytime a Republican doesn't
• 11:35
  Speaker 1: vote his way. He wants to kick him out, right.
• 11:37
  Speaker 1: He wants to not endorse them, he doesn't want to
• 11:40
  Speaker 1: fund them. So you cannot separate yourself if you're a
• 11:44
  Speaker 1: Republican from Donald Trump unless you fully repudiate Donald Trump.
• 11:50
  Speaker 1: And the problem they have is there they need his base.
• 11:55
  Speaker 1: And right now, when you look at all these polls
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: that have been coming out, I've been a little bit
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: cautious about overreacting. I know a lot of people have
• 12:05
  Speaker 1: been seeing this new AP pole that puts it in
• 12:10
  Speaker 1: the low thirties. Now, I'll say this, if that's in
• 12:14
  Speaker 1: the low thirties, then my guess is those with registered
• 12:18
  Speaker 1: voters are going to be in the high thirties now.
• 12:20
  Speaker 1: And that's a big deal. If we see when you
• 12:22
  Speaker 1: see if you see the Fox News poll or the
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: NBC News poll, not Survey Monkey's NBC News poll, but
• 12:27
  Speaker 1: the one done by the two professional campaign pollsters. Because
• 12:32
  Speaker 1: I know how they do their methodology. If you start
• 12:35
  Speaker 1: to see that drop below forty on his approval rating
• 12:39
  Speaker 1: and his approval rating in registered voters sort of likely
• 12:42
  Speaker 1: registered voters in the twenty twenty six mid term, if
• 12:44
  Speaker 1: that starts to be in the mid to high thirties,
• 12:48
  Speaker 1: that's catastrophic. You know, you're looking at with this map,
• 12:54
  Speaker 1: probably twenty five to thirty five seats, right, which, for
• 12:58
  Speaker 1: what it's worth, which would have translated in twenty ten,
• 13:01
  Speaker 1: you know, sort of twenty years ago into a forty
• 13:04
  Speaker 1: or fifty or sixty seat type of shift. We've obviously
• 13:07
  Speaker 1: so hardened and so partisanized the maps around the country
• 13:12
  Speaker 1: that there's just you know, the max, right, the absolute
• 13:17
  Speaker 1: tippy top that I could legitimately say Democrats could win
• 13:23
  Speaker 1: in the House is probably forty. And that's if Republican
• 13:27
  Speaker 1: turnout is in the total toilet and Democratic turnout is
• 13:30
  Speaker 1: through the roof, and they went independence by more than
• 13:33
  Speaker 1: five points, right, Like, if all of that came together,
• 13:36
  Speaker 1: you could, you could, you could get to thirty five
• 13:39
  Speaker 1: or forty seats. But the fact is that's the territory
• 13:44
  Speaker 1: we're headed. And of course, the larger issue and I
• 13:48
  Speaker 1: think what Republicans learned, right and you could see it
• 13:51
  Speaker 1: in that ad campaign during during the No strategy. You know, first,
• 13:55
  Speaker 1: you know, the most effective messenger the No campaign had
• 13:59
  Speaker 1: was brock a right, and that they had had this
• 14:02
  Speaker 1: one excerpt of him lamenting jerry mandering, talking about that's
• 14:07
  Speaker 1: why nothing gets done in Washington, It's because of jerry mandering.
• 14:10
  Speaker 1: And it was pretty powerful. It was very Obama as
• 14:13
  Speaker 1: quote pretty powerful quote so powerful that that's why I
• 14:19
  Speaker 1: think Democrats pulled the Abigail Spaandberger stuff and doubled down
• 14:22
  Speaker 1: on more. They needed, essentially Obama to explain himself, right,
• 14:26
  Speaker 1: so he didn't contradict himself. He still claimed jerry mandering
• 14:30
  Speaker 1: was bad, but he wanted to say this is temporary,
• 14:32
  Speaker 1: this is about a larger fight. And I'll say this,
• 14:34
  Speaker 1: the Yes campaign improved their messaging. You know, when this
• 14:38
  Speaker 1: campaign first started, they were lying about what it was.
• 14:42
  Speaker 1: They were trying to claim that this was a fairness issue.
• 14:46
  Speaker 1: As they realized that that wasn't working, and I'm guessing
• 14:49
  Speaker 1: some focus groups told him that because it's not like
• 14:52
  Speaker 1: we were seeing a lot of public polling on this,
• 14:54
  Speaker 1: then they shifted it and had to essentially explain it.
• 14:59
  Speaker 1: And it is still fascinating, how wordy this the campaign
• 15:03
  Speaker 1: messaging was for the S campaign. But this is a
• 15:06
  Speaker 1: unique political electorate. As I've indicated to you before with
• 15:09
  Speaker 1: Northern Virginia that you have essentially, you know, extraordinarily focused voters. Right,
• 15:16
  Speaker 1: this is an electorate that pays a lot of attention.
• 15:18
  Speaker 1: They understand minutia and they had you know, you had
• 15:24
  Speaker 1: to you had to be honest about it. Look, this
• 15:27
  Speaker 1: is a this this is not something anybody wants to do.
• 15:30
  Speaker 1: But here's why we're advocating it, and it's why they're
• 15:34
  Speaker 1: I think at the end, their messaging was able able
• 15:37
  Speaker 1: to work. You know, making it all about Donald Trump
• 15:41
  Speaker 1: doesn't hurt either, especially in Northern Virginia, because one of
• 15:44
  Speaker 1: the things that I don't think people fully appreciate, and
• 15:47
  Speaker 1: I've said it before, is that there is there is
• 15:50
  Speaker 1: no group of people that Donald Trump has targeted more right,
• 15:54
  Speaker 1: I would say there's probably two communities that feel like
• 15:57
  Speaker 1: they've been personally targeted and had their life turned upside
• 16:01
  Speaker 1: down by Donald Trump. Minneapolis, and we've seen that response,
• 16:07
  Speaker 1: you know, with the with I's killing of two American citizens,
• 16:10
  Speaker 1: and of course in Northern Virginia where he and frankly
• 16:14
  Speaker 1: the suburbs all around DC, and we just haven't had
• 16:17
  Speaker 1: any Maryland elections that have been of significance or we
• 16:21
  Speaker 1: would have seen it there. But you could just feel
• 16:24
  Speaker 1: it because this is you know, Northern Virginia is not
• 16:28
  Speaker 1: a really liberal, ideologically liberal area. What it is is
• 16:33
  Speaker 1: it is just simply anti Trump, and it is angrily
• 16:38
  Speaker 1: anti Trump, right, mister chainsaw Elon Musk when he came
• 16:42
  Speaker 1: in and he essentially gutted the government, he put a
• 16:45
  Speaker 1: lot of people that live in Northern Virginia out of work,
• 16:47
  Speaker 1: He forced a lot of people into retirement. And these
• 16:51
  Speaker 1: are people that are pretty pretty ticked off and they're
• 16:57
  Speaker 1: watching and seeing So this, this just instruction of the
• 17:00
  Speaker 1: federal government is some sort of intentional destruction based on
• 17:06
  Speaker 1: politics rather than based on whether something's a good idea
• 17:09
  Speaker 1: or a bad idea. Right, The gutting of usaid just
• 17:11
  Speaker 1: one of the colossal mistakes that he's made, is why
• 17:18
  Speaker 1: I think you've seen you know why. It was just
• 17:21
  Speaker 1: this was never not going to pass because of this
• 17:24
  Speaker 1: angry elector. So those that are lamenting, if they're oh
• 17:29
  Speaker 1: of more, please if the rnc AT poured money or
• 17:32
  Speaker 1: Trump or club for growth. These are just uncredible institutions,
• 17:37
  Speaker 1: uncredible people on this stuff, and it just it wouldn't
• 17:40
  Speaker 1: have worked. The only message that I'm curious about that
• 17:45
  Speaker 1: might have worked for no is if Glenn Youngkin went
• 17:48
  Speaker 1: candidate the camera, he's the most prominent Virginia Republican and
• 17:53
  Speaker 1: had said, my party is wrong. What they did in
• 17:58
  Speaker 1: Texas is a mistake. What's been done before is a mistake.
• 18:02
  Speaker 1: I'm sorry it happened, but let's not do that here
• 18:06
  Speaker 1: in Virginia in some form or another. But they couldn't
• 18:12
  Speaker 1: do it right because they couldn't risk They were afraid
• 18:15
  Speaker 1: of attacking Donald Trump, right, So to me, what you
• 18:21
  Speaker 1: see here right, and their inability to do what would
• 18:25
  Speaker 1: have been their best messaging to win this thing, which
• 18:28
  Speaker 1: was criticize Texas and criticize this national Republican effort, but
• 18:33
  Speaker 1: they couldn't bring themselves to do it. Well. That's why
• 18:36
  Speaker 1: I think this is a harbinger of just how disastrous
• 18:40
  Speaker 1: this is going to be for incumbent Republicans who by
• 18:43
  Speaker 1: the fall are going to be desperate to try to
• 18:45
  Speaker 1: separate themselves from Donald Trump and just aren't going to
• 18:47
  Speaker 1: be able to do it because they're going to have
• 18:49
  Speaker 1: he's got you know, yes, his numbers are in the
• 18:52
  Speaker 1: somewhere between you know, thirty three and thirty eight. That's
• 18:56
  Speaker 1: his magabase. That is all that approves of what he's doing. Right,
• 19:01
  Speaker 1: These are the folks that have been mainlining the kool aid. Right,
• 19:04
  Speaker 1: they don't just drink it, they mainline it. And they're
• 19:08
  Speaker 1: not going to go anywhere. But they could set out,
• 19:13
  Speaker 1: they could decide not to support certain Republicans if they
• 19:16
  Speaker 1: think that they are somehow working against Trump. So I
• 19:20
  Speaker 1: think that the limitations of the No campaign their inability
• 19:28
  Speaker 1: to look inward and criticize fellow Republicans. Well, if you
• 19:33
  Speaker 1: can't do it in what would have been the easiest
• 19:36
  Speaker 1: environment to test that message out, you're going to tell
• 19:41
  Speaker 1: me that your Republican nominee for senate's going to be
• 19:44
  Speaker 1: able to pull that off in Iowa. The Republican incumbent
• 19:47
  Speaker 1: senator in Ohio is going to be able to pull
• 19:49
  Speaker 1: that off. The Republican incumbent senator from Nomaska is going
• 19:52
  Speaker 1: to be able to pull that off. I'm skeptical the
• 19:59
  Speaker 1: try and so you're either you're gonna see one of
• 20:02
  Speaker 1: two things. You're gonna see some Republicans try to separate
• 20:05
  Speaker 1: themselves from Trump, and maybe one or two might pull
• 20:10
  Speaker 1: it off. Right there's you know, maybe maybe a Susan
• 20:13
  Speaker 1: Collins kind of has some credibility with her own voters
• 20:17
  Speaker 1: on that. Uh, you know, she is a better shot
• 20:22
  Speaker 1: than most. Maybe a Dan Sullivan, I say, maybe, I
• 20:28
  Speaker 1: know he's not a real maga guy, and he does
• 20:32
  Speaker 1: have cover in Lisa Rakowski. But outside of those two guys,
• 20:38
  Speaker 1: excuse me one one gallowe guy there, I don't see.
• 20:42
  Speaker 1: I don't see a lot of Republicans that are gonna
• 20:45
  Speaker 1: successfully to be able to sort of distance themselves from
• 20:48
  Speaker 1: Trump too much, right, and they've all felt the need
• 20:52
  Speaker 1: that to get his endorsement in primaries and those endorsements.
• 20:56
  Speaker 1: I think, I think it's gonna be one of those things.
• 20:59
  Speaker 1: We saw this six and I saw it in fourteen.
• 21:04
  Speaker 1: It was a cookie cutter ad that both parties ran,
• 21:08
  Speaker 1: but it worked. And the cookie cutter ad was incumbent
• 21:12
  Speaker 1: senator or incumbent Congressman so and so voted with the
• 21:17
  Speaker 1: unpopular president ninety five percent of the time. And it
• 21:22
  Speaker 1: absolutely and it just pounded that over and over. It's
• 21:26
  Speaker 1: what worked in six It ended up working in o
• 21:29
  Speaker 1: eight for Democrats, it worked in ten for Republicans, it
• 21:33
  Speaker 1: worked in fourteen for Republicans, And this is gonna end
• 21:36
  Speaker 1: up working the same way, except it'll even be easier
• 21:42
  Speaker 1: with some of these folks, because you're gonna have Trump's
• 21:44
  Speaker 1: own words, right, He has these flowery, absurd tweets when
• 21:51
  Speaker 1: he endorses, and so it only makes it even that
• 21:54
  Speaker 1: much more memorable and sticky who he does. So look,
• 21:58
  Speaker 1: as you know, I think this is I think this
• 22:00
  Speaker 1: race to the bottom. And I will say this, I
• 22:02
  Speaker 1: want you know I'm not gonna you know, I've made
• 22:07
  Speaker 1: my point clear that I think this is a long
• 22:10
  Speaker 1: term mistake. I think this is going to hurt the
• 22:12
  Speaker 1: credibility of the Democratic Party going forward. I think that
• 22:18
  Speaker 1: for those of us that actually do want to fix
• 22:20
  Speaker 1: the frickin democracy, Like why I'm up here in Boston
• 22:23
  Speaker 1: today and we need to fix the infrastructure of democracy.
• 22:25
  Speaker 1: And I'm a believer, by the way, it doesn't this
• 22:28
  Speaker 1: isn't about good people or bad people getting better people
• 22:31
  Speaker 1: into office. We have to have better incentives, all right,
• 22:35
  Speaker 1: As I'm going to tow butcher Milton Friedman quote, But
• 22:39
  Speaker 1: as my friend Dave Konewski reminded me of that Milton
• 22:43
  Speaker 1: Friedman quote, and I've used it a few times. Bad
• 22:48
  Speaker 1: people will do good things if the incentives are aligned,
• 22:50
  Speaker 1: and good people will do bad things that the incentives
• 22:53
  Speaker 1: are misaligned. It is incentives that we have to change,
• 22:56
  Speaker 1: whether it's all party primaries, whether it's constitutional amendments, whether
• 23:01
  Speaker 1: it's full disclosure on money. We have no idea where
• 23:03
  Speaker 1: any of this money came from left or right in
• 23:06
  Speaker 1: the Virginia referendum. It is all dark money these days.
• 23:09
  Speaker 1: And and this is where I why I'm probably so
• 23:13
  Speaker 1: tough on the Democrats on this, because dark money is
• 23:16
  Speaker 1: another example of this.
• 23:17
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 23:18
  Speaker 1: The party is lamented dark money and lamented redistricting, and
• 23:23
  Speaker 1: they've essentially done it by saying, well, we don't like
• 23:26
  Speaker 1: to do this, but we're going to do it because
• 23:28
  Speaker 1: we can't tie one hand arm behind our back and
• 23:32
  Speaker 1: going up against the Republicans. I understand that mindset, I
• 23:38
  Speaker 1: understand the rationale, I understand the argument. And it may
• 23:42
  Speaker 1: be that that, you know, I have more faith in
• 23:45
  Speaker 1: the American voter than some other people do. You know
• 23:48
  Speaker 1: when I see some of this, you know it's about
• 23:51
  Speaker 1: time Democrats, you know, went up there and say fuck
• 23:54
  Speaker 1: around and find out. Okay, are you gonna are you
• 23:59
  Speaker 1: gonna govern fairly? Or are you going to jam shit
• 24:02
  Speaker 1: down everybody's throat, Because that's what the Right's been doing
• 24:06
  Speaker 1: and people don't like it. And I promise you they're
• 24:08
  Speaker 1: not going to like it. Emulating Donald Trump's campaign style,
• 24:15
  Speaker 1: emulating Donald Trump's governance is bad for America hard stop,
• 24:21
  Speaker 1: so be careful. You know, I don't think Democrats should
• 24:24
  Speaker 1: want to celebrate winning a race to the bottom. Now,
• 24:30
  Speaker 1: the upside of what could happen, Maybe cooler heads will
• 24:33
  Speaker 1: prevail and dumb ass Republicans won't try to keep jerry
• 24:37
  Speaker 1: mandering their way and keep trying to rig systems, and
• 24:40
  Speaker 1: then you know, maybe maybe this is mutual assured jerrymandering destruction.
• 24:46
  Speaker 1: And if that's what we have, that's what we have.
• 24:48
  Speaker 1: But you know who the losers are here, and this
• 24:50
  Speaker 1: is why I'm not you know, it's the losers are
• 24:55
  Speaker 1: communities that are just being blown to smithereens when it
• 24:59
  Speaker 1: comes to their resources. Right, Folks that live in southwest Virginia,
• 25:06
  Speaker 1: uh and and folks that live in the western part
• 25:08
  Speaker 1: of the state, all of a sudden, you know, have
• 25:11
  Speaker 1: have their congressional districts begin essentially at Arlington Cemetery or
• 25:20
  Speaker 1: at National Airport. I mean, it is ridiculous and it
• 25:23
  Speaker 1: is an insult to the founders of what we're doing
• 25:27
  Speaker 1: and that you know this is this is I'm not
• 25:29
  Speaker 1: picking on just Virginia here, this is the whole mess.
• 25:33
  Speaker 1: The losers are the American people. The losers are those
• 25:37
  Speaker 1: who aren't partisan warriors, not hard left or hard right,
• 25:42
  Speaker 1: those of us that are sort of looking for moderate
• 25:45
  Speaker 1: and temperament. Doesn't mean we're looking for centrist policies, by
• 25:48
  Speaker 1: the way, just moderate intemperament. That's what a majority of
• 25:53
  Speaker 1: this country wants. They don't you know, this is why
• 25:58
  Speaker 1: they keep rejecting both parties the second either one of
• 26:02
  Speaker 1: them gets power, all right, they don't want that. What
• 26:08
  Speaker 1: they want is an open debate and they want an
• 26:12
  Speaker 1: opportunity to see different things debated. Now, I'll say this,
• 26:16
  Speaker 1: Democrats do get credit for at least going to the
• 26:19
  Speaker 1: voters in California and Virginia. Texas never asked voter permission.
• 26:23
  Speaker 1: They just shoved it down people's throats. Florida actually violated
• 26:27
  Speaker 1: what the voters wanted and shoved it down their throats.
• 26:31
  Speaker 1: In twenty two, and we're going to see if they
• 26:33
  Speaker 1: do it again. Although I think they're going to get
• 26:34
  Speaker 1: cold feet. It's not that they don't want to do it.
• 26:38
  Speaker 1: I don't think they can come up with a map
• 26:39
  Speaker 1: that either meets constitutional grounds because again, it's in its
• 26:43
  Speaker 1: state constitution.
• 26:45
  Speaker 2: All right.
• 26:45
  Speaker 1: I'm going to read the exact amendments in Florida, and
• 26:48
  Speaker 1: this is why I think they're a not going to
• 26:50
  Speaker 1: be able to pull it off even if they try. Right,
• 26:54
  Speaker 1: it was Amendments five and six passed with over sixty
• 26:57
  Speaker 1: percent of the vote in Florida in twenty ten. Remember,
• 27:00
  Speaker 1: Florida puts this anti democratic hurdle on the constitutional amendments.
• 27:04
  Speaker 1: They of the threshold is not fifty percent, but it's
• 27:06
  Speaker 1: sixty percent because they didn't want the people to have
• 27:12
  Speaker 1: full say there. Look, I do think these sixty just
• 27:17
  Speaker 1: a quick aside. I think these sixty percent thresholds are
• 27:23
  Speaker 1: I understand the mindset of it. Hey, you don't want
• 27:25
  Speaker 1: to make it too easy to amend the constitution. Look,
• 27:27
  Speaker 1: instead of sixty percent thresholds, do what Nevada does. You
• 27:30
  Speaker 1: have to get fifty percent plus one and back to
• 27:32
  Speaker 1: back election cycles, you know, make it two bytes in
• 27:36
  Speaker 1: order to amend the Constitution. But raising the threshold to
• 27:39
  Speaker 1: sixty is arbitrary, It's sort of, It's not arbitrary, it's
• 27:44
  Speaker 1: like purpose. It's done purposely so to sort of just
• 27:49
  Speaker 1: because the majority party wants to control that situation better.
• 27:52
  Speaker 1: But anyway, let me read Amendments five and six of
• 27:55
  Speaker 1: how they passed. Maps cannot be drawn with the intent
• 28:00
  Speaker 1: to favor or disfavor a political party or an incumbent.
• 28:03
  Speaker 1: It's straightforward, that's what it says. They also cannot quote
• 28:06
  Speaker 1: diminish the ability of racial or language minorities to elect
• 28:10
  Speaker 1: representatives of their choice. And then the second part of
• 28:14
  Speaker 1: the amendments says districts must be compact, contiguous, and use
• 28:17
  Speaker 1: existing political geographical boundaries like city or county lines where feasible.
• 28:22
  Speaker 1: So the only feasible way Republicans can pick up seats
• 28:27
  Speaker 1: in Florida is to do what I think. I use
• 28:31
  Speaker 1: this language either in the of a live stream that
• 28:36
  Speaker 1: we did on Tuesday night or on Wednesday morning's podcast.
• 28:39
  Speaker 1: Forgive me for conflating the two, but essentially think of
• 28:43
  Speaker 1: it as a strip of bacon there in the South.
• 28:44
  Speaker 1: What they want to do is there's a handful of
• 28:48
  Speaker 1: Democratic districts w Washman, Schultz, Jared Moscowitz sort of that
• 28:52
  Speaker 1: are in Broward and some parts of Palm Beach, even
• 28:55
  Speaker 1: parts of Miami Day and they want to, like a
• 28:59
  Speaker 1: strip of bacon, go from the Atlantic Ocean to the
• 29:02
  Speaker 1: Gulf of Mexico, basically through Lake Okuchobe through the Everglades. Well,
• 29:09
  Speaker 1: let me ask you this, districts must be compact, contos,
• 29:12
  Speaker 1: contiguous and use existing political geographic boundaries. Trying to do
• 29:16
  Speaker 1: that wouldn't do that. So then they have to figure
• 29:19
  Speaker 1: out if there's any north south ways that they can
• 29:22
  Speaker 1: do this, and it just doesn't appear. That doesn't mean
• 29:27
  Speaker 1: they won't try and that that. But I have a
• 29:30
  Speaker 1: sense that you're going to have enough, right DeSantis has
• 29:34
  Speaker 1: already had, you know, because he's a lame duck governor.
• 29:39
  Speaker 1: This is his last year in office. You do have
• 29:43
  Speaker 1: Republicans in the legislature that are not necessarily ready to
• 29:49
  Speaker 1: just salute the flag right now. So I think this
• 29:53
  Speaker 1: is going to be a bit harder than they think.
• 29:56
  Speaker 1: But who knows, maybe Trump uh for essentially bullies them
• 30:02
  Speaker 1: into doing it, which may only do something that they regret,
• 30:07
  Speaker 1: which is actually energized an anti Trump plurality in Florida
• 30:12
  Speaker 1: that could turn into an anti Trump majority. All right,
• 30:16
  Speaker 1: I mean Florida Republicans are operating as if Florida is
• 30:21
  Speaker 1: Idaho and Florida ain't Idaho. All right. It may not
• 30:25
  Speaker 1: be what Florida was fifteen years ago, but it hasn't
• 30:28
  Speaker 1: gone that far right, and so they could be. They
• 30:34
  Speaker 1: could be playing with matches next to a gasnect. This
• 30:40
  Speaker 1: episode of the Chuck Podcast is brought to you by Soul.
• 30:44
  Speaker 1: So if you love that end of the day unwined
• 30:46
  Speaker 1: but hate the hangover, Soul's out of Office is for you.
• 30:50
  Speaker 1: These sparkling THHC drinks and gummies give you the same
• 30:53
  Speaker 1: relaxed social feeling without the alcohol, without the calories, and
• 30:57
  Speaker 1: without the crash. Soul is a well brand that believes
• 31:00
  Speaker 1: feeling good should be fun and easy. Soul specializes in
• 31:04
  Speaker 1: delicious hemp derived THHC and CBD products designed to boost
• 31:08
  Speaker 1: your mood and help you unwind. They're best selling. Out
• 31:12
  Speaker 1: of office gummies were designed to provide a mild, relaxing buzz,
• 31:15
  Speaker 1: boost your mood, and enhance creativity and relaxation. With five
• 31:19
  Speaker 1: different strengths, you can tailor the dose to fit your vibe.
• 31:22
  Speaker 1: SO also has a variety of products specifically designed to
• 31:25
  Speaker 1: help you get a better night's rest, including their top
• 31:28
  Speaker 1: selling Sleepy Gummies, a fan favorite for deep, restorous sleep. Look,
• 31:33
  Speaker 1: I have made no secret, I am a believer in
• 31:35
  Speaker 1: this stuff, in cannabis and hemp derived. I do not
• 31:38
  Speaker 1: partake in alcohol. For the most part. I think this
• 31:41
  Speaker 1: stuff is a lot safer than alcohol, a lot less
• 31:43
  Speaker 1: addictive than alcohol. And yes, I have to say I
• 31:46
  Speaker 1: love these drinks. It is the glass of wine and
• 31:49
  Speaker 1: you know, after work, that's what this is. So no
• 31:53
  Speaker 1: hangover and no excess calories like this. I'm a big fan.
• 31:57
  Speaker 1: So bring on the good vibes and treat yourself to
• 31:59
  Speaker 1: SO today. Right now, Soul is offering my audience thirty
• 32:02
  Speaker 1: percent off your entire order. Go to getsoul dot com
• 32:05
  Speaker 1: and use the word podcast that's getsol dot com promo
• 32:09
  Speaker 1: code podcast for thirty percent off. And yes, I too,
• 32:13
  Speaker 1: am a customer. All right, I want to pivot to
• 32:19
  Speaker 1: Irans is. It's interesting to see now if you've noticed,
• 32:23
  Speaker 1: there's now a lot of legacy media coverage going back
• 32:27
  Speaker 1: to the Iran nuclear deal that President Obama and John
• 32:30
  Speaker 1: Kerry negotiated because there's now a realization that the best
• 32:34
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump can hope for is some reanimation of the
• 32:39
  Speaker 1: nuclear deal that he tore up, one that, if you recall,
• 32:44
  Speaker 1: he tore up despite everybody arounding around him at the time,
• 32:48
  Speaker 1: Secretary Pompeo, Secretary Madis, everybody was telling him, don't do it.
• 32:52
  Speaker 1: Even they didn't like the deal, but don't do it.
• 32:55
  Speaker 1: Ripping it up was a bad idea. And now he's
• 32:57
  Speaker 1: got to figure out how to reconstitute it, and he's
• 32:59
  Speaker 1: going to end up handing them probably more cash in
• 33:03
  Speaker 1: order to get them to relinquish the straight of horm moves.
• 33:06
  Speaker 1: But what was interesting is Wall Street Journal editorial board
• 33:14
  Speaker 1: sort of unloaded on him and noted and there was
• 33:18
  Speaker 1: a great headline right, and it got his attention. The
• 33:21
  Speaker 1: Iranians take Trump for a sucker. They do. It was
• 33:25
  Speaker 1: essentially the point I was making when he extended the
• 33:29
  Speaker 1: seasfire right. He did it on his own. The Iranians
• 33:33
  Speaker 1: actually basically flipped him the middle finger, and he still
• 33:37
  Speaker 1: extended the seasfire right. So they know he desperately wants
• 33:41
  Speaker 1: a deal, and he wants one badly. And the journal
• 33:45
  Speaker 1: I think correctly in the editorial Patriot essentially ripped him
• 33:49
  Speaker 1: for this, right, I am what he has done with Iran.
• 33:53
  Speaker 1: I mean it is astonishing, right, he actually got involved
• 33:57
  Speaker 1: and made everything worse than somehow strengthened to run and
• 34:00
  Speaker 1: strengthened China. I do think eventually China is the one
• 34:03
  Speaker 1: that's going to get Aroanda back down and get to
• 34:05
  Speaker 1: the table and they'll get their new rand nuclear deal.
• 34:10
  Speaker 1: So I have some cautious optimism that I think I
• 34:15
  Speaker 1: know where this comes to an end, because it's clear
• 34:18
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump just absolutely is afraid. I have been quoting
• 34:25
  Speaker 1: Todd Young, who, in a interview with my friendly Ane
• 34:28
  Speaker 1: Caldwell at Puck used a fabulous metaphor, and you know
• 34:33
  Speaker 1: he was not in favor of going and bombing Iran, right,
• 34:36
  Speaker 1: he was one of those that thought it was a mistake.
• 34:39
  Speaker 1: But he's also one of those. And it's kind of
• 34:41
  Speaker 1: where I am on this. I'm uncomfortably in this position,
• 34:45
  Speaker 1: and I'll explain it in a minute, which is, you know,
• 34:47
  Speaker 1: it's a bad idea to try to grab a tiger
• 34:50
  Speaker 1: by its ears, but if you grab a tiger by
• 34:53
  Speaker 1: its ears, you know what a worse idea is letting go, right,
• 34:58
  Speaker 1: because the minute you let go, tiger's on top of you.
• 35:03
  Speaker 1: So and that's the situation he's in, right, he grabbed
• 35:07
  Speaker 1: the tiger by the ears with Iran, but he doesn't
• 35:11
  Speaker 1: have the guts to finish the job because what it
• 35:15
  Speaker 1: would take to finish the job is something that would
• 35:17
  Speaker 1: be extraordinarily unpopular. Would probably h e rode certainly are
• 35:27
  Speaker 1: it would it would it would be a it would
• 35:32
  Speaker 1: certainly make a rock uh seem like a little excursion
• 35:39
  Speaker 1: to use Donald Trump language, and it would certainly sort
• 35:44
  Speaker 1: of we I'd say it would weaken our standing in
• 35:46
  Speaker 1: the world, but Donald Trump has I don't know how
• 35:50
  Speaker 1: he could weaken our standing anymore than what he's done.
• 35:53
  Speaker 1: But I want to read his response because the fact
• 35:55
  Speaker 1: of the matter is the louder he squeals, the more
• 36:00
  Speaker 1: you know the criticism is correct. So I always want
• 36:05
  Speaker 1: to remind people of that. And then I'm going to
• 36:07
  Speaker 1: get to one other topic before we get to my interview.
• 36:10
  Speaker 1: So of course Donald Trump says the Wall Street Journal
• 36:12
  Speaker 1: has lost its way, and then he's got a lot
• 36:15
  Speaker 1: more to say, and he goes an idiot on the
• 36:17
  Speaker 1: Wall Street Journal's editorial board named Elliott Kaufman just wrote
• 36:20
  Speaker 1: an op ed entitled the Iranians take Trump for a sucker?
• 36:25
  Speaker 1: Yes they do, and he goes. Really for forty seven
• 36:28
  Speaker 1: years they have killed our people and many others, and
• 36:29
  Speaker 1: taken advantage of every president except me. And what did
• 36:32
  Speaker 1: I give to them? A country in tatters. Their entire
• 36:35
  Speaker 1: navy is at the bottom of the sea. Their air
• 36:36
  Speaker 1: force is gone, their anti aircraft and radars wiped out.
• 36:39
  Speaker 1: Their nuclear labs and storage areas were obliterated late one
• 36:42
  Speaker 1: dark June evening by our great B two bombers. Their
• 36:44
  Speaker 1: leaders are dead, all caps, including General Solomoni, their evil
• 36:49
  Speaker 1: genius who destroyed the lives of so many with his
• 36:51
  Speaker 1: favored roadside bombs. The straight offor moves is blockaded and
• 36:54
  Speaker 1: totally controlled by the US. Is it though okay? With
• 36:58
  Speaker 1: no ships allowed to go to any imports. It is
• 37:01
  Speaker 1: said that they are losing five hundred million dollars a
• 37:02
  Speaker 1: day because of this. Their country is an economic catastrophe
• 37:06
  Speaker 1: that is hanging on by a threat. Barack Hussein Obama
• 37:08
  Speaker 1: gave them one point seven billion dollars in green cash
• 37:11
  Speaker 1: flown in by a Boeing seven fifty seven to their
• 37:13
  Speaker 1: leaders and hundreds of billions of dollars in order to
• 37:16
  Speaker 1: help them on their way to a nuclear bomb. Other
• 37:18
  Speaker 1: presidents did nothing to stop them. A blight on the
• 37:20
  Speaker 1: office of the presidency. But despite all this, I have
• 37:23
  Speaker 1: a moron on the editorial board of the Wall Street
• 37:24
  Speaker 1: Journal writing about me being taken for a sucker. Ran
• 37:27
  Speaker 1: certainly doesn't think so. Oh really, I mean, it's it is.
• 37:35
  Speaker 1: It is amusing how clueless he is on this. But again,
• 37:40
  Speaker 1: I think he knows he made a gigantic mistake. I
• 37:45
  Speaker 1: don't know. I would sit here and say this will
• 37:47
  Speaker 1: this will define his presidency. No, it's not going to
• 37:49
  Speaker 1: define his presidency. His presidency's defined by the destruction of
• 37:54
  Speaker 1: the of the world order that he has done for us.
• 37:57
  Speaker 1: I mean, I have to say, I'm shaking my head
• 38:00
  Speaker 1: that the latest idea from Zelensky and Ukraine is to say, hey,
• 38:03
  Speaker 1: can we We'll call the don Bas region Donnie Land,
• 38:07
  Speaker 1: and maybe that'll make and name it after Trump and
• 38:10
  Speaker 1: that'll make him want to help Ukraine push back the
• 38:14
  Speaker 1: Russians from the Dnbas. Reason the reason I think a
• 38:17
  Speaker 1: that's I mean, first of all, you can't you can't
• 38:20
  Speaker 1: reward ridiculous behavior like has been done with Trump one
• 38:24
  Speaker 1: but two, don't forget Zelenski. Putin will always offer Trump more,
• 38:27
  Speaker 1: and Trump will always take that deal. So if you're
• 38:31
  Speaker 1: promising him Donnie Land, he'll probably promising promising him something else.
• 38:34
  Speaker 1: You know, maybe he'll give back certain tapes that some
• 38:38
  Speaker 1: people are afraid of. But I digress. But I read
• 38:45
  Speaker 1: that whole thing for you, because you know this is
• 38:49
  Speaker 1: where his head is at. Look, I've destroyed their navy.
• 38:52
  Speaker 1: It's so clear he doesn't understand the Iranians. Number one,
• 38:56
  Speaker 1: it's clear that they didn't really have a strategy for
• 38:59
  Speaker 1: what they were going to do. Because if they've all
• 39:01
  Speaker 1: this military success, it's not worked. Who controls the straight
• 39:07
  Speaker 1: of horror moves. If the United States controlled the straight
• 39:09
  Speaker 1: of horror moves, oil would be going through. But nothing's
• 39:12
  Speaker 1: going through. So he is he is. I guess he's
• 39:19
  Speaker 1: going to say, I'm not going to give him a
• 39:20
  Speaker 1: palette of cash. So I'm different than President Obama anyway.
• 39:27
  Speaker 1: I think we know where that's at it. I'm going
• 39:28
  Speaker 1: to hit one final point because I rarely like to
• 39:34
  Speaker 1: make too many comments about other journalists or other columnists
• 39:42
  Speaker 1: or podcasters or whatever you want to call us in
• 39:45
  Speaker 1: this independent space, because you know, a lot of times
• 39:51
  Speaker 1: there's a there's a huge chunk of folks that are
• 39:53
  Speaker 1: here that just want to hear their name said, just
• 39:56
  Speaker 1: are hopeful that you know, someone like me notices them
• 40:00
  Speaker 1: so they can somehow use it to game an algorithm.
• 40:02
  Speaker 1: So I'm I'm always a little hesitant to sort of overreact,
• 40:05
  Speaker 1: but I've I've had people in my life today, multiple
• 40:11
  Speaker 1: people's ask me what I make of this Tucker Carlson
• 40:16
  Speaker 1: Heel turn on Trump in this very public airing, in
• 40:23
  Speaker 1: this supposed apology, two folks for misleading Trump. So I
• 40:28
  Speaker 1: have two reactions to it. One is the reaction that
• 40:31
  Speaker 1: I've given you after Marjorie Taylor Green and everybody else,
• 40:33
  Speaker 1: that this is every single relationship Donald Trump has ever
• 40:38
  Speaker 1: had that it wasn't blood. And he's even had some
• 40:42
  Speaker 1: relationships and badly that were with relatives. But every single
• 40:49
  Speaker 1: professional relationship he has had has eventually ended like this,
• 40:55
  Speaker 1: where the person regrets some form of either supporting him,
• 41:01
  Speaker 1: doing business with him, working with them. Right the list.
• 41:05
  Speaker 1: You know, I could sit here, if I was just
• 41:07
  Speaker 1: running a scroll here, we'd need another thirty minutes of
• 41:09
  Speaker 1: this podcast monologue in order to list all the people
• 41:12
  Speaker 1: over the over the decades that have his expressed regret
• 41:17
  Speaker 1: for it. I mean he he abandons everybody eventually, even
• 41:20
  Speaker 1: his most important mentor, Roy Cone, you know, as Roy
• 41:26
  Speaker 1: Cone's response was, you know, Donald Trump pisses ice water,
• 41:30
  Speaker 1: meaning he's just a cold hearted, self centered sob, and
• 41:37
  Speaker 1: he will everybody gets eventually feels alienated by Donald Trump.
• 41:43
  Speaker 1: Right it is. The list is long, so that that's
• 41:46
  Speaker 1: one reaction I have to, you know, to to Tucker's
• 41:52
  Speaker 1: heel turn onness. There's another part of this why I'm
• 41:56
  Speaker 1: a little skeptical to really make a big deal out
• 41:59
  Speaker 1: of this. You know, I think I believe Marjorie Taylor
• 42:03
  Speaker 1: Green was guine as genuine in her disgust and why
• 42:06
  Speaker 1: she's walked from from him, not the movement, but him.
• 42:12
  Speaker 1: Tucker Carlson has never been I don't know what's a
• 42:16
  Speaker 1: genuine thought. He's an incredibly smart guy and there was
• 42:20
  Speaker 1: a time he was an incredibly fun dinner companion. Okay,
• 42:24
  Speaker 1: this is why there's sort of the Tucker Carlson why
• 42:27
  Speaker 1: so many in the sort of Washington ecosystem don't ignore
• 42:31
  Speaker 1: him because a lot of us have known him for
• 42:34
  Speaker 1: years but clearly we didn't know him, right, you know,
• 42:37
  Speaker 1: he just sort of was another frequent person that showed
• 42:41
  Speaker 1: up to some of these events that we were all
• 42:42
  Speaker 1: covering together. And we were all of a similar age
• 42:46
  Speaker 1: as we were rising up in the nineties, and all
• 42:48
  Speaker 1: of us sort of got, you know, those of us
• 42:50
  Speaker 1: that are still left caught a break early on with
• 42:53
  Speaker 1: various either new publications, the Internet and all this stuff.
• 42:56
  Speaker 1: So you know, we we have sort of common courage trajectoris.
• 43:01
  Speaker 1: So I think that's why there's also this extra layer
• 43:03
  Speaker 1: of interest or fascination into what, you know, what where
• 43:08
  Speaker 1: Tucker's Tucker's head is. But I'll tell you the other
• 43:11
  Speaker 1: reaction I had to this is that if it's about
• 43:14
  Speaker 1: is it's it's like, oh, well, the WWE has a
• 43:19
  Speaker 1: new world champion. You're like, oh, so the scriptwriters decided
• 43:21
  Speaker 1: to do that, right, this there's every chance that this
• 43:27
  Speaker 1: is sort of a WWE type of heel turn, right,
• 43:30
  Speaker 1: sort of a fake heel turn, and he wants to
• 43:32
  Speaker 1: do this, So I, like I said, I'm not. I
• 43:38
  Speaker 1: can't sit here and guarantee you that that what he's
• 43:45
  Speaker 1: doing is genuine because he's spent so much of his
• 43:49
  Speaker 1: professional life, contradicting himself for years, right, whether it's on
• 43:54
  Speaker 1: cable television, whether it was in his writing, whether it's
• 43:56
  Speaker 1: been in his political support on and off Donald Trump.
• 44:02
  Speaker 1: You know, the the fact that he was sort of
• 44:05
  Speaker 1: you could see that sort of the two face in
• 44:07
  Speaker 1: him during the dominion trial with all the lead texts
• 44:10
  Speaker 1: and sort of right, Tucker would think, would say one
• 44:13
  Speaker 1: thing off air and then say something different on air.
• 44:19
  Speaker 1: So again, like I said, it's possible that he now
• 44:23
  Speaker 1: is one of hundreds of people over the years that
• 44:28
  Speaker 1: have that at some point, really, you know, Trump finally
• 44:32
  Speaker 1: crosses the line for them that are I'm out. I can't.
• 44:34
  Speaker 1: I can't deal with it. You know, maybe it's because
• 44:36
  Speaker 1: Trump didn't pay a bill, maybe it's Trump insulted, or
• 44:39
  Speaker 1: maybe Trump you know, lie to you. Whatever it is,
• 44:42
  Speaker 1: that is not a shock to me, and so I
• 44:44
  Speaker 1: can't rule that out. But because of his history of
• 44:48
  Speaker 1: essentially saying whatever it takes to get an audience, whatever
• 44:52
  Speaker 1: it takes to make a buck, I'm gonna be honest
• 44:56
  Speaker 1: with you, I don't know how how seriously to take
• 44:59
  Speaker 1: to take what he says. And there's also one other
• 45:03
  Speaker 1: option that he might be up to maybe he's so
• 45:06
  Speaker 1: delusional he thinks he can be president. And this is
• 45:09
  Speaker 1: the beginning of And I do wonder, you know, the
• 45:13
  Speaker 1: if you're I do wonder if there will be space
• 45:17
  Speaker 1: for somebody to be an anti Trump MAGA candidate. I
• 45:23
  Speaker 1: don't know how big that constituency is. It may be
• 45:29
  Speaker 1: that quote unquote the MAGA influencers are anti Trump, but
• 45:31
  Speaker 1: the MAGA rank and file not so much. But that
• 45:37
  Speaker 1: would be a curiosity to me if somebody decides, And
• 45:40
  Speaker 1: it wouldn't surprise me if somebody essentially says, hey, I'm
• 45:43
  Speaker 1: I'm everything. I'm I'm a more honest version of what
• 45:48
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump tried to be. Maybe, but anyway, I just
• 45:53
  Speaker 1: I normally don't address so other like, you know, it's like, please,
• 45:57
  Speaker 1: I know, Megan Kelly's just trying to make a buck.
• 45:59
  Speaker 1: I have no idea what you stands for. I don't
• 46:00
  Speaker 1: think any of you do either, right, Like, there's just
• 46:03
  Speaker 1: never been a through line of principle or honesty there.
• 46:06
  Speaker 1: I feel that way about Tucker, you know. And there's
• 46:11
  Speaker 1: so I'm not interested in, you know, creating these like
• 46:16
  Speaker 1: podcast standoffs and all this stuff. I know it's supposedly
• 46:18
  Speaker 1: good for business, but that isn't that isn't why I'm
• 46:21
  Speaker 1: doing this. I'm trying to be a voice for the
• 46:24
  Speaker 1: rational majority here, right, we're the ones that have been
• 46:28
  Speaker 1: We're looking around here going I got jokers to the left,
• 46:30
  Speaker 1: clowns to the right, right, and here I am stuck
• 46:33
  Speaker 1: in the middle with all of them. So anyway, my
• 46:38
  Speaker 1: two cents there, So I'm gonna let's get to a break.
• 46:43
  Speaker 1: Like I said, I think this conversation with the two
• 46:46
  Speaker 1: lawyers leading the charge of civil litigation against the big
• 46:52
  Speaker 1: tech companies for their social media platforms, they're, like I said,
• 46:56
  Speaker 1: the case is not It's basically section two thirty proof,
• 47:01
  Speaker 1: because it is not about the content. It is about
• 47:06
  Speaker 1: the product that they intentionally made the product you know. Essentially,
• 47:12
  Speaker 1: you know, and when when we had you know what
• 47:15
  Speaker 1: what hung the tobacco companies, it was their own research, right,
• 47:19
  Speaker 1: Their own research indicated what they were up to. Well,
• 47:22
  Speaker 1: this is the same thing that happened in this trial, right. Essentially,
• 47:26
  Speaker 1: the plaintiffs were able to use Meta's own research, Google's
• 47:31
  Speaker 1: own research to make their case that it was that
• 47:36
  Speaker 1: this stuff was intentionally done to make the make the
• 47:41
  Speaker 1: platform more addictive, particularly for young people. So sneaking the
• 47:47
  Speaker 1: break and when we come back, Mark Lanier and Rahul
• 47:50
  Speaker 1: Robert Booty. This episode of the Chuck Podcast is brought
• 47:57
  Speaker 1: to you by Wild Grain. Wild Grain is the first
• 48:01
  Speaker 1: bake from frozen subscription box for sour dough breads, artisonal
• 48:06
  Speaker 1: pastries and fresh pastas, plus all the items conveniently baked
• 48:10
  Speaker 1: in twenty five minutes or less. Unlike many store brought options,
• 48:14
  Speaker 1: Wild Grain uses some simple ingredients you can pronounce and
• 48:17
  Speaker 1: a slow fermentation process that can be a lot easier
• 48:21
  Speaker 1: on your belly, little gut health there right, and richer
• 48:23
  Speaker 1: in nutrients anioxidants. There's also no preservatives and no shortcuts.
• 48:28
  Speaker 1: The Wild Grain boxes are fully customizable. In addition to
• 48:31
  Speaker 1: their variety box, they have a gluten free box, a
• 48:33
  Speaker 1: vegan box, and a new protein box. I will tell
• 48:37
  Speaker 1: you I have done the gluten free box. I have
• 48:40
  Speaker 1: done it a second time. I have also used the
• 48:43
  Speaker 1: code the todcast code. You use the promo code podcast
• 48:47
  Speaker 1: at checkout, you get thirty dollars off. I've already used
• 48:50
  Speaker 1: it as a gift to somebody else who loves this bread.
• 48:54
  Speaker 1: It is hard to find good gluten free bread. It
• 48:57
  Speaker 1: is fantastic. They give you step by step in struct
• 49:00
  Speaker 1: I really dig this. There is nothing like having an
• 49:04
  Speaker 1: artesion bakery in your freezer to chase away the winter chill.
• 49:07
  Speaker 1: Now is the best time to stay in and enjoy
• 49:10
  Speaker 1: some comforting homemade meals with Wildgrain. I obviously highly recommend it.
• 49:15
  Speaker 1: It is worth giving Wildgreen to try. Right now, Wildgrain
• 49:18
  Speaker 1: is offering my listeners thirty dollars off your first box
• 49:20
  Speaker 1: plus free croissants for life. Come on when you go
• 49:24
  Speaker 1: to wildgrain dot com slash podcast to start your subscription today.
• 49:28
  Speaker 1: That's thirty dollars off your first box and free croissants
• 49:32
  Speaker 1: for life when you visit wildgrain dot com, slash podcast,
• 49:35
  Speaker 1: or simply use the promo code podcast at checkout. This
• 49:39
  Speaker 1: is a sponsor I absolutely embrace, so use that code.
• 49:46
  Speaker 1: So in March, and as I talked about at the time,
• 49:51
  Speaker 1: we got two what could be landmark verdicts, the big
• 49:55
  Speaker 1: tech companies. One was in New Mexico and another was
• 49:59
  Speaker 1: in Los a Angelis. And the one in Los Angeles
• 50:01
  Speaker 1: got a lot of attention because this was the first
• 50:03
  Speaker 1: one that talked about that where the where, the where.
• 50:08
  Speaker 1: The lawsuit was about the product themselves, not the content
• 50:14
  Speaker 1: on social media platforms, but the actual social media platform itself.
• 50:20
  Speaker 1: So there was no hiding behind Section two thirty, which
• 50:23
  Speaker 1: is essentially all about you know, having no liability for
• 50:27
  Speaker 1: what's published on their platforms. But this was a lawsuit
• 50:31
  Speaker 1: where Meta lost because a jury found them essentially guilty
• 50:36
  Speaker 1: of creating an addictive platform. And many people have described
• 50:43
  Speaker 1: this really as the big Tobacco moment for social media.
• 50:47
  Speaker 1: This will be the first of many. This is this
• 50:49
  Speaker 1: is was considered a Bellweather case officially. So what this
• 50:53
  Speaker 1: means is that this, along with about seven or eight
• 50:57
  Speaker 1: other cases, once they're all decided, they will be used
• 51:01
  Speaker 1: to help decide thousands of other lawsuits that are potentially
• 51:05
  Speaker 1: brought against, whether it's Meta, Snap, TikTok, you name it there.
• 51:10
  Speaker 1: I'm sure I've butchered some of this. But to get
• 51:12
  Speaker 1: into some more details on this, I've got the two
• 51:15
  Speaker 1: lead attorneys from that ground baking decision in Los Angeles,
• 51:19
  Speaker 1: Mark Lanier and Rahul Ravaputi are joining me now to
• 51:24
  Speaker 1: just talk about the cases, talk about the cases are
• 51:27
  Speaker 1: going to be trying in the next few months, maybe years,
• 51:32
  Speaker 1: and find out how long is this going to take?
• 51:33
  Speaker 1: Right if you go back into the world of big tobacco,
• 51:37
  Speaker 1: these are lawsuits that started in the eighties. I guess
• 51:40
  Speaker 1: the first one maybe even started before that, but we
• 51:43
  Speaker 1: really didn't get the big settlement and the big regulation
• 51:45
  Speaker 1: that came to be when government finally responded until the nineties.
• 51:49
  Speaker 1: This stuff takes years, possibly decades. And so with that,
• 51:53
  Speaker 1: let me bring up my guests, Rahul Mark, good to
• 51:55
  Speaker 1: see you.
• 51:56
  Speaker 3: Good to see you too, Chuck. And I'll let Mark
• 51:59
  Speaker 3: to this, Ugh because Mark was lead trial counsel on
• 52:02
  Speaker 3: this and you're on the next one.
• 52:05
  Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, Well Mark, go ahead.
• 52:08
  Speaker 1: And look you heard my little mini intro there. I
• 52:10
  Speaker 1: just was trying to trying to set the table a
• 52:11
  Speaker 1: little bit, and I got the question is you know, look,
• 52:14
  Speaker 1: I've got my own you know, I uh, you know. Sometimes,
• 52:19
  Speaker 1: you know, why do we have civil litigation? Because government
• 52:22
  Speaker 1: can't always tackle everything, and sometimes government needs help identifying
• 52:27
  Speaker 1: things they should be regulating. And this is where I
• 52:30
  Speaker 1: think civil litigation comes in. And this is a we've
• 52:34
  Speaker 1: all been demanding some better accountability on big tech, and
• 52:37
  Speaker 1: sometimes you don't get it from government, you get it
• 52:39
  Speaker 1: from lawsuits.
• 52:40
  Speaker 2: Yeah, And I got to tell you you do not
• 52:42
  Speaker 2: fight the gargantchewan that is Meta and Google without a
• 52:48
  Speaker 2: substantial army. And so Raoul is nice to call me
• 52:51
  Speaker 2: lead counsel that that's that's a misnomer. That's maybe court language.
• 52:57
  Speaker 2: But the bottom line is is Raoul has been chasing
• 53:00
  Speaker 2: this forever. In a day, he let me do some
• 53:03
  Speaker 2: of the more fun stuff while he kind of helped
• 53:05
  Speaker 2: tell me how to do it. We had other lawyers there,
• 53:09
  Speaker 2: two of my daughters. We had probably thirty or forty
• 53:12
  Speaker 2: people in this fight. Because this, I think is one
• 53:17
  Speaker 2: of the most important cases that America will see for
• 53:21
  Speaker 2: the first fifty years of the twenty twenties or the
• 53:25
  Speaker 2: two thousands that we're in. This is the tip of
• 53:28
  Speaker 2: a spear. And Raoul can say it better than me
• 53:35
  Speaker 2: because he's been in it much longer than I have.
• 53:37
  Speaker 2: But it was a brutal war we were in.
• 53:41
  Speaker 1: Chuck, let me describe this one case because I'll tell
• 53:45
  Speaker 1: you why I have connected with it so much. My
• 53:47
  Speaker 1: daughter's twenty two, and in this case of yours, Kaylee,
• 53:50
  Speaker 1: who is with it's all the name that is going
• 53:52
  Speaker 1: to be referred to as she's twenty and I just
• 53:56
  Speaker 1: want to outline some things here because I'm gonna be
• 53:59
  Speaker 1: honest with on the other side of outlining it. So
• 54:02
  Speaker 1: Kaylee begins using YouTube at age six, begins using Instagram
• 54:04
  Speaker 1: at age nine. She had two hundred and eighty four
• 54:07
  Speaker 1: videos on YouTube that she had posted before. By the
• 54:10
  Speaker 1: end of her time in elementary school, I assume that's
• 54:12
  Speaker 1: fifth grade being designed here, she testified that she stopped
• 54:17
  Speaker 1: engaging with family. She began suffering anxiety and depression at
• 54:21
  Speaker 1: approximately age ten, was later clinically diagnosed for both developed
• 54:24
  Speaker 1: body dysmorphia. She attributed constant exposure to beauty filters and
• 54:29
  Speaker 1: social comparisons on Instagram. Reported suicidal tendencies as her struggles deepened. Look,
• 54:36
  Speaker 1: all all of us had had parents of young girls
• 54:39
  Speaker 1: the sort of height of the Instagram, the initial Instagram
• 54:41
  Speaker 1: boom and snap, and I'd watch it with my own daughter,
• 54:45
  Speaker 1: and look, we would intervene every once in a while,
• 54:47
  Speaker 1: get more involved, make sure she was distracted, and all
• 54:49
  Speaker 1: these things. So I've looked at this because I lived this, right.
• 54:53
  Speaker 1: I didn't live I thankfully didn't have a job this
• 54:57
  Speaker 1: addicted in either sense. But I live this because you
• 55:01
  Speaker 1: know where I'm going to go here next Mark, which
• 55:02
  Speaker 1: is this debate about. And I'm sure Meta in their pushback, said, hey,
• 55:08
  Speaker 1: you know, there should have been more parental involvement here,
• 55:12
  Speaker 1: So let me start there. I just described what it was.
• 55:15
  Speaker 1: How did you push back on the idea that this
• 55:18
  Speaker 1: was parental challenges not about Meta and Google.
• 55:25
  Speaker 2: I've decided there's not a parent on the planet who
• 55:27
  Speaker 2: has the wherewithal to stand up against these algorithms and
• 55:32
  Speaker 2: these powerful social media addiction platforms. There's just not. So
• 55:42
  Speaker 2: you take her mother for example, her mother would not
• 55:45
  Speaker 2: let her download Instagram on her phone, but Kaylee figured
• 55:49
  Speaker 2: out a way to do it anyway. Because all of
• 55:51
  Speaker 2: her classmates were on it, she wanted to fit in.
• 55:54
  Speaker 2: Her mother put time limits on her phone, but Kaylee
• 55:57
  Speaker 2: figured out a way around it locked her phone up
• 56:01
  Speaker 2: in the kitchen at night, but Kaylie would wait for
• 56:04
  Speaker 2: her mother to go to sleep and she would go
• 56:06
  Speaker 2: get the phone and she would get back on it.
• 56:10
  Speaker 2: There's not a parent in the world that can handle
• 56:14
  Speaker 2: and do this right. And the sad part is Meta
• 56:19
  Speaker 2: not only knew that, but they took advantage of it
• 56:21
  Speaker 2: because Meta did this study that showed that especially children
• 56:27
  Speaker 2: who come from homes that are broken, where the money's
• 56:31
  Speaker 2: not there where, the resources aren't there where.
• 56:34
  Speaker 1: The mayor's one parent, not two.
• 56:36
  Speaker 2: Single parent trying to work a job and raise three kids,
• 56:39
  Speaker 2: which was Kaylee's situation. The company Meta knew they were
• 56:45
  Speaker 2: more prone and likely to get addicted and to get
• 56:49
  Speaker 2: hurt by it.
• 56:50
  Speaker 3: The other thing about it, though, to add to what
• 56:53
  Speaker 3: Mark said, is when you're dealing with addiction and addiction
• 56:58
  Speaker 3: and children, it is an irreparable harm. And so there's
• 57:03
  Speaker 3: a rewiring of the brain that happens, and it happens
• 57:06
  Speaker 3: so much faster and with so much potency in a
• 57:10
  Speaker 3: child's brain than an adult's brain. And the internal research
• 57:16
  Speaker 3: that Meta did, they did studies and they found, hey,
• 57:21
  Speaker 3: once a kid's addicted, if a parent gets involved and
• 57:24
  Speaker 3: tries to intervene, it actually leads to more social media
• 57:29
  Speaker 3: use for that child. So there's no safety measures that
• 57:33
  Speaker 3: can be done once the child's addicted. There's no intervention
• 57:37
  Speaker 3: by the parents that can be done. The damage is
• 57:40
  Speaker 3: already done and it's too late. And that's some of
• 57:43
  Speaker 3: the stuff that lights were shined on the internal documents
• 57:47
  Speaker 3: in these cases to show what's really going on inside.
• 57:51
  Speaker 1: Let's talk about those because I mean these internal meta documents.
• 57:55
  Speaker 1: To me, are this is the I mean, this had
• 57:57
  Speaker 1: this was the gold as far as you're concerned, was like, hey,
• 58:01
  Speaker 1: don't trust our experts on this. This is not like
• 58:05
  Speaker 1: a case where you had to get your own expert
• 58:07
  Speaker 1: witnesses in your own expert analysis. You just had to say, hey,
• 58:12
  Speaker 1: here's what you did. Is this from all those leaks
• 58:15
  Speaker 1: over the last few years or was this due to
• 58:18
  Speaker 1: discovery that you were able to force them to show
• 58:21
  Speaker 1: this stuff?
• 58:22
  Speaker 3: This was discovery. The leaks helped us conduct more discovery,
• 58:28
  Speaker 3: got it to kind of pinpoints some issues. But all
• 58:31
  Speaker 3: of this was through countless, countless documents. And this was
• 58:37
  Speaker 3: a true in the technology era. You talk about finding
• 58:41
  Speaker 3: needles and haystacks, exponential on that.
• 58:46
  Speaker 1: So this is like finding out the tobacco companies found out,
• 58:48
  Speaker 1: you know, did studies noting that nicotine was addicted.
• 58:51
  Speaker 3: Exactly, except it's not just one study, it's dozens of studies.
• 58:55
  Speaker 3: It's hundreds of studies. And so when you talk about
• 58:58
  Speaker 3: the number of smoking guns that exist in this case
• 59:01
  Speaker 3: against meta YouTube, TikTok and snap, it's unbelievable. And what
• 59:07
  Speaker 3: it really showed was that these companies without any guardrails.
• 59:12
  Speaker 3: It's a race to the bottom. Whatever it is they
• 59:15
  Speaker 3: can do to maximize the attention economy and take the
• 59:20
  Speaker 3: largest market share. If a competitors doing something that's harmful
• 59:23
  Speaker 3: to kids, they'll do it, and they'll do it with
• 59:26
  Speaker 3: more potency, just so that they can maximize their market share.
• 59:31
  Speaker 2: Chuck the kids. If I can see what Raoul said,
• 59:35
  Speaker 2: he said the smoking guns, He's making a really astute
• 59:41
  Speaker 2: pun there, because these companies actually did have smoking guns
• 59:47
  Speaker 2: in this sense. The company said, you know, we're saying
• 59:52
  Speaker 2: publicly there's no addiction. We're saying publicly there's no problem.
• 59:55
  Speaker 2: We're saying publicly there's no harm, just like tobacco did
• 1:00:00
  Speaker 2: when internally our studies show that there are. And then
• 1:00:04
  Speaker 2: these documents say one day people are going to see
• 1:00:08
  Speaker 2: this and they're going to know we are big tobacco,
• 1:00:12
  Speaker 2: we are the tobacco companies. So they are truly smoking
• 1:00:16
  Speaker 2: guns that we found.
• 1:00:20
  Speaker 1: You had some leaks to you know, was there how
• 1:00:23
  Speaker 1: many times did you have to go back at meta
• 1:00:25
  Speaker 1: to say no, I think you have this surface this.
• 1:00:28
  Speaker 1: I mean, how did you have to pull it out
• 1:00:31
  Speaker 1: of them? Did they eventually just sort of like realize
• 1:00:34
  Speaker 1: that it's all going to leak if and it's worse
• 1:00:36
  Speaker 1: if it looks like they're hiding or what was your sense.
• 1:00:40
  Speaker 3: Well, everything's under probably the most onerous protective order. And
• 1:00:46
  Speaker 3: so these hundreds and thousands of documents that we have,
• 1:00:51
  Speaker 3: we've only been able to scratch the surface of showing
• 1:00:54
  Speaker 3: them in trials because of the limited time we have
• 1:00:57
  Speaker 3: for trial presentation. So there's so many more that are
• 1:01:02
  Speaker 3: going to see the light in these next sets of
• 1:01:04
  Speaker 3: bell Weather trials, which hopefully will will have a large
• 1:01:08
  Speaker 3: impact on how people act and how these social media
• 1:01:11
  Speaker 3: companies act. The whistleblowers are so unbelievably important because what
• 1:01:20
  Speaker 3: ends up happening is documents say one thing, and they're
• 1:01:23
  Speaker 3: crystal clear on what they say. Witnesses come in, they
• 1:01:27
  Speaker 3: try their best to whitewash it. But when you have
• 1:01:31
  Speaker 3: a former company employee, a high level person, somebody like
• 1:01:36
  Speaker 3: Arturo Behar, who was the probably the most knowledgeable safety
• 1:01:42
  Speaker 3: expert within Meta or within the tech industry as a whole,
• 1:01:46
  Speaker 3: coming out and calling out all of the internal practices
• 1:01:51
  Speaker 3: and really the mindset at Meta of profits at the
• 1:01:55
  Speaker 3: expense of child safety's that's something that has real impact.
• 1:02:02
  Speaker 1: You know, It's interesting. I think the hardest thing to
• 1:02:06
  Speaker 1: prove is addiction, especially if it's not an addiction that
• 1:02:12
  Speaker 1: we're okay, a drug addiction or an alcoholic alcohol addiction.
• 1:02:17
  Speaker 1: We kind of get that, and we're sort of we're
• 1:02:21
  Speaker 1: sort of accepting the premise that gambling can create an addiction,
• 1:02:26
  Speaker 1: and we're going to have that that that debate is starting,
• 1:02:29
  Speaker 1: and I think you know, the question is going to
• 1:02:32
  Speaker 1: be same thing. Right, there's predatory tactics that the that
• 1:02:35
  Speaker 1: the these sports gaming mobile things are using, et cetera.
• 1:02:41
  Speaker 1: What is the definition of addiction you guys used in
• 1:02:44
  Speaker 1: this trial.
• 1:02:47
  Speaker 2: Well, we put on the stand the doctor that I
• 1:02:51
  Speaker 2: considered the greatest expert in the land on addiction. She
• 1:02:56
  Speaker 2: heads up the clinic, the section on adiction at Stanford
• 1:03:00
  Speaker 2: Medical School names doctor Anna Limke. She wrote Dopamine Nation
• 1:03:05
  Speaker 2: bestseller Addiction, and she uses what she called the four seas.
• 1:03:10
  Speaker 2: But what it really boils down to is this is
• 1:03:15
  Speaker 2: someone compulsively using something where they cannot stop using it,
• 1:03:21
  Speaker 2: even when it's to the detriment of their health or
• 1:03:26
  Speaker 2: their relationships. You've got to have those elements in some
• 1:03:31
  Speaker 2: way that you define them. Someone cannot stop using something
• 1:03:37
  Speaker 2: even when it's destroying them their health or their relationships.
• 1:03:43
  Speaker 2: And that's an addiction.
• 1:03:48
  Speaker 1: What could you feel like you could point to mask this,
• 1:03:52
  Speaker 1: were you able to prove that they actually Instagram at
• 1:03:56
  Speaker 1: times made things more addicted, not do without a.
• 1:04:01
  Speaker 2: Doubt, without a doubt. And Raoul may have better insight
• 1:04:04
  Speaker 2: on this than me. But the things that I thought
• 1:04:07
  Speaker 2: really stuck out to the jurors, or the fact that
• 1:04:10
  Speaker 2: they developed these features like endless scroll, and they have
• 1:04:17
  Speaker 2: features here in the US that they don't have overseas,
• 1:04:21
  Speaker 2: so they'll ignore the age of the user. They will
• 1:04:26
  Speaker 2: sometimes not even ask for the age. YouTube you can
• 1:04:29
  Speaker 2: get on YouTube Maine and never be asked what your
• 1:04:31
  Speaker 2: age is. You can do those shorts until you've gone
• 1:04:36
  Speaker 2: through them all, which we showed would take something on
• 1:04:39
  Speaker 2: the order of three hundred and sixty eight years of
• 1:04:42
  Speaker 2: twenty four hours a day, and still you wouldn't get
• 1:04:46
  Speaker 2: through it all because they're adding millions a day. So
• 1:04:50
  Speaker 2: they put an endless scroll, they put auto play where
• 1:04:53
  Speaker 2: it plays automatically. They put a finger swipe because it's
• 1:04:58
  Speaker 2: like a slot machine where you do something physical and
• 1:05:01
  Speaker 2: you get a change. They use slot machine science. They
• 1:05:04
  Speaker 2: sculpted the algorithm to trap you to be sticky. They
• 1:05:10
  Speaker 2: set any of the features that might stop addiction into
• 1:05:15
  Speaker 2: a mode where no one can access them reasonably.
• 1:05:20
  Speaker 1: So you need an example of it.
• 1:05:22
  Speaker 2: Okay, so you've got a chance to turn off an
• 1:05:26
  Speaker 2: endless scroll feature or where after thirty minutes it'll say
• 1:05:30
  Speaker 2: you've been doing this thirty minutes, there're sure you want
• 1:05:32
  Speaker 2: to do it. Nobody even knows that feature exists. You've
• 1:05:35
  Speaker 2: got to go navigate all of this stuff to even
• 1:05:38
  Speaker 2: find it because they don't want you to put it
• 1:05:42
  Speaker 2: into place. Remember, they only make money the longer time
• 1:05:46
  Speaker 2: you spend on it. The more time you spend, the
• 1:05:49
  Speaker 2: more money they make, So they want you. They're an
• 1:05:54
  Speaker 2: early YouTube document said, quote, our goal is not view worship,
• 1:06:01
  Speaker 2: it's addiction. Close quote to.
• 1:06:06
  Speaker 3: Think about this, Chuck, And what Mark said is so
• 1:06:09
  Speaker 3: on point, because why do you have to search for
• 1:06:13
  Speaker 3: a safety feature? And why do you have to search
• 1:06:16
  Speaker 3: hard for it? And this was a I think a
• 1:06:19
  Speaker 3: pivotal moment in the trial. Mark asked a witness, can
• 1:06:23
  Speaker 3: we just get real for a second, When is an
• 1:06:26
  Speaker 3: addict going to look for a safety feature so that
• 1:06:31
  Speaker 3: they can use the product less? So they get you,
• 1:06:35
  Speaker 3: they get these kids addicted, and then they put this
• 1:06:38
  Speaker 3: you know, safety feature out there that's unfindable that say, look,
• 1:06:43
  Speaker 3: we're a safe company, and it really kind of shined
• 1:06:47
  Speaker 3: a light on who these folks are. But going back
• 1:06:50
  Speaker 3: to some of the things and the proof, let me
• 1:06:53
  Speaker 3: just read from you a document from Meta's well Being department,
• 1:06:57
  Speaker 3: which doesn't exist anymore. Product features that are designed to
• 1:07:02
  Speaker 3: exploit insecurity or provide a dopamine rush, likes notifications, the
• 1:07:09
  Speaker 3: pull down to see the infinite scroll, etc. To increase
• 1:07:15
  Speaker 3: time spent are inherently at odds with well being and
• 1:07:20
  Speaker 3: take away from people's ability to consciously focus on activities
• 1:07:24
  Speaker 3: that add value to their lives. That's their internal document
• 1:07:29
  Speaker 3: talking about all of these design features, and they describe
• 1:07:33
  Speaker 3: them in two different ways. They call them addictive like
• 1:07:37
  Speaker 3: designs and dark patterns. Dark patterns are those things that
• 1:07:42
  Speaker 3: just manipulate you into doing something you don't even want
• 1:07:45
  Speaker 3: to do. Like if a kid is steps off of
• 1:07:49
  Speaker 3: Meta and Instagram for a bit it's nighttime, and then
• 1:07:53
  Speaker 3: all of a sudden their phone lights up and with
• 1:07:56
  Speaker 3: a notification that's meaningless. Hey, somebody wants to be your friend,
• 1:08:00
  Speaker 3: and why do you need that notification at one in
• 1:08:02
  Speaker 3: the morning. Well, once that notification comes, a user then
• 1:08:07
  Speaker 3: goes back onto the app, and then they start using
• 1:08:10
  Speaker 3: it more for Instead of like ten seconds, now they're
• 1:08:13
  Speaker 3: thirty minutes to an hour, and the sleep deprivation comes.
• 1:08:17
  Speaker 3: So an internal document that was used in the trial
• 1:08:20
  Speaker 3: showed a ven diagram and the dark patterns and the
• 1:08:26
  Speaker 3: addictive like designs include auto play and list roll and
• 1:08:31
  Speaker 3: all of these notifications. These are their documents talking about it.
• 1:08:44
  Speaker 1: Well, I was at a neighbor party, just an outdoor
• 1:08:48
  Speaker 1: it's crawfish boiled on my neighbor flows all the time,
• 1:08:51
  Speaker 1: and I was talking to his father in law, who
• 1:08:54
  Speaker 1: I've become friendly with over the years, and he said,
• 1:08:58
  Speaker 1: you know, I got to stop watching YouTube at night.
• 1:09:00
  Speaker 1: He goes, I end up, and this is he's in
• 1:09:03
  Speaker 1: his late seventies, early eighties, and he's he goes, all
• 1:09:06
  Speaker 1: of a sudden, I'll like about nine point thirty started
• 1:09:09
  Speaker 1: using YouTube. I look up and it's one in the morning,
• 1:09:11
  Speaker 1: and he goes and suddenly I'm like not getting enough sleep.
• 1:09:14
  Speaker 1: And he goes, and I don't feel right. And this
• 1:09:16
  Speaker 1: is somebody in there, right, and he's self aware, and
• 1:09:20
  Speaker 1: yet he said, he can't bring himself to turn it off.
• 1:09:24
  Speaker 1: And like I said, fully formed human being here.
• 1:09:27
  Speaker 2: So Chuck, that is such a great example because we
• 1:09:33
  Speaker 2: had on the stand a fellow named Christos Goodro, who
• 1:09:37
  Speaker 2: is one of the principal architects behind that algorithm for
• 1:09:41
  Speaker 2: YouTube that sucks people in like this. And if it's
• 1:09:46
  Speaker 2: an adult, it's an adult. But when children who don't
• 1:09:51
  Speaker 2: have their brain fully developed to understand consequences get onto this,
• 1:09:56
  Speaker 2: it's even worse because those children who get robbed of
• 1:09:59
  Speaker 2: sl now have deficient school performance, They don't learn. As
• 1:10:06
  Speaker 2: Raoul has said, it totally changes their life trajectory. It
• 1:10:12
  Speaker 2: rewires their brain. Now here's the sad part. Christus Goodrow,
• 1:10:16
  Speaker 2: who authored that algorithm in a sense, was asked, can't
• 1:10:22
  Speaker 2: we change some of this for kids? We can get
• 1:10:25
  Speaker 2: an extra nine thousand hours of sleep for kids just
• 1:10:29
  Speaker 2: in California alone if we would just make this little alteration.
• 1:10:36
  Speaker 2: And his answer was that we're not going to do that.
• 1:10:39
  Speaker 2: We're not going to do that. I mean, he's faced
• 1:10:41
  Speaker 2: with vulnerable children can get nine thousand hours more sleep
• 1:10:46
  Speaker 2: if you'll make this small tweak and he refuses to
• 1:10:50
  Speaker 2: do it.
• 1:10:51
  Speaker 3: And then just on the mindset of Christoscuodro. In particular,
• 1:10:56
  Speaker 3: he was quoted as saying, it would be great if
• 1:11:00
  Speaker 3: my kids were on YouTube five to seven hours a day.
• 1:11:05
  Speaker 3: And so when you have the lead architect of YouTube
• 1:11:08
  Speaker 3: with that mindset, you know what's going to happen. Bad
• 1:11:12
  Speaker 3: things are going to happen.
• 1:11:15
  Speaker 1: To two things happen in your case, guys, and this
• 1:11:19
  Speaker 1: first one, TikTok and snap settled. How no, I mean
• 1:11:28
  Speaker 1: the jury knows this. I mean in some ways that
• 1:11:31
  Speaker 1: settlement got you the guilty verdict on meta and YouTube
• 1:11:35
  Speaker 1: and medaan Google. I mean, if you're met at Google,
• 1:11:38
  Speaker 1: you're probably like, well, thanks for settling, because now you've
• 1:11:40
  Speaker 1: made it easier. I mean, am I just am I
• 1:11:43
  Speaker 1: being too simple minded about this?
• 1:11:46
  Speaker 2: I don't think you're being too simple minded? And I'd
• 1:11:48
  Speaker 2: love to get ra Rul's inside into this. But I
• 1:11:51
  Speaker 2: will say it's a multifaceted diamond because I think it
• 1:11:56
  Speaker 2: also allows the jury to say, well, we don't need
• 1:11:58
  Speaker 2: to give all of the damages because they've already gotten
• 1:12:01
  Speaker 2: some money.
• 1:12:02
  Speaker 1: Oh.
• 1:12:02
  Speaker 2: It just also allows the jury to say, wait a minute,
• 1:12:06
  Speaker 2: maybe this is Snapchat and TikTok's fault because we do
• 1:12:10
  Speaker 2: see she spend a lot of time on those How
• 1:12:13
  Speaker 2: on earth are you going to say it's the fault
• 1:12:15
  Speaker 2: of Meta or.
• 1:12:17
  Speaker 1: It could have you think it could have cut both ways.
• 1:12:20
  Speaker 2: Yeah, it scares us. We'd rather them not know that,
• 1:12:25
  Speaker 2: but it was such news that they knew it.
• 1:12:29
  Speaker 1: I guess I just think juries aren't going to distinguish
• 1:12:31
  Speaker 1: between the four between those four entities the way.
• 1:12:34
  Speaker 2: You both think.
• 1:12:35
  Speaker 3: But maybe you know on that check. I don't disagree
• 1:12:37
  Speaker 3: with you in the sense that if the jury got
• 1:12:40
  Speaker 3: to see the evidence as to all four defendants, it's indistinguishable.
• 1:12:46
  Speaker 3: But one of the things in the trial, and we
• 1:12:50
  Speaker 3: don't know how it would play out and if it
• 1:12:52
  Speaker 3: would play out differently. But Meta and YouTube they were
• 1:12:57
  Speaker 3: not blaming Snap or TikTok, and I think if they did,
• 1:13:02
  Speaker 3: that would be an admission of guilt on their part. Right,
• 1:13:06
  Speaker 3: So they took the calculated decision of saying, we're just
• 1:13:10
  Speaker 3: going to try and get people to believe that these
• 1:13:14
  Speaker 3: platforms are safe as designed, which is a very hard
• 1:13:18
  Speaker 3: lift on their part.
• 1:13:19
  Speaker 1: How much discovery did you get out of TikTok and
• 1:13:23
  Speaker 1: Snap before they settled? It was part of their motivation
• 1:13:26
  Speaker 1: to settle not to produce some documents.
• 1:13:28
  Speaker 3: The litigation has been going for over three and a
• 1:13:31
  Speaker 3: half years, so at the time of the first Bellweather trial,
• 1:13:36
  Speaker 3: all of the discovery has been completed against all four defendants.
• 1:13:40
  Speaker 1: You have abbat and they just settled in this case,
• 1:13:43
  Speaker 1: or are they settling all cases just in this case? Okay,
• 1:13:50
  Speaker 1: could you use any of the TikTok or snap in
• 1:13:54
  Speaker 1: this or you could have the discovery in there or
• 1:13:57
  Speaker 1: in this case because they settled, you had to keep
• 1:13:59
  Speaker 1: it just about meta and Google.
• 1:14:03
  Speaker 3: That's corrected, just about meta in Google.
• 1:14:08
  Speaker 1: I want to get to something that Google's attorney said
• 1:14:12
  Speaker 1: after the fact, which is interesting. A Google spokesperson stated
• 1:14:18
  Speaker 1: post verdict, this case misunderstands YouTube, which is responsibly built
• 1:14:23
  Speaker 1: streaming platform, not a social media site. So well, hey, look,
• 1:14:32
  Speaker 1: you know this is the old divide and conquer strategy
• 1:14:35
  Speaker 1: right potentially, but Google's basically and this is sort of
• 1:14:41
  Speaker 1: I think of Google as a friend of mine was
• 1:14:44
  Speaker 1: active and been involved as here a club for decades,
• 1:14:49
  Speaker 1: and he used to describe BP as sort of the
• 1:14:53
  Speaker 1: oil company that apologizes for being an oil company, like
• 1:14:57
  Speaker 1: they always like want to be the ones that like,
• 1:14:58
  Speaker 1: we care about climate chain me. All this stuff Google
• 1:15:02
  Speaker 1: strikes me is that they don't like to be the
• 1:15:03
  Speaker 1: bad guy. They always are looking and if you told
• 1:15:06
  Speaker 1: me Google was going to try to find a way
• 1:15:08
  Speaker 1: to like, hey, we don't want to be lumped in
• 1:15:10
  Speaker 1: with Instagram and TikTok and snap and maybe they end
• 1:15:19
  Speaker 1: up pulling away and changing some of their behaviors sooner
• 1:15:24
  Speaker 1: than others. Are you getting a hint of that with
• 1:15:27
  Speaker 1: these next trials that are coming.
• 1:15:28
  Speaker 2: Up or not? I don't think so. And I'll say
• 1:15:30
  Speaker 2: this that reminds me of an Italian restaurant saying, hey,
• 1:15:37
  Speaker 2: we serve pizza. You misunderstood it. We're a pizzeria. Well,
• 1:15:43
  Speaker 2: but for the fact you also have salads, you also
• 1:15:46
  Speaker 2: have pasta, you also have tiramissu, you also have you know,
• 1:15:50
  Speaker 2: a complete Italian menu. So no, we're not going to
• 1:15:54
  Speaker 2: just focus on the pizza you serve. Do they have
• 1:15:57
  Speaker 2: a video streaming service, Yes, but they also have shorts.
• 1:16:01
  Speaker 2: They also have all sorts of recommendations. They have lights,
• 1:16:05
  Speaker 2: they have comments, they have dislikes, they send out notifications,
• 1:16:09
  Speaker 2: they have endless role they have auto play. They're not Netflix.
• 1:16:15
  Speaker 1: Interesting. And the thing Netflix is not a social media
• 1:16:19
  Speaker 1: site in your and they don't qualify for this, right.
• 1:16:23
  Speaker 3: And the thing that drives me crazy about YouTube in
• 1:16:26
  Speaker 3: particular is what that representative said, is there forward facing misrepresentation,
• 1:16:35
  Speaker 3: and it's what I believe got them into the schools.
• 1:16:39
  Speaker 3: They inject themselves into the schools, and now kid that
• 1:16:42
  Speaker 3: really young ages are getting exposed to screens and YouTube
• 1:16:48
  Speaker 3: and YouTube, which then leads to exposure to the other
• 1:16:52
  Speaker 3: social media apps. And what they started as and what
• 1:16:57
  Speaker 3: they've become with the algorithm and infinite scroll is they
• 1:17:02
  Speaker 3: become everybody else. So they wedged themselves in early on
• 1:17:05
  Speaker 3: with kids under a false premise, and now their.
• 1:17:08
  Speaker 1: Candy cigarettes huh, except that.
• 1:17:11
  Speaker 3: They are and then the candy box became cigarette nicotine
• 1:17:15
  Speaker 3: in there too, so.
• 1:17:16
  Speaker 1: Right right, yeah, well I only look, I hear where
• 1:17:21
  Speaker 1: you guys are coming from, and I don't disagree on
• 1:17:23
  Speaker 1: how you're describing it, But going forward, what does that
• 1:17:28
  Speaker 1: tell you that they're going out they're like, hey, hey, hey,
• 1:17:31
  Speaker 1: don't call us a social media side. It's almost like,
• 1:17:33
  Speaker 1: hey man, we don't want to be we don't want
• 1:17:35
  Speaker 1: to be labeled that, Like that's terrible.
• 1:17:38
  Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, it is.
• 1:17:40
  Speaker 1: A It is sort of saying we're not guilty, but
• 1:17:43
  Speaker 1: maybe they are, and you can go after Mata and
• 1:17:45
  Speaker 1: you can go out. Please go for it, be my guest.
• 1:17:48
  Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah. The side joke that was running with the
• 1:17:52
  Speaker 2: lawyer for YouTube in this case is he was trying
• 1:17:57
  Speaker 2: so hard to say that they were not social media.
• 1:18:00
  Speaker 2: He was calling himself YouTube instead of YouTube, and that
• 1:18:05
  Speaker 2: did not work. And the reason it did not work
• 1:18:08
  Speaker 2: is because there are exhaustive documents from Google and YouTube
• 1:18:14
  Speaker 2: files that call them social media, that refer to them
• 1:18:18
  Speaker 2: as social media, that speak of their social media platform,
• 1:18:24
  Speaker 2: their app. They are social media. You know, I can
• 1:18:29
  Speaker 2: tell you that I'm not a human being, that I'm
• 1:18:31
  Speaker 2: actually a duck, but you're looking and I've got a
• 1:18:36
  Speaker 2: birth certificate and I've got you know, I'm a mammal.
• 1:18:41
  Speaker 2: I mean, they can say all they want to say,
• 1:18:44
  Speaker 2: but the truth is the truth.
• 1:18:47
  Speaker 3: Yeah, I'm just from another YouTube document. This is the vision.
• 1:18:52
  Speaker 3: We aspire to create an app that is addictive. And
• 1:18:57
  Speaker 3: so you know, you look at these documents and you
• 1:18:59
  Speaker 3: look at what their their true aspiration is and they
• 1:19:04
  Speaker 3: they can't hide from it, and none of these social
• 1:19:06
  Speaker 3: media companies can. And then it just begs the question,
• 1:19:09
  Speaker 3: like what's in a name anyways? You know, it's it's
• 1:19:13
  Speaker 3: it's obviously a bad moniker to have to be called
• 1:19:16
  Speaker 3: a social media company, but you can't hide from it
• 1:19:19
  Speaker 3: by calling yourself something else.
• 1:19:23
  Speaker 1: Mark, What was what? What did you? Uh? How was
• 1:19:25
  Speaker 1: your experience cross examining Mark Zuckerberg? Were you nervous? Were
• 1:19:30
  Speaker 1: you what? Were you just like chomp chomping at the bed? Like?
• 1:19:33
  Speaker 1: What was your mindset going into it?
• 1:19:35
  Speaker 3: Yeah?
• 1:19:35
  Speaker 2: I found him rather wooden. You know, he's had media
• 1:19:40
  Speaker 2: training for hundreds of hours before he testified. He had,
• 1:19:45
  Speaker 2: you know, probably hundreds of hours with his lawyers getting
• 1:19:48
  Speaker 2: him ready, which really calls out the cross examination question.
• 1:19:52
  Speaker 2: How many hours of media training do you need to
• 1:19:55
  Speaker 2: tell the truth? I mean, do you get fifty seven
• 1:20:00
  Speaker 2: twenty five hours of media training before you.
• 1:20:02
  Speaker 1: Tell you were such a great? When did you stop
• 1:20:05
  Speaker 1: beating your wife? Question?
• 1:20:06
  Speaker 2: Yeah?
• 1:20:07
  Speaker 1: How many hours of media training doesn't take to tell
• 1:20:09
  Speaker 1: the truth? You know, you're like, there's no answer to
• 1:20:12
  Speaker 1: that question, thanks a lot.
• 1:20:14
  Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, so it just you know, you don't need
• 1:20:19
  Speaker 2: media training to tell your kid don't forget your backpack
• 1:20:21
  Speaker 2: on the way to school. You know, all we need
• 1:20:25
  Speaker 2: is the truth, and I found that he was prepared
• 1:20:29
  Speaker 2: for certain questions. What were they?
• 1:20:33
  Speaker 1: What did you feel like he was most prepared for,
• 1:20:35
  Speaker 1: and what were you surprised he wasn't prepared or do
• 1:20:39
  Speaker 1: you not want.
• 1:20:39
  Speaker 2: To No, no, no, I'm fine saying it. He was
• 1:20:44
  Speaker 2: clearly prepared for how wealthy he is, because he volunteered
• 1:20:49
  Speaker 2: an answer that said, you know, but we've set up
• 1:20:52
  Speaker 2: a corporation to give money to so that it can
• 1:20:55
  Speaker 2: cure cancer. So we're just really here to cure cancer.
• 1:21:00
  Speaker 2: But what he couldn't do is he couldn't, you know,
• 1:21:05
  Speaker 2: for a guy who's supposed to be one of the
• 1:21:06
  Speaker 2: smartest in the world, and certainly in his mind maybe
• 1:21:09
  Speaker 2: the smartest in the courtroom, he couldn't handle the unusual
• 1:21:12
  Speaker 2: questions like this, mister Zuckerberg, would you agree with me?
• 1:21:16
  Speaker 2: There are vulnerable children in the world who don't come
• 1:21:19
  Speaker 2: from the best homes, whose parents aren't on the top
• 1:21:21
  Speaker 2: of their game, who don't have all the money, who
• 1:21:23
  Speaker 2: may have a learning disability, who may not be social misfits.
• 1:21:27
  Speaker 2: Those vulnerable children are in the world right right. They're
• 1:21:30
  Speaker 2: in America, right right, They're in California, right right, They're
• 1:21:34
  Speaker 2: in our neighborhoods, right right, And then I said, it
• 1:21:37
  Speaker 2: seems to me there are three ways we can approach
• 1:21:40
  Speaker 2: those vulnerable children. One, ignore them outside, out of mind
• 1:21:45
  Speaker 2: not not problem too. We can help them. We can
• 1:21:50
  Speaker 2: volunteer at the temples, the churches, the synagogues, the school groups,
• 1:21:55
  Speaker 2: big brother, big sister, library reading programs. We can go
• 1:21:59
  Speaker 2: out of our way to help the vulnerable children. Fair, fair,
• 1:22:03
  Speaker 2: I said, but there's a third option. We can look
• 1:22:06
  Speaker 2: at those vulnerable children and see a dollar sign on
• 1:22:09
  Speaker 2: their back if we trample on them. We can enrich
• 1:22:12
  Speaker 2: ourselves upon them. We can pray upon them to feed
• 1:22:16
  Speaker 2: our bank accounts. Now, why didn't Meta choose option three?
• 1:22:21
  Speaker 2: And his reaction is, you know, was oh, I don't
• 1:22:24
  Speaker 2: think we did. And I said, well that's why we've
• 1:22:27
  Speaker 2: got these documents. Now let's look at them and see
• 1:22:29
  Speaker 2: if you didn't do that. And so we started with
• 1:22:31
  Speaker 2: the documents.
• 1:22:33
  Speaker 1: So well, Bell Weather case, not everybody understands what this means. So,
• 1:22:39
  Speaker 1: you know, let me just paint the picture. There's a
• 1:22:41
  Speaker 1: ton of people filed lawsuits against the big tech companies
• 1:22:44
  Speaker 1: on some form of this, right, what is there some
• 1:22:46
  Speaker 1: twenty three hundred cases?
• 1:22:47
  Speaker 3: A little over three thousand.
• 1:22:49
  Speaker 1: Now we're over three thousand cases. So what has happened
• 1:22:54
  Speaker 1: that put it into a situation where there's a quote
• 1:22:57
  Speaker 1: bell Weather, So there's three thousand cases, they're not going
• 1:22:59
  Speaker 1: to hear all three cases? Correct?
• 1:23:01
  Speaker 3: Well, I would like to believe that. But the way
• 1:23:06
  Speaker 3: the way the court system is set up here in California,
• 1:23:10
  Speaker 3: thousands of cases are filed. They all end up in
• 1:23:13
  Speaker 3: front of one courtroom, in front of one judge, and
• 1:23:17
  Speaker 3: that judge is Carolyn Cole here in the Los Angeles
• 1:23:19
  Speaker 3: Superior Court, and she needs to manage these thousands of
• 1:23:23
  Speaker 3: cases and try to get them in a position of
• 1:23:27
  Speaker 3: efficiently getting tried, resolved whatever right. And the way that
• 1:23:34
  Speaker 3: she wanted to do that is through a Bellweather trial process.
• 1:23:38
  Speaker 3: So while all the discovery, depositions, documents are being produced,
• 1:23:43
  Speaker 3: on the other side of it, there's hundreds, if not thousands,
• 1:23:47
  Speaker 3: of plaintiffs with data they're called plaintiffact sheets that are
• 1:23:50
  Speaker 3: provided so that the judge and the parties can look
• 1:23:54
  Speaker 3: and go what are the similarities between the claims, the usage,
• 1:23:58
  Speaker 3: the injuries, et cetera, and then decide what would be
• 1:24:04
  Speaker 3: maybe representative cases as to what's a a very powerful
• 1:24:11
  Speaker 3: case and maybe a little less powerful case and everything
• 1:24:15
  Speaker 3: in between. And so Judge Cole went through that exercise.
• 1:24:19
  Speaker 3: The parties then talked about the cases and then selected
• 1:24:22
  Speaker 3: nine cases that she thought in total would have characteristics
• 1:24:27
  Speaker 3: that would represent the other two nine and ninety one cases.
• 1:24:32
  Speaker 1: And how did she decide in the nine in consultation
• 1:24:34
  Speaker 1: with defense and plane off here?
• 1:24:38
  Speaker 3: Correct? Correct, And it's not necessarily by agreement. So just
• 1:24:42
  Speaker 3: like selection of a jury, you get like no, no, yes,
• 1:24:46
  Speaker 3: or you know, exactly executed jury selection is a misnomer.
• 1:24:50
  Speaker 3: It's just de selection. You're you're left with what's left there.
• 1:24:53
  Speaker 1: Yeah, you don't get to pick who you want, but
• 1:24:55
  Speaker 1: you can eliminate who you really don't want exactly exactly.
• 1:24:59
  Speaker 3: And so it's really in the judges call on these cases.
• 1:25:02
  Speaker 3: And that's how she picked.
• 1:25:04
  Speaker 1: Up And these are all in Los Angeles because the
• 1:25:06
  Speaker 1: companies are based in California. Correct, it's not so these
• 1:25:10
  Speaker 1: I believe Kaylee was not a Californian.
• 1:25:13
  Speaker 3: Right, she was a Californian.
• 1:25:15
  Speaker 2: She was from chic Up North.
• 1:25:17
  Speaker 1: Yeah, Okay, so she is a Californian. But there are
• 1:25:19
  Speaker 1: cases where it won't just be California, Right, like.
• 1:25:22
  Speaker 3: The next trial for Russell is he's a Florida resident,
• 1:25:26
  Speaker 3: but it's going to be here in La Superior as well.
• 1:25:28
  Speaker 1: Yep, this case from start to finish took how long.
• 1:25:34
  Speaker 3: January twenty seventh to March twenty seventh feels like somewhere
• 1:25:38
  Speaker 3: right around there, so about two months.
• 1:25:41
  Speaker 1: And well that was because you got a trial date.
• 1:25:44
  Speaker 1: How long did it take to like when did you know,
• 1:25:46
  Speaker 1: when did this all get formalized with discovery and all
• 1:25:49
  Speaker 1: that stuff.
• 1:25:50
  Speaker 3: Oh three and a half years, so three almost four years.
• 1:25:54
  Speaker 1: But we don't expect you to have to have three
• 1:25:56
  Speaker 1: years for each each subsequent next case.
• 1:25:59
  Speaker 3: All of the cases got worked up together for these
• 1:26:02
  Speaker 3: bell Weather cases, so the next eight cases they could
• 1:26:06
  Speaker 3: go back to back to back to back if need be.
• 1:26:09
  Speaker 3: So we're going to show up in court tomorrow and
• 1:26:12
  Speaker 3: Judge Cole is going to set the trial date for
• 1:26:15
  Speaker 3: Russell's case, and it could be.
• 1:26:17
  Speaker 1: This will be by the time this there is probably
• 1:26:19
  Speaker 1: later in the month, but we're we're taping on four
• 1:26:21
  Speaker 1: to twenty on April twentieth here, so we'll we'll just
• 1:26:26
  Speaker 1: to give people a date stamp, yeah on this. So
• 1:26:29
  Speaker 1: eight more trials, So the judge need to get the
• 1:26:36
  Speaker 1: verdicts in all nine before she starts characterizing the rest
• 1:26:39
  Speaker 1: of the three thousand.
• 1:26:42
  Speaker 3: I don't know. That's that's I think a moving target
• 1:26:46
  Speaker 3: as to how she sees things and whether there's enough
• 1:26:50
  Speaker 3: information to start getting the cases out her mindset is
• 1:26:56
  Speaker 3: what you What she wants to do is get enough
• 1:26:58
  Speaker 3: rulings on all of the unique issues so that there
• 1:27:01
  Speaker 3: are essentially no unique issues that require the knowledge base
• 1:27:06
  Speaker 3: of the entire Section two thirty work up and everything else,
• 1:27:10
  Speaker 3: and then it can just get sent to other court
• 1:27:12
  Speaker 3: rooms in La Superior and have multiple trials going at
• 1:27:16
  Speaker 3: the same time.
• 1:27:18
  Speaker 1: Do you expect jury trials for all three thousand?
• 1:27:21
  Speaker 3: I don't.
• 1:27:24
  Speaker 2: Yeah. Now, I think once there's a pattern established of
• 1:27:31
  Speaker 2: who's going to win, who's going to lose, and which
• 1:27:33
  Speaker 2: ones do you win and which ones do you lose? Realistically,
• 1:27:37
  Speaker 2: the companies that they don't need this media publicity. They
• 1:27:41
  Speaker 2: need to figure out how to get about making their money,
• 1:27:44
  Speaker 2: not spending it.
• 1:27:55
  Speaker 1: I guess the question is you we I mean, we're
• 1:27:59
  Speaker 1: all just spit in here. But if you win the
• 1:28:01
  Speaker 1: first four, one would assume they start to think about,
• 1:28:05
  Speaker 1: do we need to create a settlement fund and just
• 1:28:08
  Speaker 1: settle them all.
• 1:28:10
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I certainly agree with that.
• 1:28:13
  Speaker 1: Yeah, what's the model, what what is Where is this
• 1:28:18
  Speaker 1: like tobacco? And where is this not like tobacco?
• 1:28:23
  Speaker 3: Well, it's like tobacco in the sense that they created
• 1:28:27
  Speaker 3: an addictive product by design.
• 1:28:29
  Speaker 1: Okay, like the intentionality. Yeah, so there was it was
• 1:28:34
  Speaker 1: intentionally addictive and they knew it. You know, it's not
• 1:28:38
  Speaker 1: something they made and they found out it was addictive
• 1:28:41
  Speaker 1: after the fact, And that's that'd be a slight difference here, right.
• 1:28:45
  Speaker 1: You guys are contending they wanted to build it to
• 1:28:50
  Speaker 1: be addictive and they accomplished their task.
• 1:28:53
  Speaker 4: I would just pray with addiction by design, yeah, okay,
• 1:28:57
  Speaker 4: all right, And you know some of it, it I
• 1:29:00
  Speaker 4: think is irresponsible deployment of different features as well.
• 1:29:05
  Speaker 3: So there there may be some circumstances where they just
• 1:29:08
  Speaker 3: blindly launched certain features and then said, hey, we don't
• 1:29:15
  Speaker 3: know if it's safe or not, but let's just try
• 1:29:18
  Speaker 3: it out and our test our test sample will be
• 1:29:20
  Speaker 3: the entire child possible.
• 1:29:22
  Speaker 1: That's negligence. That that's negligible, yes, exactly.
• 1:29:26
  Speaker 3: But then getting to the next step for all of
• 1:29:29
  Speaker 3: the features that are part of this case, they knew
• 1:29:32
  Speaker 3: for a very long time, so they either intentionally launched
• 1:29:36
  Speaker 3: it knowing it's addictive, or launched it negligently then found
• 1:29:41
  Speaker 3: out through their internal research that it's addictive and did
• 1:29:44
  Speaker 3: nothing about it. Either way gets to the same same point,
• 1:29:48
  Speaker 3: which is intentionality in the way that they did it.
• 1:29:53
  Speaker 3: Then you've got concealment. And this is to me, the
• 1:29:59
  Speaker 3: destruction of an entire generation of kids. And you know,
• 1:30:03
  Speaker 3: I've got three boys twenty seventeen and fourteen and looked
• 1:30:08
  Speaker 3: at these things and looked what they were doing and
• 1:30:11
  Speaker 3: the harm that they could inflict, and it's created irreparable harm.
• 1:30:18
  Speaker 3: And so what ends up happening is through the concealment,
• 1:30:23
  Speaker 3: they're allowed to get a critical massive kids using social media.
• 1:30:28
  Speaker 3: I think it's almost ninety percent of teens are using
• 1:30:30
  Speaker 3: it now. And then what do you do next. It's
• 1:30:34
  Speaker 3: like you can't just renavigate a battleship. Turning that shit
• 1:30:39
  Speaker 3: is so hard to do and take so many layers.
• 1:30:42
  Speaker 3: So now they've got a market share and are profiting
• 1:30:46
  Speaker 3: off of it and creating the situation where it's very
• 1:30:50
  Speaker 3: hard to undo the damage and to change the narrative
• 1:30:55
  Speaker 3: so that kids stop using it so that they start
• 1:30:59
  Speaker 3: using safe practices and are forced to use the safe practices,
• 1:31:04
  Speaker 3: and so with each passing day, and Chuck you asked
• 1:31:06
  Speaker 3: about the four trials and whether they'd finally see the
• 1:31:09
  Speaker 3: writing on the wall. I don't know, because they're pretty
• 1:31:13
  Speaker 3: happy lining their pockets with every passing day, and the
• 1:31:17
  Speaker 3: cost of this litigation is less than the profits that
• 1:31:21
  Speaker 3: they ned.
• 1:31:22
  Speaker 1: You're describing the Ford, the infamous Ford Pinto really trial
• 1:31:26
  Speaker 1: right where where the Ford Pinto was? This for some
• 1:31:30
  Speaker 1: of my younger folks, was this economy car that when
• 1:31:34
  Speaker 1: it got rear ended, it's had a design flaw and
• 1:31:37
  Speaker 1: if it got rear ended the wrong way, it basically
• 1:31:39
  Speaker 1: blew up the gas tank and it just had this explosion.
• 1:31:43
  Speaker 1: And Ford knew it, and they made a calculation of
• 1:31:50
  Speaker 1: what it would take to fix it after the fact
• 1:31:52
  Speaker 1: and the recall versus settling claims that were filed, and
• 1:31:57
  Speaker 1: it would be cheaper to settle the file clib names, Yeah, yeah,
• 1:32:02
  Speaker 1: Are you sure we're not in a situation like that
• 1:32:04
  Speaker 1: already with with with these social media companies?
• 1:32:07
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't think we are, And I'll give you
• 1:32:10
  Speaker 2: my reasons, and.
• 1:32:11
  Speaker 1: Well thinks we are the two of you disagree on this, well.
• 1:32:15
  Speaker 2: And we may and if so, I think he's probably
• 1:32:17
  Speaker 2: right and I'm wrong, at least historically, I'll put my
• 1:32:21
  Speaker 2: chips on him. But uh so much of these companies
• 1:32:27
  Speaker 2: depend upon PR. And uh you take Google for example.
• 1:32:32
  Speaker 2: Google wants YouTube in every classroom. And Google is going
• 1:32:37
  Speaker 2: to have trouble if they repeatedly go to trial and
• 1:32:41
  Speaker 2: get hammered with juries saying they've done this maliciously, They've
• 1:32:47
  Speaker 2: done this intentionally, they're destroying children. And then Google goes
• 1:32:53
  Speaker 2: and says to the school district, hey, let us be
• 1:32:57
  Speaker 2: on all your school computers to learning. That's a left
• 1:33:04
  Speaker 2: hand and right hand. And the kind of money that
• 1:33:08
  Speaker 2: these companies make, settling this would be a boon to them.
• 1:33:14
  Speaker 2: It would send their stock through the roof. It would
• 1:33:18
  Speaker 2: give them PR pluses, and they care deeply about the PR.
• 1:33:23
  Speaker 2: I think they care more about the PR than just
• 1:33:26
  Speaker 2: the part.
• 1:33:27
  Speaker 1: What does that tell you you think settlement's coming?
• 1:33:30
  Speaker 2: I think it will at some point. I like your
• 1:33:32
  Speaker 2: try four cases, maybe it's eight, you know, maybe it's fifteen.
• 1:33:39
  Speaker 2: But somewhere down the road the settlement will.
• 1:33:43
  Speaker 1: You Now you guys, this happened to I mean, it
• 1:33:45
  Speaker 1: was like back to back days. We had the trial
• 1:33:47
  Speaker 1: in New Mexico was brought by the state government, and
• 1:33:51
  Speaker 1: you're going to have states and that was a separate thing.
• 1:33:52
  Speaker 1: With tobacco, right, you had private litigation. I remember to
• 1:33:56
  Speaker 1: me that I remember the first one on tobacco that
• 1:33:59
  Speaker 1: really sort of got everybody's attentions. I think it was
• 1:34:02
  Speaker 1: the flight attendant lawsuit. Right, it was just sort of like, hey,
• 1:34:05
  Speaker 1: they had no way of avoiding secondhand smoke. They couldn't
• 1:34:10
  Speaker 1: do it, and look what happened. And then I think
• 1:34:11
  Speaker 1: blackjack dealers were next, Like it was like those were
• 1:34:14
  Speaker 1: the two. You couldn't dispute that they were sort of
• 1:34:19
  Speaker 1: trapped with secondhand smoke on that front. So is is
• 1:34:26
  Speaker 1: there a corollary here?
• 1:34:29
  Speaker 2: Yeah?
• 1:34:30
  Speaker 1: Private versus public And then the state ags came in
• 1:34:33
  Speaker 1: and then they did it as sort of harmful to
• 1:34:35
  Speaker 1: their You know, what is the distinction between a private
• 1:34:37
  Speaker 1: litigation for a class that's harmed in this case teens
• 1:34:42
  Speaker 1: versus what the state ags are doing?
• 1:34:45
  Speaker 2: Well, you ought to answer this because you've got your
• 1:34:47
  Speaker 2: hands in both pies pretty deep.
• 1:34:49
  Speaker 3: Yeah, So there's kind of multiple buckets going here. There's
• 1:34:53
  Speaker 3: going to be a school district trial that's happening very soon.
• 1:34:57
  Speaker 3: And then you've got the New Mexico who brought that
• 1:35:01
  Speaker 3: case and it was really for statutory damages for violation
• 1:35:06
  Speaker 3: of a state statute and had a lot to do
• 1:35:10
  Speaker 3: with grooming, exploitative material and exposure to children, and that
• 1:35:15
  Speaker 3: led to five thousand dollars per event and ultimately got
• 1:35:19
  Speaker 3: to three hundred and seventy five million. And so, speaking
• 1:35:24
  Speaker 3: not as the lawyer but as a human being, I
• 1:35:27
  Speaker 3: think it's fantastic that all of these verdicts are coming
• 1:35:32
  Speaker 3: with different lenses. So you're looking at the conduct related
• 1:35:37
  Speaker 3: to harming children through exploit child exploitative material, sexual content,
• 1:35:45
  Speaker 3: grooming pedophiles, awful stuff. And then you've got verdicts that
• 1:35:50
  Speaker 3: are coming through the impact to children directly through addiction awful,
• 1:35:56
  Speaker 3: awful stuff. And then you're going to have public nuisance
• 1:35:59
  Speaker 3: by way of the school districts and how it's negatively
• 1:36:03
  Speaker 3: impacting education because it's just permeated the school district. That's
• 1:36:08
  Speaker 3: terrible as well. And I think all of those things,
• 1:36:10
  Speaker 3: to Mark's point, are going to create a significant negative
• 1:36:15
  Speaker 3: pr for these companies and at the same time creating
• 1:36:19
  Speaker 3: awareness where things are just going to get shut down.
• 1:36:23
  Speaker 3: And there's school districts now, and there's parents in every
• 1:36:25
  Speaker 3: community that are chuck. I think even you too, right,
• 1:36:29
  Speaker 3: don't want you know.
• 1:36:30
  Speaker 1: My local community, we're starting to see homemade signs that
• 1:36:36
  Speaker 1: say tell Arlington Public schools to get to get iPads
• 1:36:41
  Speaker 1: out of the class. Yeah.
• 1:36:43
  Speaker 3: Yeah, And that's a grassroots movement that's now expanding across
• 1:36:49
  Speaker 3: the country. And these verdicts have led to that this litigation,
• 1:36:53
  Speaker 3: which started three and a half plus years ago. After
• 1:36:56
  Speaker 3: it started, the US Surgeon General came out with his
• 1:36:59
  Speaker 3: report on how harmful social media is. So it's coming
• 1:37:03
  Speaker 3: from all angles, which I think is a great thing.
• 1:37:06
  Speaker 1: Mark and Roe play pray regula, pray regulator for me here. Okay,
• 1:37:13
  Speaker 1: let's assume I have a few members of Congress listening
• 1:37:15
  Speaker 1: to this interview. I'd like to think I do, and
• 1:37:18
  Speaker 1: they want to do something, and they want they've been
• 1:37:21
  Speaker 1: we've all been dying, like, what is some good structure
• 1:37:25
  Speaker 1: that could be put around these tech companies. You know,
• 1:37:29
  Speaker 1: I could get extreme here. I think that all of
• 1:37:31
  Speaker 1: this stuff should be banned to twenty five. I believe
• 1:37:36
  Speaker 1: in that for sports gambling, I believe in that for
• 1:37:38
  Speaker 1: marijuana usage. I believe that for alcohol usage that I'm
• 1:37:41
  Speaker 1: a believer. I believe all of the science that says
• 1:37:44
  Speaker 1: the brain, especially among young men versus young women even
• 1:37:47
  Speaker 1: but still, the twenty five is when you know your
• 1:37:49
  Speaker 1: your sort of fully formed brain. So, and I will
• 1:37:54
  Speaker 1: note rental car companies, insurance companies have made it so
• 1:38:00
  Speaker 1: there's a reason they don't let anybody under twenty five
• 1:38:02
  Speaker 1: rent a car without paying through the nose on that front.
• 1:38:06
  Speaker 1: But let me set that aside. Actual regulatory ideas. You know,
• 1:38:12
  Speaker 1: is it the end specifics that lawmakers should target to
• 1:38:17
  Speaker 1: limit social media addiction?
• 1:38:20
  Speaker 2: Well, I really like the idea of limiting it. The
• 1:38:22
  Speaker 2: problem is, I think in America that may be dead
• 1:38:25
  Speaker 2: on arrival because the power of these companies to influence
• 1:38:32
  Speaker 2: and lobby is.
• 1:38:33
  Speaker 1: Look, we have a drinking age of twenty one. We
• 1:38:35
  Speaker 1: have tobacco. You know. I'm not saying it's perfect, you know,
• 1:38:39
  Speaker 1: but we have put age requirements. We have done some things.
• 1:38:45
  Speaker 1: We usually wait till it's done, all sorts of destructive
• 1:38:48
  Speaker 1: behavior before we do it, but we do eventually do it.
• 1:38:51
  Speaker 1: And I guess what could be done without getting it
• 1:38:55
  Speaker 1: thrown out in court due to the first Amendment.
• 1:38:58
  Speaker 2: Well, I think I like your idea of putting age
• 1:39:01
  Speaker 2: limits on it. Australia is but thirteen and that made
• 1:39:04
  Speaker 2: a big deal out of everything. But I'm thinking thirteen mercy,
• 1:39:08
  Speaker 2: go for twenty one, go for twenty five. You add
• 1:39:13
  Speaker 2: to it. You know, if I were a legislator, I
• 1:39:17
  Speaker 2: would get rid of Section two thirty right now. These
• 1:39:20
  Speaker 2: these companies can put porn on there to anybody at
• 1:39:23
  Speaker 2: any age and you can't hold them accountable. And I
• 1:39:27
  Speaker 2: would get rid of two thirty protection for these companies
• 1:39:29
  Speaker 2: and a heartbeat. The sad part is these companies have
• 1:39:33
  Speaker 2: written their own legislation. It's like Protect the Kids Act
• 1:39:37
  Speaker 2: Kids and it does. Yeah, all it does is give
• 1:39:41
  Speaker 2: them free get out of jail cards. And so you
• 1:39:45
  Speaker 2: don't want to hand over policing to the industry. You've
• 1:39:50
  Speaker 2: got to do something roll I don't.
• 1:39:52
  Speaker 3: Know, so just some real simple things. So I agree
• 1:39:57
  Speaker 3: one hundred percent with Mark. They need to be a
• 1:40:00
  Speaker 3: auntable and responsible and repealing Section two thirty is a
• 1:40:03
  Speaker 3: part of forcing responsible behavior on the part of these
• 1:40:06
  Speaker 3: social media companies. But looking at as crazy as it sounds,
• 1:40:12
  Speaker 3: China okay, TikTok in China it's called dough yin And
• 1:40:17
  Speaker 3: here's what they have. They have age modeling, so there's
• 1:40:19
  Speaker 3: age verification to make sure that kids are treated like kids.
• 1:40:24
  Speaker 3: And as part of that, if you use it for
• 1:40:26
  Speaker 3: just several minutes you're forced to rest. You have to
• 1:40:30
  Speaker 3: get off of it. It won't work anymore. They have
• 1:40:33
  Speaker 3: a forty minute daily limit. After forty minutes you're done,
• 1:40:37
  Speaker 3: nighttime curfew. You can't use it at night because you
• 1:40:40
  Speaker 3: need to get your rest at night. All of the
• 1:40:42
  Speaker 3: things that oh, even in the endless scroll you know
• 1:40:46
  Speaker 3: this slot machine effect of just keeps swipe, swipe, swipe.
• 1:40:50
  Speaker 3: It has a lag in between each time you swipe
• 1:40:53
  Speaker 3: it so that your mind actually doesn't get into that
• 1:40:55
  Speaker 3: slot machine, endless reward and intermittent reward system. There's already
• 1:41:00
  Speaker 3: things that exist in other countries that people know to
• 1:41:05
  Speaker 3: be safe practices that can be implemented here. But I
• 1:41:08
  Speaker 3: really think with technology in particular, there has to be
• 1:41:13
  Speaker 3: a responsibility shifted onto the companies to continue to be vigilant,
• 1:41:18
  Speaker 3: and their failure to do so and do best practices
• 1:41:22
  Speaker 3: is something that has to hit them where it hits
• 1:41:24
  Speaker 3: them the hardest, which is in their shareholder price and
• 1:41:28
  Speaker 3: in their bank.
• 1:41:29
  Speaker 1: Barker, No, I mean, and this is sort of why
• 1:41:31
  Speaker 1: I sort of I keep using the rental car companies
• 1:41:34
  Speaker 1: as an interesting example, because there's no law that says
• 1:41:38
  Speaker 1: you have to be twenty five to rent a car.
• 1:41:41
  Speaker 1: You don't, right, Actually you can be younger. It's the
• 1:41:44
  Speaker 1: rental car companies that won't ensure you unless you're twenty
• 1:41:48
  Speaker 1: five and won't allow it to carry over. And I
• 1:41:52
  Speaker 1: just wonder, like, is you know, this is why I
• 1:41:55
  Speaker 1: always say in a true free market, free system, you
• 1:41:58
  Speaker 1: have to have private civil litigation or you'll never get
• 1:42:01
  Speaker 1: you'll never have, you know, be able to have full accountabilities,
• 1:42:04
  Speaker 1: right because you have government cap regulatory capture with the
• 1:42:07
  Speaker 1: government that Mark was just describing right now of how
• 1:42:10
  Speaker 1: they sort of get to write the legislation for the
• 1:42:12
  Speaker 1: Protect Kids Act things like that. Is there a Is
• 1:42:17
  Speaker 1: there an equivalent here? I mean, you guys think if
• 1:42:20
  Speaker 1: there's an you know, if you extract enough financial pain,
• 1:42:22
  Speaker 1: they're just going to change because they're tired of losing
• 1:42:24
  Speaker 1: these lawsuits.
• 1:42:27
  Speaker 2: I think too. I think that's what we see. You
• 1:42:31
  Speaker 2: used four kinto as an example very clearly the financial
• 1:42:36
  Speaker 2: analysis of how much we lose in a lawsuit was
• 1:42:39
  Speaker 2: done by Ford, it's done by everybody. What's our exposure?
• 1:42:44
  Speaker 2: Insurance companies ask the same question. Car rental companies ask
• 1:42:48
  Speaker 2: the same question that if car rental companies can make
• 1:42:52
  Speaker 2: more by renting out a car to a twenty year
• 1:42:54
  Speaker 2: old or an eighteen year old or a sixteen year old,
• 1:42:56
  Speaker 2: they do it in a heartbeat, but they know financially
• 1:42:59
  Speaker 2: they're going to lose money, right, And that's what you've
• 1:43:01
  Speaker 2: got to do with these companies. That's that's their language.
• 1:43:07
  Speaker 3: And the and the other problem and part of it, candidly,
• 1:43:11
  Speaker 3: I think that it's going to require the Congress and
• 1:43:16
  Speaker 3: send it to do something, because what you're going to
• 1:43:19
  Speaker 3: see is if somebody makes a move to be engaged
• 1:43:24
  Speaker 3: in a safer, safer practice for children, nobody else is.
• 1:43:29
  Speaker 3: So let's just say TikTok does something because it's the
• 1:43:32
  Speaker 3: right thing to do. And this hypothetical world I'm offering, Okay,
• 1:43:36
  Speaker 3: you think Instagram, Meta YouTube and Snap are going to
• 1:43:40
  Speaker 3: follow along or are they going to just reap the
• 1:43:43
  Speaker 3: market share at the expense of TikTok and so people
• 1:43:46
  Speaker 3: are not better off for it, and uh, and so
• 1:43:50
  Speaker 3: none of these companies are going to consistently do the
• 1:43:53
  Speaker 3: right thing unless unless there's somebody forcing them to do it,
• 1:43:58
  Speaker 3: and you're a peel teck up?
• 1:44:00
  Speaker 1: Is allation the appeals. They're going to appeal what happened?
• 1:44:04
  Speaker 1: Tell me about the appeal process. Do you expect is
• 1:44:07
  Speaker 1: this gonna you think they're going to do? Is this through?
• 1:44:10
  Speaker 1: So it's federal court, so it's going to go circuit?
• 1:44:12
  Speaker 1: Then do you expect have to go all the way
• 1:44:14
  Speaker 1: to spring?
• 1:44:15
  Speaker 3: This is actually a state court?
• 1:44:17
  Speaker 2: Uh?
• 1:44:17
  Speaker 3: Trial verdict? So this is.
• 1:44:19
  Speaker 1: A this is a state court even though it's federal.
• 1:44:22
  Speaker 3: It's a federal statute that they're asserting as a defense.
• 1:44:27
  Speaker 1: Okay, so it's a state court case. So you expect
• 1:44:29
  Speaker 1: this to go through the state Supreme Court.
• 1:44:32
  Speaker 3: That's that's their intention. And then if it if it
• 1:44:35
  Speaker 3: ends in the state Supreme Court being affirmed, then I
• 1:44:37
  Speaker 3: expect they're going to try and get it to the
• 1:44:40
  Speaker 3: United States Supreme Court.
• 1:44:42
  Speaker 1: What would be the what's there? What? What? What? Why
• 1:44:47
  Speaker 1: would they just access it or or what? What? What's
• 1:44:51
  Speaker 1: their appeal or have they not filed? What they're why
• 1:44:53
  Speaker 1: they say the verdict was wrongly wrongly given?
• 1:44:58
  Speaker 3: Yeah, So the process is it starts with emotion for
• 1:45:00
  Speaker 3: new trial, which has not yet been filed, and then
• 1:45:04
  Speaker 3: after that's ruled upon, then the appellate process starts through
• 1:45:08
  Speaker 3: a notice of appeal. And then once the notice is filed,
• 1:45:13
  Speaker 3: and then I think it's either sixty or ninety days
• 1:45:15
  Speaker 3: than the appellate briefing gets filed. And then only after
• 1:45:19
  Speaker 3: it's fully briefed, which could take upwards of a year,
• 1:45:23
  Speaker 3: and then it gets calendared for argument in the Court
• 1:45:26
  Speaker 3: of Appeal and then and so you're probably about a
• 1:45:30
  Speaker 3: year and a half ish in before that's actually heard.
• 1:45:35
  Speaker 3: And then after the Court of Appeal issues it's ruling,
• 1:45:37
  Speaker 3: which it has a period of time to do, then
• 1:45:39
  Speaker 3: they can seek review from the United or from the
• 1:45:42
  Speaker 3: California Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court then hears it,
• 1:45:45
  Speaker 3: that takes a period of time, and then after that
• 1:45:48
  Speaker 3: they have an opportunity, there may be an opportunity for
• 1:45:52
  Speaker 3: them to seek relief from this United States Supreme Court.
• 1:45:58
  Speaker 1: So I'm like thet in my head twenty thirty twenty
• 1:46:03
  Speaker 1: thirty two, Like Mark, there's resolution, some resolution ten years okay,
• 1:46:10
  Speaker 1: and that look Tobacco took. That's why I was making that.
• 1:46:12
  Speaker 1: I think the first tobacco cases were in the seventies.
• 1:46:17
  Speaker 1: I don't remember first from early eighties. Like I said,
• 1:46:21
  Speaker 1: I remember the early flight attendant one when they just
• 1:46:23
  Speaker 1: got rid of smoking sections and airplanes. Any of us
• 1:46:26
  Speaker 1: that were old enough to remember, those were just the
• 1:46:28
  Speaker 1: most ridiculous, as if you weren't going to have any
• 1:46:32
  Speaker 1: smoke in Rose one through eighteen. But after you know,
• 1:46:35
  Speaker 1: you know, smoking nineteen and back luck with that, all right,
• 1:46:41
  Speaker 1: Well by then you're going to be well, we'll all
• 1:46:44
  Speaker 1: be getting Instagram in our brain, right.
• 1:46:48
  Speaker 3: Yeah, I know. I mean, look, technology is something that,
• 1:46:51
  Speaker 3: as you know, with the AI coming on the heels
• 1:46:54
  Speaker 3: of this, it only highlights how much we need to
• 1:46:58
  Speaker 3: be ahead of ahead of it, opposed to waiting.
• 1:47:02
  Speaker 1: Instant narrati regulators. And by the way, on section two thirty,
• 1:47:06
  Speaker 1: the minute they create an algorithm, they've become a publisher.
• 1:47:10
  Speaker 1: I don't think section two thirty applies to any other
• 1:47:12
  Speaker 1: stuff anymore. They've created way too many things. If they
• 1:47:17
  Speaker 1: have created an accelerant for me to see somebody's content,
• 1:47:20
  Speaker 1: they're also a publisher.
• 1:47:23
  Speaker 2: Yep. So well, I don't even vote for you for
• 1:47:26
  Speaker 2: Supreme Court.
• 1:47:29
  Speaker 1: I mean I have I look, you know, when you
• 1:47:32
  Speaker 1: decide if something's above the fold and below the fold.
• 1:47:35
  Speaker 1: You're a publisher. Well, an algorithm is deciding what's above
• 1:47:39
  Speaker 1: the fold or below the fold. So I don't even think,
• 1:47:44
  Speaker 1: like I as much as two thirty is a good boogeyman,
• 1:47:47
  Speaker 1: I think there's I think there's actually still some arguments
• 1:47:51
  Speaker 1: to be made that it's just Section two thirties null
• 1:47:54
  Speaker 1: and void. The minute you create an algorithm. I like
• 1:47:59
  Speaker 1: the way you think for it. Yeah, well, if it works,
• 1:48:01
  Speaker 1: then then can I get a free law degree somewhere.
• 1:48:03
  Speaker 1: I don't have to say it if it works.
• 1:48:05
  Speaker 2: If it works, we will come on your podcast and
• 1:48:07
  Speaker 2: tell everyone this was the Chuck tod podcast.
• 1:48:12
  Speaker 1: There it is, there is we created new law, new
• 1:48:16
  Speaker 1: legal doctrine. Here, Mark and Rahul, this was great. I
• 1:48:22
  Speaker 1: think there's Here's the thing. We like these products. We
• 1:48:26
  Speaker 1: just don't want them to be predatory. There are good
• 1:48:29
  Speaker 1: things about them. Just stop trying to like make it
• 1:48:33
  Speaker 1: twenty four hours of our life exactly. I mean, I
• 1:48:37
  Speaker 1: like a good steak. I don't want it every hour
• 1:48:40
  Speaker 1: of the day or I'm gonna have a heart attack.
• 1:48:42
  Speaker 2: Yeah, And that was our position with the jury. We
• 1:48:45
  Speaker 2: were very honest.
• 1:48:46
  Speaker 1: We said, hey, these can be useful tools.
• 1:48:51
  Speaker 2: We can enjoy these tools, but it doesn't mean that
• 1:48:55
  Speaker 2: they're allowed to addict our vulnerable children on purpose.
• 1:48:59
  Speaker 1: For the good is this will appear on YouTube. So
• 1:49:01
  Speaker 1: let's see how well the algorithm does and making sure
• 1:49:04
  Speaker 1: we get to see all of this. Gentlemen, I learned
• 1:49:06
  Speaker 1: a lot. Thank you so much, good.
• 1:49:07
  Speaker 2: Luck on these cases.
• 1:49:18
  Speaker 1: Well, there you go, the big tobacco moment. But look,
• 1:49:21
  Speaker 1: do realize with these social media companies, we're probably talking
• 1:49:26
  Speaker 1: that sometime in the early twenty thirties before we start
• 1:49:30
  Speaker 1: to see serious changes unless unless we get a we
• 1:49:36
  Speaker 1: get somehow a bunch of elected officials who realize, oh,
• 1:49:40
  Speaker 1: maybe government ought to be in the consumer protection game again.
• 1:49:45
  Speaker 1: Right now, we don't have any serious consumer protectors in office.
• 1:49:50
  Speaker 1: This is why, you know, I'm somebody who's like, I know,
• 1:49:54
  Speaker 1: you know, there's trial lawyers can get a bad name,
• 1:49:57
  Speaker 1: ambulance chasing this and all this stuff. They exist for
• 1:50:01
  Speaker 1: a reason. They exist when when when government fails to
• 1:50:04
  Speaker 1: do their job, and the courts are sometimes the last
• 1:50:07
  Speaker 1: resort for the for the uh, for the for the abuse,
• 1:50:11
  Speaker 1: for the consumer that gets abused. All right, let's do
• 1:50:16
  Speaker 1: some questions and then stay for my hot take on
• 1:50:19
  Speaker 1: Kevin Durant. Ask Chuck, but we're gonna start with Max.
• 1:50:26
  Speaker 1: Any writes Hey, as ever, appreciate that between the thirties
• 1:50:28
  Speaker 1: of view you deliver on important stories. Thanks for the
• 1:50:31
  Speaker 1: rare bit of rational sanity in the whirlwind of chaos
• 1:50:34
  Speaker 1: we face every day. You have frequently discussed that we
• 1:50:36
  Speaker 1: seem to be entering Donald Trump's lame duck era, but
• 1:50:38
  Speaker 1: considering his insistence on gilding everything around him, painting everything gold,
• 1:50:43
  Speaker 1: wouldn't it wouldn't he be our first LeMay duck president Cheeserrie,
• 1:50:48
  Speaker 1: Thank you, Max. You made me laugh. He put the
• 1:50:51
  Speaker 1: accent on the ease. That's why I said, LeMay duck.
• 1:50:54
  Speaker 1: I think it's duck a la range, right, I mean,
• 1:50:56
  Speaker 1: how did you miss that one? Right? That was sitting there,
• 1:51:00
  Speaker 1: you Max duck le lem In fact, we'll use your
• 1:51:03
  Speaker 1: lemae duck a la range the orange lame duck man, right,
• 1:51:08
  Speaker 1: So anyway, brilliant, But yeah, we got to add the
• 1:51:14
  Speaker 1: uh a la range right. Next one comes from might
• 1:51:22
  Speaker 1: be a six timer, he says. When I first got
• 1:51:24
  Speaker 1: into politics, Tim Russell was my favorite go to media figure.
• 1:51:27
  Speaker 1: He had the perfect blend of common sense and sharp
• 1:51:29
  Speaker 1: intelligence when needed. Can you just tell a good story
• 1:51:32
  Speaker 1: about Tim? Thanks, Adam B. Davey, Florida. I'll give you
• 1:51:35
  Speaker 1: a good one. And it's a good Florida story. So,
• 1:51:40
  Speaker 1: and it's something I'm a young Chuck Todd at this time.
• 1:51:44
  Speaker 1: This is twenty twenty eight. I'm just like trying to
• 1:51:48
  Speaker 1: think of when this was. This is twenty oh eight February.
• 1:51:56
  Speaker 1: He he's, uh, we're down in Boca Raton, Florida, because
• 1:52:01
  Speaker 1: he's moderating a Republican presidential primary debate at FAU Florida
• 1:52:09
  Speaker 1: Atlanta University. And I believe the debate was on a Thursday,
• 1:52:14
  Speaker 1: and he decided to do meet the press on the road.
• 1:52:20
  Speaker 1: But the guests that we could get for the show
• 1:52:24
  Speaker 1: was John McCain and he was going to be in Tampa. So,
• 1:52:30
  Speaker 1: you know, we get in the car and we drive,
• 1:52:32
  Speaker 1: you know, we just do the quick, short trip. But
• 1:52:34
  Speaker 1: he decides, you know, we we decided it's myself another
• 1:52:39
  Speaker 1: producer of his and Tim. Tim was driving and of
• 1:52:42
  Speaker 1: course for lunch, you know, and I've I'm this way too,
• 1:52:47
  Speaker 1: you know. No, we're not any in a chain, No
• 1:52:50
  Speaker 1: chain restaurants or any of us. Come on, let's let's
• 1:52:52
  Speaker 1: go find something interesting. So we find a little barbecue joint. Man,
• 1:52:59
  Speaker 1: I'm trying to think where we were. I mean, we
• 1:53:00
  Speaker 1: would have been on seventy five because we took where
• 1:53:03
  Speaker 1: we were headed over. I think we would turn Pike
• 1:53:05
  Speaker 1: to seventy five. So I can't remember where we were,
• 1:53:08
  Speaker 1: but I'm gonna say probably, you know, somewhere west of Sarasota,
• 1:53:18
  Speaker 1: excuse me, east of Sarasota. And somebody recognizes Tim, but
• 1:53:27
  Speaker 1: they don't know it's Tim Russer. They just know they
• 1:53:30
  Speaker 1: know him from TV. And this woman comes up and
• 1:53:32
  Speaker 1: she says, hey, do you do the sports in Cleveland?
• 1:53:36
  Speaker 1: And he goes, no, that's not me, and they go okay.
• 1:53:40
  Speaker 1: And so when we're and we were eating, I think
• 1:53:42
  Speaker 1: it was Barbara. I know we were having barbecue. It
• 1:53:44
  Speaker 1: was a local barbecue place and we were eating, and
• 1:53:46
  Speaker 1: so it was the person was sort of it was
• 1:53:48
  Speaker 1: one of those where you quit your order then you
• 1:53:50
  Speaker 1: you know, it wasn't you know, you serve yourself. And
• 1:53:55
  Speaker 1: then this was somebody as we were in the middle
• 1:53:57
  Speaker 1: eating and they were sort of they were just coming
• 1:53:59
  Speaker 1: in and going to sit down, and we were we
• 1:54:04
  Speaker 1: lingered longer because we were chatting. We were probably you know,
• 1:54:07
  Speaker 1: who the hell knows what we were chatting about. You know, Hey, Tim,
• 1:54:10
  Speaker 1: tell us a story, right, just like you were asking.
• 1:54:14
  Speaker 1: You know when it was just whenever I was doing
• 1:54:16
  Speaker 1: meals with him, right, I was always getting some interesting,
• 1:54:19
  Speaker 1: interesting stories. And then the person comes back, and this
• 1:54:24
  Speaker 1: woman then comes back about half hour later and she goes,
• 1:54:27
  Speaker 1: are you sure you don't do the sports in Cleveland?
• 1:54:30
  Speaker 1: Like as if Tim was like lying about it. I mean,
• 1:54:33
  Speaker 1: I understand if you don't want people recognizing you. I
• 1:54:36
  Speaker 1: remember where we are. We're like, you know, somewhere on
• 1:54:40
  Speaker 1: I seventy five east of Sarasota on our way to Tampa.
• 1:54:45
  Speaker 1: And this person is thinking that the local sports anchor
• 1:54:48
  Speaker 1: of Cleveland wants to be so anonymous, right, that they
• 1:54:51
  Speaker 1: were lying to them about that, and what Tim never
• 1:54:55
  Speaker 1: does and what I don't do, Nor is other producer.
• 1:54:58
  Speaker 1: We don't say no, no, no, he's Tim Russ. You
• 1:55:00
  Speaker 1: must know who he is, because there's something frankly arrogant
• 1:55:05
  Speaker 1: about it, right, there's something weird. Anytime people have come
• 1:55:07
  Speaker 1: up to me and say, well, where do I you know,
• 1:55:10
  Speaker 1: do I know you from somewhere. It's always it's always awkward.
• 1:55:14
  Speaker 1: I don't know, like I never know what to say,
• 1:55:16
  Speaker 1: or like, you know, where did you or a lot
• 1:55:18
  Speaker 1: of times that the one one will say where did
• 1:55:20
  Speaker 1: you go to high school? And I'll say in Miami, oh, well,
• 1:55:22
  Speaker 1: you just look like somebody I thought I went to
• 1:55:24
  Speaker 1: high school with. And then sometimes people will come back
• 1:55:26
  Speaker 1: to me go, I know where I know you from,
• 1:55:29
  Speaker 1: and then they'll figure it out. Anyway, so the person
• 1:55:34
  Speaker 1: comes back to him and says this, and then and
• 1:55:36
  Speaker 1: he goes, no, that's it, and then they're walking out
• 1:55:39
  Speaker 1: the door he goes, but go Indians. And you know
• 1:55:44
  Speaker 1: he did say, he goes, I went to law school
• 1:55:45
  Speaker 1: in Cleveland, which is true. He did go to law
• 1:55:47
  Speaker 1: school in Cleveland. But we've often wondered, my friend and I,
• 1:55:53
  Speaker 1: Betsy Fisher, we've often wondered about that story. Whether the
• 1:55:56
  Speaker 1: persons like left later go oh my god, now I
• 1:55:59
  Speaker 1: know who that is, right, and they got it on
• 1:56:01
  Speaker 1: the way home. So I hope that's good enough. You know,
• 1:56:06
  Speaker 1: you can hit me with it in six months. You
• 1:56:10
  Speaker 1: can ask me to come up on another one if
• 1:56:12
  Speaker 1: you will. Anyway, thanks for the question, Adam, next question
• 1:56:16
  Speaker 1: comes from Jim m and he writes, Hey, every Monday,
• 1:56:18
  Speaker 1: I watch your show with Chris Eliza. This week you
• 1:56:20
  Speaker 1: mentioned a project you're working on to get independence elected
• 1:56:23
  Speaker 1: in major elections. Can you expand on that. Well, it's
• 1:56:25
  Speaker 1: actually in part why I'm up here in Boston as well.
• 1:56:30
  Speaker 1: It's it's about not just independence, but it's also about
• 1:56:34
  Speaker 1: coming up with a mechanism and a support function for
• 1:56:40
  Speaker 1: members of either party who decide not who decide not to,
• 1:56:44
  Speaker 1: who decide to break from leadership right and want to,
• 1:56:46
  Speaker 1: you know, actually vote what they think is in the
• 1:56:49
  Speaker 1: best interests of their constituents rather than what's in the
• 1:56:52
  Speaker 1: best interests of a party leader. Because what you're seeing
• 1:56:57
  Speaker 1: now is that when you break from the party, suddenly
• 1:56:59
  Speaker 1: the party won't support you. You lose all this stuff. So,
• 1:57:03
  Speaker 1: you know, is there a way to create a third alliance,
• 1:57:06
  Speaker 1: if you will, that supports elected officials who simply want
• 1:57:13
  Speaker 1: to be more responsive, whether they're independent, so they so
• 1:57:17
  Speaker 1: you want to number one, I hope you can give
• 1:57:19
  Speaker 1: them the opportunity to not have to feel like they
• 1:57:21
  Speaker 1: need to belong to a political party in order to
• 1:57:24
  Speaker 1: effectively govern. And unfortunately, right now, I think some of
• 1:57:27
  Speaker 1: our infrastructure isn't there yet for that Ballot access is
• 1:57:31
  Speaker 1: difficult for independence and things like that. And by the way,
• 1:57:34
  Speaker 1: some aspects of this is about helping you know, maybe
• 1:57:40
  Speaker 1: you know, helping to get you know, run referendum campaigns,
• 1:57:43
  Speaker 1: to force open primaries, maybe create all party primary ballots,
• 1:57:47
  Speaker 1: which I'm really you know, when I look at all
• 1:57:50
  Speaker 1: the different iterations of what's the fairest way to make
• 1:57:55
  Speaker 1: sure you're actually getting elected officials who represent the electorates
• 1:57:59
  Speaker 1: that they're trying to represent, I think it's pretty clear
• 1:58:01
  Speaker 1: we need all party primaries and everybody on the same
• 1:58:04
  Speaker 1: primary ballot. If you want polarization, then please separate your primaries.
• 1:58:10
  Speaker 1: But if you don't want polarization and you want just
• 1:58:15
  Speaker 1: actual debates on merits, I think you want you want
• 1:58:20
  Speaker 1: everybody on one ballot on that front. So I don't
• 1:58:25
  Speaker 1: want to get too much into it because it's in
• 1:58:27
  Speaker 1: the you know, it's in the it's not in the
• 1:58:30
  Speaker 1: incub it's out of the incubation stage, but we're still
• 1:58:33
  Speaker 1: in the you know, finding the supports system. But I'm
• 1:58:36
  Speaker 1: working with a lot of interesting folks and there's people
• 1:58:41
  Speaker 1: from both parties involved with this effort, People in independent
• 1:58:45
  Speaker 1: entities involved with this effort, People in other walks of
• 1:58:49
  Speaker 1: life like myself, involved in this effort. But all I'll
• 1:58:56
  Speaker 1: say is stay tuned. You know, as you can see
• 1:58:59
  Speaker 1: this is this It is clear to me there's a
• 1:59:02
  Speaker 1: plurality of Americans that are just underrepresented in our politics.
• 1:59:08
  Speaker 1: Right we have the fastest growing party is no party.
• 1:59:12
  Speaker 1: And we have got to align our small d democratic
• 1:59:17
  Speaker 1: system with the electorate that we have, rather than forcing
• 1:59:20
  Speaker 1: the electorate to choose between to choose to support an
• 1:59:24
  Speaker 1: outdated system, and that's essentially what we have as an
• 1:59:27
  Speaker 1: outdated system. I am coming to you know, Look, this
• 1:59:31
  Speaker 1: is probably a decade away, so this is something that
• 1:59:34
  Speaker 1: will either age really well or you can use it
• 1:59:36
  Speaker 1: and put it on my epitaph. But I think both
• 1:59:39
  Speaker 1: parties are facing a existential crisis that probably comes to
• 1:59:46
  Speaker 1: fruition sometime in the mid to late twenty thirties. So
• 1:59:49
  Speaker 1: we shall see bills as the next question. Hey check,
• 1:59:54
  Speaker 1: I get frustrated with surveys that separate MAGA from Republican.
• 1:59:58
  Speaker 1: Is there really a meaningful distinction if the same voters
• 2:00:00
  Speaker 1: are supporting Trump? And how should accountability work within the
• 2:00:03
  Speaker 1: GOP for the direction of the party has taken under
• 2:00:06
  Speaker 1: his influence. Hope you had a happy four twenty and
• 2:00:08
  Speaker 1: enjoyed a HEMP derived beverage of your choosing. Hey, get
• 2:00:11
  Speaker 1: sold ay Man, Remember get sold and use the code.
• 2:00:14
  Speaker 1: Thanks and go Nats. Their record is better by one
• 2:00:16
  Speaker 1: loss than my ever anxiety inducing Mariners. Well, Bell, I
• 2:00:20
  Speaker 1: will tell you this. I have Emerson Hancock on my
• 2:00:25
  Speaker 1: fantasy team. I just picked him up, So I'm you know,
• 2:00:28
  Speaker 1: I'm a little invested in your Mariners succeeding there for
• 2:00:31
  Speaker 1: what it's worth, and I'm just pleasantly surprised that my
• 2:00:35
  Speaker 1: Nats are. I love put it this way. I you know,
• 2:00:40
  Speaker 1: sometimes you know, you have your favorite team and you're like,
• 2:00:42
  Speaker 1: you know, do you want to watch them when they're
• 2:00:44
  Speaker 1: on offense or defense? Like you know, this last year
• 2:00:48
  Speaker 1: with the University of Miami, I was always more excited
• 2:00:50
  Speaker 1: when Miami was on defense. I just loved watching that
• 2:00:52
  Speaker 1: defense that Weirdly, the offense always got me nervous. You know,
• 2:00:55
  Speaker 1: you back up, I hope he's got it. Oh good,
• 2:00:57
  Speaker 1: he handed it to Fletcher right, Like you know, you
• 2:01:00
  Speaker 1: just sort of like dor Cridge. Well, this year with
• 2:01:02
  Speaker 1: the Nats, like when they're at bat. I can't wait
• 2:01:04
  Speaker 1: to watch when it's their time to when when when
• 2:01:07
  Speaker 1: when the other team's up and we're pitching, that's when
• 2:01:11
  Speaker 1: I get really nervous. Well, look, we've been as as
• 2:01:17
  Speaker 1: the person who helped author the original that we were
• 2:01:21
  Speaker 1: the first entity to start doing this. When I say we,
• 2:01:24
  Speaker 1: it was my former employer NBC. They're two pollsters, Bill
• 2:01:31
  Speaker 1: mcadurff and Jeff Horatt Hart McInturff, the combination there. We
• 2:01:36
  Speaker 1: came up with this question going way back in twenty
• 2:01:40
  Speaker 1: sixteen and twenty seventeen, and we've been consistently seeing, like
• 2:01:44
  Speaker 1: you know, we just said, there are many many America.
• 2:01:46
  Speaker 1: Do you consider yourself more of a supporter of the
• 2:01:49
  Speaker 1: Republican Party or more the way the question is asked,
• 2:01:52
  Speaker 1: at least certainly the best version of the question, I
• 2:01:54
  Speaker 1: think is the way I'm outlining here, which is, you know,
• 2:01:58
  Speaker 1: and we just ask it among folks who already align
• 2:02:01
  Speaker 1: as Republican, do you consider yourself more of a Republican
• 2:02:05
  Speaker 1: or more of a Trump supporter and make America great again?
• 2:02:08
  Speaker 1: Mag and just saying shorthanding MAGA at this point, or
• 2:02:11
  Speaker 1: do you consider yourself more of a MAGA supporter than
• 2:02:13
  Speaker 1: you are a Republican. And here's what we've noticed is
• 2:02:18
  Speaker 1: that what it this is as good of a test
• 2:02:22
  Speaker 1: of trying to figure out what is Trump. How tight
• 2:02:27
  Speaker 1: is Trump's grip on the party right, and when it's
• 2:02:30
  Speaker 1: more MAGA, his grip is tighter, when it's more Republican,
• 2:02:33
  Speaker 1: his grip is looser right, And it's an early sign
• 2:02:37
  Speaker 1: to sort of see where things. It's another way to
• 2:02:39
  Speaker 1: sort of because you know, some of these folks aren't
• 2:02:43
  Speaker 1: going to say they disapprove of Trump's job if they're
• 2:02:45
  Speaker 1: a Republican, even if they kind of do but they
• 2:02:48
  Speaker 1: don't want to say it. But if they start saying, well, no,
• 2:02:51
  Speaker 1: I'm more of a Republican than I am a member
• 2:02:53
  Speaker 1: of MAGA, and it may be that the very same
• 2:02:56
  Speaker 1: person three surveys before said no, I'm MAGA more than
• 2:02:58
  Speaker 1: I am Republican, it's a We have found it to
• 2:03:02
  Speaker 1: be the best sort of early warning sign to try
• 2:03:06
  Speaker 1: to understand. You know, he got problems inside the GOP.
• 2:03:11
  Speaker 1: So I think that distinction, I you know, it is
• 2:03:16
  Speaker 1: for strategicy reasons. I think the distinction does matter because
• 2:03:22
  Speaker 1: it matters how you talk to Republicans. Right. It matters
• 2:03:25
  Speaker 1: how much do you feel. And if you start to
• 2:03:27
  Speaker 1: see that Republican number going up and up and up,
• 2:03:29
  Speaker 1: then you'll see. What you will also see is more
• 2:03:32
  Speaker 1: elected Republicans feeling comfortable distancing themselves from Trump. So look,
• 2:03:37
  Speaker 1: I'm not going to sit here and say that I
• 2:03:39
  Speaker 1: think that I have I believe. I'm not going to
• 2:03:44
  Speaker 1: quote myself. I want to quote I just I associate
• 2:03:48
  Speaker 1: myself with Marco Rubio when it comes to Donald Trump
• 2:03:51
  Speaker 1: and the accountability question. And this is what Marco Rubio
• 2:03:56
  Speaker 1: said in March of twenty sixteen. And I think this
• 2:04:00
  Speaker 1: quote will live longer than Marco Rubio's lack of support
• 2:04:07
  Speaker 1: for Donald Trump. But anyway, the quote is for years
• 2:04:09
  Speaker 1: to come. There are many people on the right, in
• 2:04:11
  Speaker 1: the media and voters at large that are going to
• 2:04:13
  Speaker 1: be having to explain and justify how they fell into
• 2:04:15
  Speaker 1: this trap of supporting Donald Trump because this is not
• 2:04:18
  Speaker 1: going to end well one way or the other. It
• 2:04:21
  Speaker 1: is probably the most prescient quote that the current Secretary
• 2:04:24
  Speaker 1: of State has ever uttered, and it is one that
• 2:04:27
  Speaker 1: I'm here's my prediction. One day he himself will quote
• 2:04:36
  Speaker 1: himself and have to admit he should have known better.
• 2:04:41
  Speaker 1: Maybe not in his fifties, maybe not in his sixties,
• 2:04:45
  Speaker 1: but at some point he too will have to do
• 2:04:50
  Speaker 1: what he predicted. Many other people will have to do.
• 2:04:53
  Speaker 1: So I take your point, Bill, and I do think
• 2:04:57
  Speaker 1: supporting Trump is a is a tattoo, not a stain,
• 2:05:04
  Speaker 1: and the people that it's you know, I don't think
• 2:05:07
  Speaker 1: many are going to have luck scrubbing that away. You're
• 2:05:12
  Speaker 1: gonna have to go full repudiation. Next question comes from
• 2:05:16
  Speaker 1: Joe Nashville. Hey, check, if there's a third party that
• 2:05:18
  Speaker 1: emerges from today's ultra partisan environment, what do you think
• 2:05:20
  Speaker 1: they will call themselves? I think you should make this
• 2:05:22
  Speaker 1: a top five list. Will they try to reconstitute a
• 2:05:25
  Speaker 1: past party? Name the Federalists, the Whigs, the Constitution Party
• 2:05:28
  Speaker 1: are something new, the America Party, the Freedom Party Joe
• 2:05:31
  Speaker 1: in Nashville, You know, the the Freedom Party is interesting.
• 2:05:37
  Speaker 1: That's an interesting idea, you know, or you might call them,
• 2:05:41
  Speaker 1: you know, you could see sort of a hybrid right
• 2:05:43
  Speaker 1: freedom Democrats. Remember there was a time we had the
• 2:05:47
  Speaker 1: we had the republic the Democratic Republican Party, the early
• 2:05:51
  Speaker 1: early version, uh, one of the early versions back the
• 2:05:55
  Speaker 1: Federalists are an interesting idea is to go back me
• 2:05:58
  Speaker 1: and are you are actual federalist US? I like that
• 2:06:02
  Speaker 1: better than the Constitution Party. The Constitution Party has been
• 2:06:04
  Speaker 1: associated with some quirky crazy There is a Constitutional Party
• 2:06:08
  Speaker 1: that that has existed, and it's super far right, not
• 2:06:11
  Speaker 1: really a serious entity. But I certainly I wouldn't I
• 2:06:18
  Speaker 1: wouldn't want to be associated with a Whigs, that's for sure.
• 2:06:23
  Speaker 1: But I could see Federalists is a good one. And
• 2:06:28
  Speaker 1: that's kind of where I think that there is how
• 2:06:33
  Speaker 1: you would rationalize, right, you know, it's a federalist system.
• 2:06:37
  Speaker 1: We're a republic right in that sense. The Republicans right
• 2:06:41
  Speaker 1: at the time, you know, they don't believe in US
• 2:06:43
  Speaker 1: being a republic anymore. I don't think they fully. There's
• 2:06:46
  Speaker 1: a lot of Republicans who don't understand the actual origin
• 2:06:48
  Speaker 1: of the of the term that named the party. But
• 2:06:51
  Speaker 1: I digress. But I guess I would embrace I could
• 2:06:56
  Speaker 1: embrace federalists on that run. Look, in the way our
• 2:07:01
  Speaker 1: systems designed, I suspect that you will have a party
• 2:07:05
  Speaker 1: collapse in a party replacement, not necessarily a third party,
• 2:07:09
  Speaker 1: that it would act the way, you know, you'd have
• 2:07:10
  Speaker 1: sort of one or two cycles of success. And if
• 2:07:13
  Speaker 1: it had a huge success, then you just essentially they
• 2:07:16
  Speaker 1: would become the majority of party. Look, we've seen you know,
• 2:07:19
  Speaker 1: this has happened, right, parties have all sorts of party
• 2:07:22
  Speaker 1: coalition names have come and gone in Israel. We're starting
• 2:07:25
  Speaker 1: to see this now in the UK. So I am
• 2:07:28
  Speaker 1: I don't think this is something that people ought to
• 2:07:31
  Speaker 1: say is pie in the sky anymore. You know, there's
• 2:07:35
  Speaker 1: just when you look at the brand and I mean
• 2:07:39
  Speaker 1: the fact is we've torched We've torched every institution. So
• 2:07:43
  Speaker 1: why do we think the two parties are going to
• 2:07:44
  Speaker 1: survive this? Right? Every other institution hasn't been able to
• 2:07:47
  Speaker 1: survive this. So I'm I'm you know, I think there's
• 2:07:52
  Speaker 1: going to be a reckoning of how did we get
• 2:07:54
  Speaker 1: into this mess? You know at these two parties in
• 2:07:57
  Speaker 1: some ways both have a hand had a hand in it.
• 2:07:59
  Speaker 1: And I think that in that sense, why that you
• 2:08:02
  Speaker 1: it won't be additions, it'll be replacements john S and
• 2:08:09
  Speaker 1: Miliwaukee rites. What effect on the midterms do you think
• 2:08:12
  Speaker 1: the retirement of Alito and Thomas would make if this
• 2:08:15
  Speaker 1: is done in October? Well, here's what I do believe
• 2:08:22
  Speaker 1: that the that the Republican campaign strategists would love to
• 2:08:31
  Speaker 1: have anything to change the subject from the economy, changed
• 2:08:34
  Speaker 1: the subject from the war. Perhaps a Supreme Court nomination
• 2:08:39
  Speaker 1: could do that. And you know, and there's no doubt
• 2:08:49
  Speaker 1: that whoever Trump Trump would want to nominate somebody as
• 2:08:51
  Speaker 1: controversial as possible, almost to to bait Democrats into doing
• 2:08:57
  Speaker 1: whatever it took to stop this person. Uh, even though
• 2:09:00
  Speaker 1: you could argue if it's a leader for the leader
• 2:09:03
  Speaker 1: or Thomas seat, it's you know, sort of right winger
• 2:09:06
  Speaker 1: for right winger, right, like, it's not really going to
• 2:09:09
  Speaker 1: change the makeup of the court. You know. I think
• 2:09:13
  Speaker 1: the smart strategy would be to basically olay it in
• 2:09:16
  Speaker 1: and don't create the fight because I think, you know,
• 2:09:20
  Speaker 1: there's a lot of Republican consultants who believe, well, boy,
• 2:09:25
  Speaker 1: I don't know how else to motivate voters. Maybe we
• 2:09:28
  Speaker 1: can do Maybe we can do it again on judges, right,
• 2:09:30
  Speaker 1: we can do it again, you know, And that has
• 2:09:33
  Speaker 1: been a go to for getting out the Republican base
• 2:09:38
  Speaker 1: for years. I just don't know now that they've overturned Row,
• 2:09:44
  Speaker 1: I just don't know if it has the same salience
• 2:09:46
  Speaker 1: that it did in twenty eighteen. Where I do think
• 2:09:50
  Speaker 1: the Kavanaugh nomination taking place when it took place, and
• 2:09:54
  Speaker 1: because there was the scale of vacancy at sixteen. I
• 2:09:57
  Speaker 1: do think these Supreme Court vacancies had a huge impact
• 2:10:01
  Speaker 1: on the twenty sixteen election. I mean, you know, if
• 2:10:03
  Speaker 1: you want to all the different butterfly effects at twenty sixteen,
• 2:10:07
  Speaker 1: if you had just told me what's one to get
• 2:10:09
  Speaker 1: rid of Scalia, Scalia lived, Trump doesn't win, and Kavanaugh
• 2:10:18
  Speaker 1: in eighteen, I think definitely cost Democrats two sentence seeds.
• 2:10:22
  Speaker 1: I think they were on their way to having a
• 2:10:25
  Speaker 1: much better midterm year and they still had it in
• 2:10:27
  Speaker 1: the House. But I do think it it cost Claire
• 2:10:32
  Speaker 1: mccaskell her senate seed, and Joe Donley.
• 2:10:34
  Speaker 2: His.
• 2:10:45
  Speaker 1: Brayden and Charlotte Wrights. Hey, I really enjoy the podcast
• 2:10:47
  Speaker 1: and always learn something. It feels like part of Trump's
• 2:10:50
  Speaker 1: coalition is more focused on owning the Libs than on policy.
• 2:10:53
  Speaker 1: So how do Democrats or independence actually make inroads with
• 2:10:56
  Speaker 1: those voters. Is there a way to shift the conversation
• 2:10:58
  Speaker 1: towards tangible issues like cost of living, in governance, or
• 2:11:01
  Speaker 1: just as a segment of the electorate that's increasingly out
• 2:11:03
  Speaker 1: of reach. I just yeah, I think they own the
• 2:11:06
  Speaker 1: Libs segment of the electorate are just those aren't. They're
• 2:11:10
  Speaker 1: not serious people. They're performers, they're theatrics. They're just they're
• 2:11:15
  Speaker 1: they're not they're they're not persuadable voters. So I wouldn't
• 2:11:18
  Speaker 1: treat them as persuadable voters. But I do think there's
• 2:11:20
  Speaker 1: quite a few Trump voters that are persuadable voters, those
• 2:11:24
  Speaker 1: that are frustrated with the system, those that wanted disruption. Right,
• 2:11:28
  Speaker 1: I think the own the Lib's crowd is really kind
• 2:11:31
  Speaker 1: of like, you know, kind of what the current version
• 2:11:34
  Speaker 1: of Heritage is, Right, there was a Heritage in the
• 2:11:38
  Speaker 1: nineties was like a serious institution. Heritage today is a
• 2:11:41
  Speaker 1: kind of a clown show. They just they're just sort
• 2:11:44
  Speaker 1: of organized around quote owning the Libs. And that's that's
• 2:11:47
  Speaker 1: kind of, you know, kind of what I think these
• 2:11:51
  Speaker 1: the MAGA influencers who are right now all upset at Trump,
• 2:11:55
  Speaker 1: but what they really want to be is, you know,
• 2:11:57
  Speaker 1: they're also the ones that like, do these silly little
• 2:11:59
  Speaker 1: I whant to drink liberal tiers and all this stuff.
• 2:12:02
  Speaker 1: So no, I think you ignore the own the Libs crowd.
• 2:12:05
  Speaker 1: In fact, when you're doing research, you find a way
• 2:12:07
  Speaker 1: to you just you know, this is not about talking
• 2:12:11
  Speaker 1: to one hundred percent of everybody in the electorate, right.
• 2:12:13
  Speaker 1: I always say this, if you want to be a
• 2:12:16
  Speaker 1: successful politician, you've got to be able to be credible
• 2:12:21
  Speaker 1: with sixty percent of the electorate. You're not going to
• 2:12:24
  Speaker 1: get support from sixty percent of the electorate most of
• 2:12:27
  Speaker 1: the time, you know, I few could, But you need
• 2:12:29
  Speaker 1: to be credible with sixty percent of the electorate. If
• 2:12:31
  Speaker 1: you want to be an effective politician, you want a
• 2:12:36
  Speaker 1: job approval rating that's closer to sixty, which tells you
• 2:12:41
  Speaker 1: you know it. You know, in the twentieth century, it
• 2:12:45
  Speaker 1: was common for our presidents to have higher approval ratings
• 2:12:48
  Speaker 1: than their actual vote number. Now it's common, it's more
• 2:12:56
  Speaker 1: common for presidents to get elected with they where their
• 2:13:02
  Speaker 1: approval rating is already below the number that they received
• 2:13:05
  Speaker 1: their overall percentage numbers. So yeah, I just think the
• 2:13:10
  Speaker 1: the own the LIBS crowd isn't worth talking to. But
• 2:13:12
  Speaker 1: I think that's probably half of mega right, Maybe it's
• 2:13:18
  Speaker 1: two thirds of the Republican Party, maybe it's half the
• 2:13:21
  Speaker 1: Republican electorate. But I think there is a somewhere between
• 2:13:26
  Speaker 1: twenty and thirty percent of the of the Republican electorate
• 2:13:28
  Speaker 1: and sort of seventy percent of the independent electorate. And
• 2:13:34
  Speaker 1: you know, depending on your point of view and the
• 2:13:36
  Speaker 1: part and the Democratic party, right, if you're looking for,
• 2:13:39
  Speaker 1: you know that that is that is persuaded, you know,
• 2:13:42
  Speaker 1: and I think probably thirty percent of the Democratic electorate, right,
• 2:13:46
  Speaker 1: I think it's sort of sixty percent of Independence thirty
• 2:13:49
  Speaker 1: on each side. That are the persuadable people that you know,
• 2:13:52
  Speaker 1: that that center left Democrat that every once in a
• 2:13:55
  Speaker 1: while might support a Republican, that center center right Republican
• 2:13:58
  Speaker 1: then might every once in a while support a democt
• 2:14:00
  Speaker 1: at uh, and of course the independence. But yeah, you know,
• 2:14:03
  Speaker 1: if I wouldn't the own the LIB crowd, you know,
• 2:14:06
  Speaker 1: the best way to deal with them is just simply
• 2:14:08
  Speaker 1: use them as a use them as a foil. Right
• 2:14:13
  Speaker 1: to me, the the you know, if you're like this,
• 2:14:16
  Speaker 1: the leadership is in the owned the LIB business, right,
• 2:14:19
  Speaker 1: Like Johnson's not serious about policy, He's just in the
• 2:14:22
  Speaker 1: own the LIB game. So it is a way I
• 2:14:24
  Speaker 1: think to to to sort of make if you're trying
• 2:14:28
  Speaker 1: to paint your opponent as not serious about helping people,
• 2:14:33
  Speaker 1: you use that on the Lib messaging Jim in Pennsylvania. Rights,
• 2:14:38
  Speaker 1: is there any way to stop jerrymandering? What it need
• 2:14:40
  Speaker 1: to be state by a state by state regulated? Could
• 2:14:43
  Speaker 1: it be regulated through Congress or an executive order or
• 2:14:45
  Speaker 1: with a different Supreme Court? And then one NFL draft question.
• 2:14:48
  Speaker 1: If you were GM, what would your strategy be? Standpad
• 2:14:50
  Speaker 1: every year, trade up for the star players, trade back
• 2:14:52
  Speaker 1: in stockpile picks, win with volume and quality depth Jim
• 2:14:57
  Speaker 1: in Pennsylvania. So I will say this on redistricting, it
• 2:15:04
  Speaker 1: is it is written into the Constitution that the states
• 2:15:09
  Speaker 1: are in charge of this. So you need a constitutional
• 2:15:11
  Speaker 1: amendment if you want to try to put some rules
• 2:15:16
  Speaker 1: in place for how it's done. I think instead there
• 2:15:20
  Speaker 1: are ways to minimize the impact. Look, I think you're
• 2:15:25
  Speaker 1: you're always going to have one person's fair map is
• 2:15:28
  Speaker 1: another person's gerrymandered map, right, Because I could argue that
• 2:15:33
  Speaker 1: a community of interest is not a competitive district, but
• 2:15:39
  Speaker 1: a competitive district is not a community of interest because
• 2:15:42
  Speaker 1: in some places the community of interest is pretty partisan.
• 2:15:46
  Speaker 1: You know, and they and you know, it's a it's
• 2:15:48
  Speaker 1: sort of a one sided thing. But you know, if
• 2:15:50
  Speaker 1: you if you mandated competitiveness, then you might actually need
• 2:15:54
  Speaker 1: to jerrymander and create all sorts of weird districts if
• 2:15:57
  Speaker 1: your goal was to create nothing more than fifty five
• 2:15:59
  Speaker 1: to forty five. So there's the state by state referendums
• 2:16:05
  Speaker 1: are about the only way to do it, because the
• 2:16:07
  Speaker 1: problem is if you don't have a if you're not
• 2:16:09
  Speaker 1: a referendum state and you're asking, you have to ask
• 2:16:13
  Speaker 1: the state legislature to take away its own power, and
• 2:16:15
  Speaker 1: they're just not going to do that. I will go
• 2:16:19
  Speaker 1: back to the solution that I've been advocating. I think
• 2:16:21
  Speaker 1: there's two things I would do. I'd have a constitutional
• 2:16:26
  Speaker 1: amendment that mandated that a congressional district could be no
• 2:16:30
  Speaker 1: bigger than point zero three percent of the population. And
• 2:16:34
  Speaker 1: so why do I put it that way, Because that
• 2:16:37
  Speaker 1: right now would put us at one per four hundred
• 2:16:39
  Speaker 1: thousand members of Congress population. It would probably pretty close
• 2:16:44
  Speaker 1: to double the size of the House. And a larger
• 2:16:49
  Speaker 1: House wouldn't eliminate jerrymandering, but it would minimize jerrymandering's impact
• 2:16:54
  Speaker 1: because if you have more district lines, it's just sort
• 2:16:58
  Speaker 1: of it's easier to create the communities of interest and
• 2:17:02
  Speaker 1: there's just less less votes to play. With less communities
• 2:17:07
  Speaker 1: to break up and all of those things. Alternatively, I
• 2:17:16
  Speaker 1: will tell you I have always, I have always fantasized
• 2:17:21
  Speaker 1: about creating the following metric, which is you take that
• 2:17:27
  Speaker 1: every ten years, you know, and this is what you'd
• 2:17:30
  Speaker 1: have to write into the constitution. You average the party,
• 2:17:36
  Speaker 1: You average the vote by party of the governor and
• 2:17:41
  Speaker 1: the president in every state during the decade up to
• 2:17:47
  Speaker 1: the census. Right, So let's say, going into twenty thirty,
• 2:17:50
  Speaker 1: you would take, you know, all the governors result by
• 2:17:53
  Speaker 1: party and the president, and then you'd sort of average
• 2:17:55
  Speaker 1: it out, and let's say it worked out to fifty
• 2:18:00
  Speaker 1: three forty seven R to D Well, then I would
• 2:18:07
  Speaker 1: say that's your baseline, which means no congressional district could
• 2:18:10
  Speaker 1: be drawn more than you know, with a with a
• 2:18:14
  Speaker 1: Republican advantage, no more than ten points higher than the
• 2:18:17
  Speaker 1: best performing overall average Republican statewide. So you know, you
• 2:18:21
  Speaker 1: couldn't have a district that was more than sixty three
• 2:18:24
  Speaker 1: percent Republican, and you couldn't have a district that was
• 2:18:27
  Speaker 1: any less than forty three percent Republican. And did it
• 2:18:31
  Speaker 1: with the Democrats. So you do some you know, and
• 2:18:32
  Speaker 1: whatever it is that you create sort of a a
• 2:18:36
  Speaker 1: ten point guard rail over and above what the what
• 2:18:40
  Speaker 1: the statewide average is and said state over a ten
• 2:18:43
  Speaker 1: year period. So that way you're reflecting the general direction
• 2:18:47
  Speaker 1: of the you know, is this a republican state, is
• 2:18:49
  Speaker 1: a democratic state? Or is this a purple state? And
• 2:18:52
  Speaker 1: maybe you put a limit that if that if if
• 2:18:54
  Speaker 1: it's under you know, if your state is under fifty
• 2:18:57
  Speaker 1: five to forty five, if the average is below fifty
• 2:18:59
  Speaker 1: five to forty five, then has to be as evenly
• 2:19:01
  Speaker 1: divided as you possibly can can come up with. So
• 2:19:04
  Speaker 1: those are sort of some of the math ideas that
• 2:19:08
  Speaker 1: I've had put to this. But I do think the
• 2:19:10
  Speaker 1: simpler way to sort of d defang Jerry Manderin is
• 2:19:17
  Speaker 1: to just uncap the house and you know, let's let's
• 2:19:21
  Speaker 1: go double cat the house. All right. As for your
• 2:19:24
  Speaker 1: as for your GM question, I'd have a simple strategy.
• 2:19:30
  Speaker 1: I would draft the best offensive tackle or defensive tackle,
• 2:19:34
  Speaker 1: best offensive lineman or defensive linemen available every single first round,
• 2:19:41
  Speaker 1: hard stop just about every single first round unless I
• 2:19:45
  Speaker 1: needed a quarterback. That's it. I would never use a
• 2:19:48
  Speaker 1: first round pick for any other position. Ultimately, you win
• 2:19:53
  Speaker 1: football games at the line of scrimmage I I have.
• 2:19:57
  Speaker 1: I am only becoming more convinced to this the more
• 2:20:02
  Speaker 1: the longer I live and the more I watch football. Right,
• 2:20:04
  Speaker 1: I mean, just think about it. Every championship team NFL
• 2:20:09
  Speaker 1: or college, they always have a dominant offensive line or
• 2:20:14
  Speaker 1: defensive line. And you build football teams inside out, you
• 2:20:19
  Speaker 1: could always find receivers all over. I would never draft
• 2:20:21
  Speaker 1: a receiver in the first round. They are always receivers
• 2:20:24
  Speaker 1: to be found. I would never draft a running back
• 2:20:28
  Speaker 1: in the first round. There are always running backs to
• 2:20:31
  Speaker 1: be found, So that would be That would be my
• 2:20:34
  Speaker 1: basic strategy. And yes, I would stockpile as many second, third,
• 2:20:40
  Speaker 1: and fourth round picks as I could get. I think
• 2:20:42
  Speaker 1: those are the sweet spots. I'd use my first round
• 2:20:44
  Speaker 1: pick almost exclusively on the lines and or a quarterback
• 2:20:49
  Speaker 1: if I needed a quarterback, and then spend two, three,
• 2:20:54
  Speaker 1: and four, the second, third, and fourth round on linebackers,
• 2:21:00
  Speaker 1: defensive backs, receivers, and running backs, and then fifth and
• 2:21:04
  Speaker 1: six are flyers, right, are sort of I've you know
• 2:21:09
  Speaker 1: one of those that you've But that would be my
• 2:21:11
  Speaker 1: basic strategy. So there's my hot take on that.
• 2:21:15
  Speaker 3: I am.
• 2:21:18
  Speaker 1: I love the draft. I will admit I found out
• 2:21:22
  Speaker 1: that my new partner in the sports history podcast that
• 2:21:25
  Speaker 1: I'm doing Dynastic, Jay and Doande he hates the draft.
• 2:21:29
  Speaker 1: We had a fun little We just taped our it's
• 2:21:31
  Speaker 1: not yet up, it'll be up in very soon, but
• 2:21:34
  Speaker 1: we taped our next episode of Dynastic. We were just
• 2:21:36
  Speaker 1: putting it through the editing machine here for a few minutes.
• 2:21:39
  Speaker 1: And it's a focus on the Pittsburgh Steelers, and a
• 2:21:42
  Speaker 1: big part of the story of the Pittsburgh Steelers is there. Essentially,
• 2:21:46
  Speaker 1: they might have had the greatest draft run in the
• 2:21:48
  Speaker 1: history of professional sports from nineteen sixty nine to nineteen
• 2:21:51
  Speaker 1: seventy four. And so I've been I've spent a lot
• 2:21:57
  Speaker 1: of time learning about draft strategies. But in nineteen sixty nine,
• 2:22:02
  Speaker 1: their first overall pick was a kid from North Texas,
• 2:22:06
  Speaker 1: from the from the mean Green down there at North Texas,
• 2:22:09
  Speaker 1: guy named Joe Green. Right, So you know, I'm I
• 2:22:13
  Speaker 1: think you build, I think you build inside out. So
• 2:22:16
  Speaker 1: that would be my strategy. All right, I'm gonna leave
• 2:22:18
  Speaker 1: with you know, as I told you about the NBA playoffs,
• 2:22:21
  Speaker 1: I'm I'm I'm enjoying Wemby. I'm bum that he's hurt
• 2:22:26
  Speaker 1: and we're gonna not have him this weekend. I hope
• 2:22:28
  Speaker 1: he can get back and get healthy pretty quickly. He's
• 2:22:31
  Speaker 1: just it's just fun to watch him out there. And uh,
• 2:22:35
  Speaker 1: I can't quit Lebron. I love I want to, you know,
• 2:22:38
  Speaker 1: I want to see Lebron in the playoffs, which brings
• 2:22:41
  Speaker 1: me to Kevin Durant. Kevin Durant is one of the
• 2:22:46
  Speaker 1: is is going to be the most If you get
• 2:22:51
  Speaker 1: people that know basketball, there's nothing I enjoy more than
• 2:22:54
  Speaker 1: getting them to debate Kevin Durant, right, because he's one
• 2:23:00
  Speaker 1: of the greatest players of all time, there's no doubt
• 2:23:02
  Speaker 1: about it. But it's pretty clear he's a shitty teammate.
• 2:23:06
  Speaker 2: Now.
• 2:23:07
  Speaker 1: I don't know if he's like a shitty teammate because
• 2:23:10
  Speaker 1: of how he behaves or he's just a shitty teammate
• 2:23:13
  Speaker 1: because of how he plays. But look at you know,
• 2:23:19
  Speaker 1: you know, there's this old joke that you know, you know,
• 2:23:22
  Speaker 1: this person complains, you know they've had a bunch of
• 2:23:24
  Speaker 1: jobs and they're going, yeah, I had this asshole boss,
• 2:23:27
  Speaker 1: and then I had this other job. And boy, I
• 2:23:29
  Speaker 1: had this asshole boss, and then you have this another job.
• 2:23:31
  Speaker 1: You know, I've had this asshole boss. And then you
• 2:23:33
  Speaker 1: start to say to yourself, Huh, if everybody you work
• 2:23:37
  Speaker 1: for is an asshole, is it possible you're the asshole? Right?
• 2:23:45
  Speaker 1: And I don't you know, Durant's sort of a head
• 2:23:48
  Speaker 1: scratcher to me, right, He's got his whole the weird
• 2:23:50
  Speaker 1: he's too. He seems consumed with himself and he's consumed
• 2:23:55
  Speaker 1: with critics. And I feel for him. I do because
• 2:24:00
  Speaker 1: I think he's there's something he's looking for that he's
• 2:24:03
  Speaker 1: apparently never going to get right, like some form of satisfaction.
• 2:24:07
  Speaker 1: Like he's got a chip on his shoulder, and I think,
• 2:24:09
  Speaker 1: you know, there's nut. Look, I think chips are important
• 2:24:12
  Speaker 1: for successful people. A lot of successful people have a
• 2:24:16
  Speaker 1: chip on their shoulder. Maybe it's a daddy issue, maybe
• 2:24:18
  Speaker 1: it's a mommy issue, maybe it's something else. But you know, I,
• 2:24:22
  Speaker 1: in a weird way, I respect chips on the shoulder.
• 2:24:26
  Speaker 1: But I want to share with you a quote like
• 2:24:28
  Speaker 1: those actually back to Dynastic. So there was there's this
• 2:24:36
  Speaker 1: great book about the Steelers by a gentleman named Gary Palmerantz.
• 2:24:40
  Speaker 1: And he wrote this book in twenty thirteen about basically
• 2:24:44
  Speaker 1: the dead Pittsburgh Steelers. The ones that had passed on,
• 2:24:48
  Speaker 1: and he called it their life's work. And there's this
• 2:24:53
  Speaker 1: there's this factoi that I couldn't shake. And so before
• 2:24:59
  Speaker 1: Terry Bradshaw was the initial starter for the Steelers, he
• 2:25:02
  Speaker 1: was in a QB controversy with two other quarterbacks that
• 2:25:06
  Speaker 1: there was a bit of a rotation. Joe Gilliam and
• 2:25:10
  Speaker 1: he was one of the early black quarterbacks to get
• 2:25:15
  Speaker 1: a starting job in the NFL. Back the seventy four season,
• 2:25:19
  Speaker 1: he was the starting quarterback for the Steelers, not Bradshaw.
• 2:25:22
  Speaker 1: Bradshaw would eventually get the get the job later and
• 2:25:25
  Speaker 1: a former Notre Dame quarterback named Terry Hanratty and Joe
• 2:25:30
  Speaker 1: Gilliam all sorts of talent, but he and Noel just
• 2:25:33
  Speaker 1: couldn't get along with each other anyway. In the Gary
• 2:25:36
  Speaker 1: Palmeran's book, he had notes this that Joe Gilliam's gravestorm
• 2:25:43
  Speaker 1: epitaph was he was loved in spite of himself. And
• 2:25:48
  Speaker 1: I just remember I read when I first read that,
• 2:25:51
  Speaker 1: it just sort of gut punched me and I thought, man, man,
• 2:25:54
  Speaker 1: I'd love to know more what happened with Joe Gilliam
• 2:25:58
  Speaker 1: and all this stuff. And he had he ended up
• 2:25:59
  Speaker 1: he had issues, and there were clearly some other demons there.
• 2:26:04
  Speaker 1: But I thought of that quote when I saw, you know,
• 2:26:07
  Speaker 1: and I was sort of like, way, another disappointing Durant
• 2:26:10
  Speaker 1: performance right against you know, Lebron, And I've been thinking
• 2:26:14
  Speaker 1: about this, right, Phoenix got better after Kevin Durant left. Right,
• 2:26:20
  Speaker 1: he couldn't make Brooklyn happen. He had to join Steph
• 2:26:25
  Speaker 1: Curry's team to win a title. And I say all this,
• 2:26:27
  Speaker 1: and I am there is nothing scarier than that fifteen
• 2:26:31
  Speaker 1: footer that Kevin Durant takes because he never misses, right,
• 2:26:34
  Speaker 1: that little arc shot that you're just like, man, it's
• 2:26:37
  Speaker 1: it's like Kareem and his jump shot and is a
• 2:26:39
  Speaker 1: hook shot, right, It's like it's indefensible. Some foot guy
• 2:26:42
  Speaker 1: you know who has this incredible and you know, just
• 2:26:48
  Speaker 1: just automatic from about fifteen wherever he is in the court.
• 2:26:53
  Speaker 1: But that epitaph he was loved to in spite of himself.
• 2:26:57
  Speaker 1: And I kind of feel this way about Durant, like
• 2:27:00
  Speaker 1: I think there's something and I don't think any of
• 2:27:03
  Speaker 1: us know what it is, and it's I feel like
• 2:27:07
  Speaker 1: it's holding him back and I don't know what it is.
• 2:27:09
  Speaker 1: And I you know, look, I put politicians on the couch,
• 2:27:11
  Speaker 1: so hey, guess what, I'm gonna put professional athletes on
• 2:27:14
  Speaker 1: the couch. But this is going to linger as part
• 2:27:19
  Speaker 1: of his legacy that he was this roving player, right,
• 2:27:23
  Speaker 1: I mean, and I've been trying to think of who's
• 2:27:25
  Speaker 1: the who is somebody like him one of the all
• 2:27:28
  Speaker 1: time greats? Probably I'm sorry, he's probably one of the
• 2:27:31
  Speaker 1: ten greatest basketball players period on the planet Earth of
• 2:27:35
  Speaker 1: all time, and yet I wouldn't put him in the
• 2:27:38
  Speaker 1: top ten all time NBA guys because he doesn't make
• 2:27:42
  Speaker 1: people around him better, I think the closest comparison, and
• 2:27:46
  Speaker 1: I'd love Look, I'm a amateur basketball fan, meaning I'm
• 2:27:51
  Speaker 1: not going to sit here and claim I'm I'm super
• 2:27:54
  Speaker 1: expert on any of this. I'm not a basketball historian,
• 2:27:58
  Speaker 1: and probably a little bit more of football and baseball
• 2:28:00
  Speaker 1: in the basketball historian. But the the the player I
• 2:28:05
  Speaker 1: think about when I think about Duran is Wilt Chamberlain,
• 2:28:07
  Speaker 1: where you're just like, individually amazing, but for some reason
• 2:28:12
  Speaker 1: the teams he were on, you know, they were great,
• 2:28:16
  Speaker 1: but they weren't great enough, right, And I you know,
• 2:28:22
  Speaker 1: you never look, it's not like you hear that Kevin
• 2:28:23
  Speaker 1: Duran has a bad attitude or anything like this. But
• 2:28:25
  Speaker 1: there's you know, maybe he's a loaner. I don't know
• 2:28:28
  Speaker 1: what it is, but there is a there's an emerging
• 2:28:34
  Speaker 1: pattern here and it is something that is gonna it
• 2:28:39
  Speaker 1: is it is gonna linger in this discussion. You know
• 2:28:44
  Speaker 1: about him, you know it is his You know, everybody's
• 2:28:47
  Speaker 1: got a butt. You know, when you talk about in
• 2:28:50
  Speaker 1: any greatness, you know they were this this and this butt, right,
• 2:28:54
  Speaker 1: and the butt with him is going to be this.
• 2:28:56
  Speaker 1: The unanswerable question is this. He's never seen happy where
• 2:29:00
  Speaker 1: he's at, and even when he has nothing but success,
• 2:29:04
  Speaker 1: it doesn't seem to fulfill him. Right, He's missing something.
• 2:29:09
  Speaker 1: So all I'll say is I hope he finds it.
• 2:29:13
  Speaker 1: But it is it is, It is a it is
• 2:29:16
  Speaker 1: an intriguing pattern. Look, I I confess, man, I hope
• 2:29:23
  Speaker 1: when I had hoped, and I'd hoped that he was
• 2:29:25
  Speaker 1: going to be the guy to resurrect and rescue the
• 2:29:27
  Speaker 1: Washington NBA franchise. He is a PG County kid, but
• 2:29:33
  Speaker 1: apparently the last place he wanted to play. He's been
• 2:29:36
  Speaker 1: willing to play just about in any other NBA city.
• 2:29:40
  Speaker 1: Except his hometown, which is which is quite the bummer.
• 2:29:43
  Speaker 1: All right, what a weekend of sports. Enjoy the Draft.
• 2:29:47
  Speaker 1: For those of you that enjoy the draft, we get
• 2:29:49
  Speaker 1: the big White House correspondence dinner. So get ready for
• 2:29:53
  Speaker 1: all sorts of faux outrage this weekend from people either
• 2:29:57
  Speaker 1: self satisfied that they're not going or self satisfied that
• 2:30:00
  Speaker 1: they are going. Either way, I think people over overreact
• 2:30:04
  Speaker 1: to both parts of this. Uh, and I'll see you
• 2:30:07
  Speaker 1: on I'll see you on Monday. Thanks for listening. Don't
• 2:30:10
  Speaker 1: forget to like and subscribe.
• 2:30:12
  Speaker 2: Mm hmmm mmmmmmmm h