Latest / Pod Save America / 2020: Julián Castro on Immigration and Beyonce

Transcript

2020: Julián Castro on Immigration and Beyonce · Pod Save America

0:20
Speaker 1: Welcome to Pod Save America. This is Tommy Vitor. You
0:23
Speaker 1: know me from the Monday episodes. You know me from
0:25
Speaker 1: Pod Save the World, the show you listen to after
0:28
Speaker 1: Keep It on Wednesdays. That comment was directed at my wife.
0:33
Speaker 1: We are interviewing all of the presidential candidates who are
0:37
Speaker 1: willing and able to come through our studio here at
0:39
Speaker 1: Crooked Media HQ in Los Angeles. Today, I was honored
0:43
Speaker 1: to talk with Julian Castro. He's a former mayor of
0:46
Speaker 1: San Antonio, former secretary of housing and urban development, and
0:49
Speaker 1: a very, very nice guy. Here's the stuff we talked about.
0:53
Speaker 1: Here's what you have in store for you. We talked
0:55
Speaker 1: about his big, bold immigration policy and some of the
0:59
Speaker 1: political hurdles he may face in trying to pass it.
1:02
Speaker 1: We talked about why he went to Puerto Rico first
1:04
Speaker 1: when every other candidate goes to Iowa. We talked about
1:07
Speaker 1: some housing policy. We talked about whether he was willing
1:11
Speaker 1: to break some news with me by releasing his list
1:13
Speaker 1: of Supreme Court justices. Spoiler alert, he did not. We
1:19
Speaker 1: also talked about why Democrats have struggled to make inroads
1:21
Speaker 1: with Latino voters, even in 2018. And then for him personally,
1:26
Speaker 1: how he thinks he can break through in a field
1:30
Speaker 1: of 2020 primary candidates that gets bigger by the day.
1:35
Speaker 1: Then we turn to some foreign policy questions. I asked
1:38
Speaker 1: him about the rise of white nationalism and what the
1:41
Speaker 1: hell we can do to stop it. We talked about
1:43
Speaker 1: the U.S.-Saudi relationship and whether they are still an ally
1:47
Speaker 1: after all the terrible things they're doing. We talked about
1:49
Speaker 1: China and the fact that they're locking up an entire
1:53
Speaker 1: the religious minority group called the weakers, and how we
1:56
Speaker 1: push back and get them to stop. And I asked
1:58
Speaker 1: about Trump's diplomacy with North Korea. And then finally, I
2:02
Speaker 1: asked him about Beyonce. So without further ado, here is
2:06
Speaker 1: the interview with Julian Castro. Download, subscribe to Pod Save
2:10
Speaker 1: the World. I am honored to have with me in
2:18
Speaker 1: the studio today the former mayor of San Antonio, former
2:21
Speaker 1: Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Julian Castro. Thank you
2:24
Speaker 1: so much for joining us.
2:26
Speaker 2: Thanks a lot.
2:26
Speaker 1: Great to be with you. So it's been a weird
2:30
Speaker 1: week in the Trump world. I guess we can say
2:33
Speaker 1: that every week, basically.
2:34
Speaker 2: That is true.
2:34
Speaker 1: But I mean, he threatened to seal the border with Mexico.
2:36
Speaker 1: He threatened to cut off aid to El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala.
2:41
Speaker 1: You rolled out a very, very different, far less punitive
2:45
Speaker 1: and cruel immigration policy. You proposed decriminalizing illegal entry into
2:49
Speaker 1: the U.S., and making it a civil infraction. So more
2:52
Speaker 1: like a speeding ticket than a crime. You want to
2:55
Speaker 1: split up ICE. You've proposed a Marshall Plan for Central America.
2:59
Speaker 1: Can you explain your immigration proposals and, you know, in particular,
3:04
Speaker 1: what you can do on your own versus what Congress
3:06
Speaker 1: would have to act on? And talk about why you
3:08
Speaker 1: took such a bold approach.
3:10
Speaker 3: Well, I just have a different vision for this from
3:12
Speaker 3: the president. If you'll remember about a year ago, his
3:16
Speaker 3: administration told us basically that if we would just be
3:19
Speaker 3: cruel enough to separate little children from their parents, that
3:23
Speaker 3: that would deter more families from coming to the United States.
3:26
Speaker 3: And in fact, more families are coming now. And so
3:31
Speaker 3: he wants us to believe that in order to have
3:33
Speaker 3: a secure border, we need to choose cruelty. I believe
3:38
Speaker 3: that we have a border that is more secure than
3:39
Speaker 3: it's ever been, and I'm asking Americans to choose compassion.
3:43
Speaker 3: So this People First immigration plan that I rolled out
3:46
Speaker 3: includes rolling back something called Section 1325 of the Immigration
3:52
Speaker 3: and Nationality Act, which, as you know, was put in
3:55
Speaker 3: place in the late 1920s. But until about 2004, these infractions,
4:01
Speaker 3: somebody crossing over the border, was actually treated mostly as
4:05
Speaker 3: a civil matter. It wasn't treated as a criminal matter.
4:08
Speaker 3: I believe that we should go back to that, that
4:10
Speaker 3: it will help us undo the backlog that exists of people.
4:14
Speaker 3: Folks have been watching these images of people under the
4:18
Speaker 3: bridge in El Paso that are literally fenced in with
4:22
Speaker 3: razor wire. This family detention practice of separating little children
4:28
Speaker 3: from their parents. That's all part of this incarceration push
4:32
Speaker 3: in our immigration policy. I think that we need to
4:35
Speaker 3: do away with that. I also believe that we need
4:37
Speaker 3: to increase the number of refugees that this country takes in.
4:41
Speaker 3: I think that we need to stop playing games with
4:44
Speaker 3: people who are seeking asylum in this country. stop treating
4:47
Speaker 3: them like criminals and allow them to make their claim.
4:50
Speaker 3: I saw the president today suggest that we should somehow
4:52
Speaker 3: do away with asylum and also do away with immigration judges. Actually,
4:57
Speaker 3: I believe that we should strengthen our immigration judicial system
5:01
Speaker 3: and make it independent and invest in it so that
5:05
Speaker 3: we can actually process these claims. I mean, the fact
5:08
Speaker 3: of the matter is we know that many of the
5:10
Speaker 3: people who make an asylum claim in the United States
5:14
Speaker 3: are may not get asylum, right? Also, under my plan,
5:18
Speaker 3: of course, we maintain the power to deport people, but
5:22
Speaker 3: we don't treat them like criminals and we don't act
5:25
Speaker 3: like this is just going to go away. I also
5:28
Speaker 3: proposed basically a 21st century Marshall Plan for Latin America.
5:34
Speaker 3: I know that you can't compare the Latin America of
5:37
Speaker 3: today with post-World War II Europe, right? I mean, Europe
5:41
Speaker 3: was coming back after the war. But what I mean
5:44
Speaker 3: is that I believe that we need to make investments
5:48
Speaker 3: in these Northern Triangle countries, in Honduras, in El Salvador,
5:51
Speaker 3: in Guatemala, so that people can find safety and opportunity
5:55
Speaker 3: there instead of having to knock on the door of
5:58
Speaker 3: the United States. And so they win and we win.
6:02
Speaker 1: I love that you are taking a big, bold approach
6:06
Speaker 1: on immigration policy. I think that Democrats need to go
6:08
Speaker 1: at Trump hard on immigration because if you look at
6:11
Speaker 1: the facts, he's a failure, right? He's failed on enforcement.
6:14
Speaker 1: He's failed when it comes to living up to our values,
6:17
Speaker 1: he's not done the job, gotten the job done. But
6:21
Speaker 1: I also know, you know, just from mostly the time
6:23
Speaker 1: in the White House, that some of these policies are
6:25
Speaker 1: tough politically. And some of them you've proposed, like splitting
6:30
Speaker 1: up ICE, decriminalizing illegal entry, the foreign aid. If those
6:34
Speaker 1: require congressional action, and in some instances are unpopular, how
6:40
Speaker 1: do you propose to sell that? I mean, how can
6:43
Speaker 1: we get voters to understand that more money for foreign
6:49
Speaker 1: aid is actually going to help them in the long run?
6:53
Speaker 3: Well, I mean, the fact is that, as you know,
6:55
Speaker 3: the United States every single year invests in the relationships
7:01
Speaker 3: that we have around the world with aid to many countries.
7:04
Speaker 3: And so I do think that there's a backbone in
7:06
Speaker 3: our history of some built-in support, some realization of that.
7:10
Speaker 2: You're right.
7:11
Speaker 3: I mean, we do have to convince people why it
7:13
Speaker 3: would make sense. And I would very much lead that
7:17
Speaker 3: with an explanation of how much we're going to spend,
7:19
Speaker 3: how much it would cost to build that wall versus
7:22
Speaker 3: to invest less, what would be less dollars in these
7:25
Speaker 3: Northern Triangle countries. And I think to stem the tide,
7:29
Speaker 3: stem the flow. of people coming over here. So just
7:31
Speaker 3: on a numbers basis, do you.
7:32
Speaker 1: Have a ballpark number? I don't.
7:35
Speaker 3: Um, but you know, I anticipate that that would be
7:38
Speaker 3: our approach. Uh, and you know, during the course of
7:40
Speaker 3: the campaign, we look forward to getting specific about that. Um,
7:44
Speaker 3: but the other thing is that, uh, yeah, I think
7:47
Speaker 3: that on January 20th, 2021 at 12 0 1 PM,
7:52
Speaker 3: we're going to have a democratic president, a democratic Senate
7:55
Speaker 3: and a democratic house. And One of the lessons on
7:58
Speaker 3: immigration reform of 2009, 2010 is don't wait. And so
8:04
Speaker 3: we're going to go for that.
8:07
Speaker 1: A lot of candidates announced that they're going to run
8:09
Speaker 1: for president, and then they catch the first plane to Iowa.
8:12
Speaker 1: You went to Puerto Rico. Why'd you do that?
8:15
Speaker 3: I went to Puerto Rico because I wanted them and
8:18
Speaker 3: all Americans to know that if I'm president, that everybody
8:21
Speaker 3: counts in this country. This administration has failed the people
8:26
Speaker 3: of Puerto Rico. just recently, he lied that $ 91 billion
8:33
Speaker 3: had been invested in Puerto Rico to recover from Hurricane Maria.
8:37
Speaker 2: The truth is that that's just.
8:38
Speaker 3: Over $ 11 billion. And I wanted to just tell them,
8:41
Speaker 3: you know, we're thinking about them. They're Americans too. And
8:46
Speaker 3: if I'm president, I think, frankly, if any of the
8:49
Speaker 3: folks that are running for president as Democrats make it,
8:52
Speaker 3: that we're going to treat them very differently. We're going
8:54
Speaker 3: to make sure that they count.
8:56
Speaker 1: Do you have a theory for why he is so
8:59
Speaker 1: vicious towards elected officials, any financing going towards Puerto Rico.
9:06
Speaker 1: It's glaring. It's nasty. It's insecurity.
9:10
Speaker 3: He recognizes that it's another example of the administration's either
9:14
Speaker 3: malice or incompetence. See, I don't think that his incompetence
9:18
Speaker 3: is given enough credit a lot of times. It's an
9:23
Speaker 3: incompetent administration full of people who are C or D
9:26
Speaker 3: level appointees, not all of them, but a lot of them.
9:30
Speaker 3: I mean, you served in the federal government, you know
9:31
Speaker 3: what I'm talking about? Um, a lot of positions that
9:35
Speaker 3: are unfilled, a lot of decisions that don't get made
9:37
Speaker 3: because people are afraid to make a decision because there
9:39
Speaker 3: are gaps in the chain of command, um, political decisions
9:44
Speaker 3: that get made. So he wants people to believe that
9:49
Speaker 3: it was Puerto Rico's fault. from the very beginning when
9:52
Speaker 3: they suggested that somehow, you know, people were on strike
9:55
Speaker 3: and so they didn't help deliver supplies on the island.
9:57
Speaker 2: Um, he, he riles.
10:00
Speaker 3: Up his base by making him think it's Puerto Rico's fault, uh,
10:03
Speaker 3: when it wasn't and, uh, shifts the conversation to that
10:07
Speaker 3: instead of the fact that that Harvard study pointed out
10:10
Speaker 3: that about three, 3000 people died and a lot of
10:13
Speaker 3: them after the storm hit because the recovery was not
10:17
Speaker 3: handled the right way. Yeah.
10:18
Speaker 1: Puerto Ricans are known to create, uh, their own hurricanes,
10:21
Speaker 1: I think is, uh, his take on this. Um, do
10:23
Speaker 1: you think Puerto Rico should become a state?
10:25
Speaker 3: Well, I think that they should, um, that they should
10:29
Speaker 3: determine that. I know that there have been a couple
10:31
Speaker 3: of votes in years past. Uh, I would like to
10:34
Speaker 3: see a process for self-determination.
10:37
Speaker 1: I would be.
10:37
Speaker 3: Committed to that if I'm president. Um, I think that, uh, um,
10:43
Speaker 3: they should be respected first and foremost, and they've been
10:46
Speaker 3: completely disrespected by this president. I mean, I cannot believe
10:50
Speaker 3: how disrespectful this president has been.
10:52
Speaker 1: Nor can I. So you were President Obama's Secretary of
10:55
Speaker 1: Housing and Urban Development from 2014 to 2017. The financial
11:01
Speaker 1: crisis and a lot of the fallout from it was
11:04
Speaker 1: before your time in many instances, but there are some
11:07
Speaker 1: Democrats who believe that Obama didn't do enough to help
11:10
Speaker 1: homeowners hurt by the financial crisis, but he bailed out banks, right?
11:14
Speaker 1: Something you hear a lot. So, for example, they think
11:17
Speaker 1: we should have let bankruptcy judges modify homeowner mortgages to
11:21
Speaker 1: reduce the terms, reduce the value of the debt, and
11:23
Speaker 1: avoid foreclosure. It's called a cram down, one of those
11:25
Speaker 1: awful terms that I will never forget, and no one
11:28
Speaker 1: knows what it means. Do you agree with that criticism?
11:31
Speaker 1: And if you do, what other things do you think
11:33
Speaker 1: we could have done to help homeowners after the crisis?
11:36
Speaker 3: Well.
11:39
Speaker 3: What I believe is that President Obama did a very
11:43
Speaker 3: good job with the circumstances that he inherited. In terms
11:49
Speaker 3: of getting the country back up on its feet, you
11:51
Speaker 3: think about communities like Florida or Nevada that were very
11:55
Speaker 3: hard hit. It was night and day. If you stepped
11:59
Speaker 3: in there in January of 2009 versus January of 2017.
12:05
Speaker 3: At the same time, of course, there are things that that,
12:08
Speaker 3: you know, lessons learned, hopefully we won't have to go
12:11
Speaker 3: through that again, but lessons learned in terms of maybe
12:14
Speaker 3: we can be more aggressive in so that more people
12:17
Speaker 3: can keep their homes. But overall, I do think that
12:20
Speaker 3: the administration was focused on the concerns of everyday people,
12:24
Speaker 3: especially in a way that this president just is not.
12:27
Speaker 3: Folks may remember, you know, right after he was elected, uh, uh,
12:31
Speaker 3: you know, somebody caught him, I think on tape or
12:34
Speaker 3: a reporter, Trump told his buddies at one of his clubs,
12:39
Speaker 3: you know, I'm going to get you that tax cut, right?
12:41
Speaker 3: I'm going to lower your taxes. I mean, that's completely
12:44
Speaker 3: different from the attitude that President Obama had and all
12:48
Speaker 3: of us had, which is we want to do what
12:50
Speaker 3: we can to improve the lives of everyday Americans that
12:54
Speaker 3: are working hard and have just lost their homes. I
12:56
Speaker 3: think in the future, we can look at more aggressive
13:01
Speaker 3: ways to make sure people can keep their homes and
13:06
Speaker 3: also to add to housing supply that is affordable because
13:10
Speaker 3: we have a rental affordability crisis out there. And on
13:13
Speaker 3: the stomp these days, I talk a lot about that.
13:15
Speaker 3: One of the things I talk about is that we
13:17
Speaker 3: need to be the most prosperous nation in this 21st century,
13:20
Speaker 3: but it has to mean prosperity for everybody, from raising
13:23
Speaker 3: the minimum wage to investing in affordable housing to making
13:27
Speaker 3: sure that, of course, we focus on the middle class,
13:30
Speaker 3: but also that we focus on the poor too.
13:33
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, look, I've lived recently in D.C., LA,
13:36
Speaker 1: San Francisco, I mean, these are cities where rents are
13:38
Speaker 1: just skyrocketing.
13:40
Speaker 2: And you really hit the hotspots of extensive places.
13:42
Speaker 1: Yeah, it was not the smartest move on my part.
13:44
Speaker 1: I wasn't a tech founder. So, I mean, like these cities,
13:49
Speaker 1: I mean, the gentrification, people are getting driven out of
13:51
Speaker 1: their homes. What role do you think the federal government
13:54
Speaker 1: can play in helping people afford housing versus state and
13:58
Speaker 1: local governments? There are things that we can do.
14:01
Speaker 3: At the end of the Obama administration, one of the
14:04
Speaker 3: things we did was to release a set of recommendations
14:09
Speaker 3: for local communities on land use decisions that they could make,
14:16
Speaker 3: basically to increase the likelihood that affordable housing would be built,
14:20
Speaker 3: that we'd get greater supply. But we can make stronger investments.
14:24
Speaker 3: I would increase the National Housing Trust Fund increased low-income
14:28
Speaker 3: housing tax credits, also traditional tools like community development block
14:32
Speaker 3: grants and home funding and money to combat homelessness because
14:37
Speaker 3: we have, in these cities that you mentioned, growing unsheltered homelessness.
14:42
Speaker 3: But we also, I think, have to restore something called
14:47
Speaker 3: affirmatively furthering fair housing. It was a blockbuster rule that
14:51
Speaker 3: HUD did during the Obama administration to basically tell communities, look,
14:56
Speaker 3: If you're going to get federal taxpayer dollars through HUD,
14:58
Speaker 3: you have to get more serious about providing equal housing
15:01
Speaker 3: opportunity throughout your jurisdiction. And that, I think, will help jurisdictions,
15:08
Speaker 3: cities or counties be wiser, be more prudent about things
15:13
Speaker 3: like gentrification and displacement. I have to tell you that
15:17
Speaker 3: I traveled to 100 different communities in 39 states when
15:20
Speaker 3: I was HUD secretary, you know, over those two and
15:22
Speaker 3: a half years, and I would not have graded a
15:25
Speaker 3: single community with an A when it came to combating displacement.
15:30
Speaker 3: Because oftentimes what happens is by the time people recognize
15:33
Speaker 3: there's a problem here, you know, there's already gone through
15:35
Speaker 3: a tipping point and people can't afford to live there anymore.
15:38
Speaker 3: Austin is a great example of that. You know, the
15:40
Speaker 3: East side of Austin has lost half of its African-American
15:44
Speaker 3: population over the last decade or so. So there is
15:48
Speaker 3: a lot of their investments, but there's also, I think,
15:54
Speaker 3: an approach that we can take to help local communities
15:56
Speaker 3: get better about that.
15:59
Speaker 1: Switching gears a little bit, but I guess staying in
16:01
Speaker 1: San Francisco, there's some polling out today about how unpopular
16:05
Speaker 1: some of the big tech companies are like Facebook, Google, Twitter.
16:08
Speaker 1: There's been a lot of talk recently about how they
16:10
Speaker 1: should be regulated or maybe even broken up. Do you
16:13
Speaker 1: think it makes sense to break up companies like Facebook
16:16
Speaker 1: or Google? And if yes, I mean, do we need
16:19
Speaker 1: to update our antitrust laws to reflect the reality of
16:23
Speaker 1: business today versus, say, standard oil in the 20s?
16:26
Speaker 3: Oh, I think it's definitely worth taking a look at
16:28
Speaker 3: those laws. I believe that that's worth a debate, a conversation.
16:35
Speaker 3: I have concerns about, for instance, companies that have gotten
16:39
Speaker 3: as big as they have with a business model of
16:41
Speaker 3: using consumer information, using the web data, cell phone data,
16:48
Speaker 3: tracking data of ordinary Americans. I do think, I was
16:53
Speaker 3: in Iowa the other day, we did a forum in
16:56
Speaker 3: Storm Lake around rural issues, and one of the things
16:58
Speaker 3: I said there was with respect to agribusiness, for instance,
17:02
Speaker 3: that I applaud efforts to not just look at consumer
17:07
Speaker 3: price when two companies are trying to merge in agribusiness,
17:10
Speaker 3: but also looking at the effect on small business along
17:13
Speaker 3: the chain of production. And I think, you know, analogously
17:17
Speaker 3: that we can say that in the same way about
17:20
Speaker 3: tech or other industries. So, yeah, I think that that's
17:24
Speaker 3: worth a debate.
17:26
Speaker 1: During the campaign, President Trump had some donors, lobbyists, the
17:32
Speaker 1: Federalist Society draw up for him a list of potential
17:35
Speaker 1: Supreme Court justices that he could then release to show
17:38
Speaker 1: his conservative bona fides. Do you have a list and
17:41
Speaker 1: do you want to share any names with us today?
17:43
Speaker 1: I don't have a list. Okay.
17:45
Speaker 2: But let me tell you what I would do.
17:46
Speaker 3: Number one, we need to bring back respected organizations like
17:50
Speaker 3: the American Bar Association to give input and make recommendations
17:54
Speaker 3: and take those recommendations seriously. Secondly, I know the importance
18:00
Speaker 3: of the Supreme Court to fundamental rights like the right
18:03
Speaker 3: to choose and that the future of Roe v. Wade
18:07
Speaker 3: is under threat. because of the direction that the court
18:09
Speaker 3: has been going in. And if I'm president, I'm going
18:12
Speaker 3: to make sure to appoint very well-qualified judges who have
18:17
Speaker 3: a good track record and have embraced progressive values.
18:20
Speaker 1: I mean, so just this week, Mitch McConnell is forcing
18:24
Speaker 1: through a rule change that reduces the amount of time
18:27
Speaker 1: you have to debate one of these judges in cloture
18:28
Speaker 1: from 30 hours to two. So they are just ramming
18:32
Speaker 1: these You know, they're finding like anybody over the age
18:34
Speaker 1: of 13 who's maybe taking the LSAT and they're like
18:37
Speaker 1: getting the federal judge.
18:38
Speaker 2: You're not. Yeah, you're not kidding in some instances. Yeah.
18:41
Speaker 1: Unfortunately, I'm not. I mean, can we fix this? Are
18:45
Speaker 1: they stacking the federal courts to such a degree that
18:49
Speaker 1: the next Democratic president might not be able to unwind
18:52
Speaker 1: the damage?
18:53
Speaker 2: Well, I mean, there's going to be a lot.
18:54
Speaker 3: Of damage, no doubt, because they're appointing ideologues, because some
18:59
Speaker 3: of these ideologues, as you suggest, are hardly qualified. I mean,
19:02
Speaker 3: there were a couple, I think, that hadn't even argued
19:06
Speaker 3: a case, had not litigated a case, and now they're
19:09
Speaker 3: going to be Supreme Court justices that go into the intricacies, essentially,
19:13
Speaker 3: of the law. So people have discussed different ways that
19:17
Speaker 3: we could look at it. There's one that I I'm
19:20
Speaker 3: not too fond of, and maybe a couple that I
19:23
Speaker 3: would consider. The one that I'm not too fond of
19:26
Speaker 3: is just simply increasing the number of justices on the
19:30
Speaker 3: Supreme Court. Because if we go from nine justices to
19:33
Speaker 3: 11 tomorrow, what's to say that in a couple of
19:36
Speaker 3: years they don't come back and put it back at
19:38
Speaker 3: nine or at 15? The ones that intrigue me more,
19:41
Speaker 3: for instance, are term limits on what are now lifetime appointments,
19:45
Speaker 3: if you had a 20-year term limit or something like that.
19:49
Speaker 3: Or some system that's, you know, akin to how some
19:54
Speaker 3: states do commission redistricting, right? The Democrats appoint certain people,
19:58
Speaker 3: the Republicans appoint a certain number of people, and then
20:01
Speaker 3: you have to agree on a certain number of people.
20:03
Speaker 3: So those tend to be more in the middle. I
20:07
Speaker 3: think that that's worth looking at, you know?
20:09
Speaker 2: Yeah.
20:18
Speaker 1: In the 2018 midterms, Democrats obviously had a lot of success,
20:23
Speaker 1: and we made some progress among Latino voters, but I
20:26
Speaker 1: think it was a lot less than people had hoped,
20:28
Speaker 1: especially in a place like Florida. Similarly, I think you've
20:31
Speaker 1: seen general Latino political participation not keep pace with Latino
20:36
Speaker 1: population growth. I'm curious if you have a theory of
20:39
Speaker 1: the case that you're for why that is and thoughts
20:42
Speaker 1: on how Democrats could do a better job of earning
20:44
Speaker 1: the votes of Latinos in the U.S.
20:46
Speaker 3: Well, I mean, I think different reasons. What can we
20:51
Speaker 3: do to improve that? It's going to take an all-out,
20:55
Speaker 3: 365-day-a-year effort to invest in registration and in turnout. As
21:01
Speaker 3: you know, I mean, campaigns are often focused on the
21:03
Speaker 3: most likely voters because they have limited resources.
21:06
Speaker 2: So this is.
21:07
Speaker 3: Something that foundations and You know, C4s and others are
21:12
Speaker 3: going to have to do year-round, not just three months
21:16
Speaker 3: before an election or six months before an election. But
21:18
Speaker 3: if you have a sustained effort to improve turnout, registration
21:23
Speaker 3: and turnout, then I do think that you can start
21:25
Speaker 3: seeing those numbers improve. We did see, you know, from
21:28
Speaker 3: 2014 to 2018, over 150% increase in Latino participation, at
21:30
Speaker 3: least in Texas. Mm-hmm. So there is some reason for hope.
21:39
Speaker 3: I do think that in 2020, we're going to see
21:42
Speaker 3: an increase. I believe also that you have to continue
21:45
Speaker 3: to recruit good candidates from the local level, the state level,
21:49
Speaker 3: and at the federal level. As a candidate, I've always
21:54
Speaker 3: been mindful that you need to represent everybody if you're
21:58
Speaker 3: in office and as you campaign. But I do believe
22:00
Speaker 3: that my candidacy as the only Latino that's running in
22:03
Speaker 3: this race is going to have special meaning to a
22:06
Speaker 3: lot of Latinos. And I believe that if I'm the
22:09
Speaker 3: Democratic nominee, that I can go get the 11 electoral
22:12
Speaker 3: votes of Arizona, the 29 electoral votes of Florida, and
22:16
Speaker 3: the 38 electoral votes of Texas.
22:18
Speaker 1: Yeah. Something you said reminded me of something that literally
22:23
Speaker 1: keeps me up at night, which is that Trump is
22:25
Speaker 1: out there He's going to raise a billion dollars. He's
22:29
Speaker 1: putting millions of dollars into Facebook ads to scare the
22:32
Speaker 1: shit out of old white people in various places like
22:34
Speaker 1: every day. And Democrats are going to spend a couple
22:40
Speaker 1: hundred million dollars in Iowa, South Carolina, New Hampshire, maybe
22:43
Speaker 1: some Super Tuesday states. Does that worry you that we're
22:46
Speaker 1: not doing the structural investing that you talked about? Or
22:49
Speaker 1: do you think the DNC is filling that gap?
22:51
Speaker 3: Well, I mean, I'll give Tom Pettis some credit, right?
22:54
Speaker 3: I mean, I do think that he has given that
22:56
Speaker 3: thought in addition to addressing some of the 2016 issues
23:00
Speaker 3: of Bernie Hillary stuff. Yeah, divisions and feelings that were
23:04
Speaker 3: still there. But I do think that they've taken a,
23:08
Speaker 3: you know, eyes wide open approach now. But it's going
23:12
Speaker 3: to take... you know, the Democracy Alliance and others that
23:15
Speaker 3: are interested in long-term growth in registration and turnout to
23:20
Speaker 3: make those investments, we can't take our eye off of
23:23
Speaker 3: that ball. I do agree that, look, the first order
23:26
Speaker 3: of business is to go get Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania. I mean,
23:30
Speaker 3: we lost those by collectively less than 80,000 votes. And
23:33
Speaker 3: I think that a couple of the trends we saw
23:35
Speaker 3: in 2018, like the suburbs going over to Democrats and
23:41
Speaker 3: As you know, President Obama in 2012, there was an
23:43
Speaker 3: African-American turnout rate of 66%, and that fell to 59.5%
23:48
Speaker 3: in 2016. I think that that's going to go up again, right?
23:53
Speaker 3: Whether I'm the nominee or there are others that can,
23:55
Speaker 3: I think, make that go up again. So there's a
23:58
Speaker 3: lot of promise there. But on top of that, the
24:01
Speaker 3: future is to go get Arizona, Texas, and Florida. Kyrsten
24:06
Speaker 3: Sinema already won in Arizona. Gillum only lost by, in
24:10
Speaker 3: a midterm year, only lost by 33,000 votes.
24:12
Speaker 2: Bill Nelson.
24:13
Speaker 1: Heartbreaker.
24:14
Speaker 2: They were.
24:15
Speaker 1: They were.
24:15
Speaker 3: But, you know, I mean, a presidential year is going
24:17
Speaker 3: to be better than a midterm year probably for us. But,
24:21
Speaker 3: you know, Bill Nelson only lost by 10,000. And in Texas,
24:26
Speaker 3: you know, Beto O'Rourke got within two and a half
24:28
Speaker 3: points of Ted Cruz. So there's a lot to suggest
24:32
Speaker 3: that that's fruitful territory for us. Yeah.
24:34
Speaker 1: I mean, look, Beto turned out a lot of voters. Um,
24:38
Speaker 1: but he was also running against like arguably the worst
24:41
Speaker 1: person on the planet. I mean, do you think, do
24:43
Speaker 1: you think Texas is gettable in an election year? Because
24:46
Speaker 1: we've been salivating over Texas for a decade. Democrats have.
24:50
Speaker 3: Oh, I do.
24:51
Speaker 1: I do.
24:52
Speaker 3: Um, you know, a good example of that was that
24:56
Speaker 3: Hillary lost Texas by nine points, right? But she lost
25:00
Speaker 3: Ohio and Iowa by nine points. But for Texas, it
25:04
Speaker 3: had gone from a 16 point difference to to a
25:07
Speaker 3: nine point difference. And now in the midterms, there were
25:10
Speaker 3: a couple of candidates, not only Congressman O'Rourke, but also, um,
25:14
Speaker 3: the Lieutenant gubernatorial candidate, I think Mike Collier, who were
25:17
Speaker 3: within three points. So for 2020, I believe with the
25:21
Speaker 3: right candidate that, yeah, we can get it. I believe
25:24
Speaker 3: that if I'm the nominee, uh, that I can get Texas.
25:27
Speaker 1: I like that. Um, so speaking of the nominee, so
25:29
Speaker 1: there's roughly a thousand Democrats running for president. Um, I
25:33
Speaker 1: can't imagine how difficult, I mean, I remember running against
25:35
Speaker 1: Hillary and thinking it was hard to break through. I
25:37
Speaker 1: can't imagine how it is now, especially with there's thresholds
25:41
Speaker 1: one has to meet to be invited to the debates, right?
25:43
Speaker 1: And you warn supporters in a fundraising email that the
25:46
Speaker 1: party's new rules mean you might not make it onto
25:48
Speaker 1: the debate stage. So I guess my question is sort
25:50
Speaker 1: of what's your pitch to listeners to say, give me
25:52
Speaker 1: a buck so I can get on that stage. And
25:54
Speaker 1: how do you hope to break through? And then, because
25:57
Speaker 1: I love 15 part questions, like is your path Iowa,
26:01
Speaker 1: New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina, or do you think you
26:03
Speaker 1: might prioritize your time differently?
26:05
Speaker 3: Yeah. Well, um, you know, I announced on January 12th
26:09
Speaker 3: and unlike some of the candidates I had not run
26:12
Speaker 3: for president before hadn't run for Senate. Right. Um, even
26:15
Speaker 3: though I've served as a federal executive, right. Um, uh,
26:19
Speaker 3: national post. So we're building up our campaign from scratch. Um,
26:24
Speaker 3: our fundraising has accelerated tremendously. I'm still not at the 65,000 threshold.
26:29
Speaker 3: And so we're taking contributions to get on that debate stage.
26:32
Speaker 3: I haven't met the polling requirement though.
26:34
Speaker 2: Um, and, and why?
26:36
Speaker 3: Well, number one, I'm one of the few candidates in
26:38
Speaker 3: this race that has executive experience having served as a
26:42
Speaker 3: cabinet secretary, you know, managed an agency of $ 48 billion budget, 8,000 employees,
26:48
Speaker 3: 54 field offices across the country. also served as the
26:51
Speaker 3: mayor of San Antonio, the nation's seventh largest city. So
26:56
Speaker 3: I have a track record of getting things done. And
26:59
Speaker 3: I represent a new generation of leadership, and I think
27:01
Speaker 3: that people are looking for a new generation of leadership.
27:04
Speaker 3: I've also articulated a strong, positive, compelling vision for the future,
27:10
Speaker 3: that we be in the 21st century the smartest, the healthiest,
27:13
Speaker 3: the fairest, and the most prosperous nation, and am releasing
27:17
Speaker 3: plans on how we get there, like we did with
27:19
Speaker 3: this People First immigration plan. So I believe that with
27:22
Speaker 3: the support of the American people that I am going
27:24
Speaker 3: to get on the debate stage and would encourage folks
27:27
Speaker 3: to give. Once we get on that debate stage, I'm
27:31
Speaker 3: confident that I'm going to stand out. In terms of
27:34
Speaker 3: my path, I think everybody's got to compete for Iowa
27:38
Speaker 3: because in such a crowded field, if you get lost
27:41
Speaker 3: in the shuffle, if you don't do very well there,
27:44
Speaker 3: then it's probably hard to stick around. So I'm going
27:48
Speaker 3: to compete in Iowa.
27:50
Speaker 1: I also... like that we have Nevada as.
27:53
Speaker 3: The third state. After those first four states, I actually
27:55
Speaker 3: really like the secondary stretch of states. On Super Tuesday,
27:58
Speaker 3: March 3rd, we have California, we have Texas, we have,
28:02
Speaker 3: I believe, Colorado, as well as the South. Puerto Rico,
28:06
Speaker 3: I understand, is looking at moving up its primary to Sunday,
28:09
Speaker 3: March 8th. And then after that, within two weeks or so,
28:12
Speaker 3: you have Florida and Arizona. And so I feel good,
28:15
Speaker 3: very good about that secondary stretch of states.
28:17
Speaker 1: So let's fast forward a little bit. You won.
28:20
Speaker 2: Congrats.
28:21
Speaker 1: You walk into the Oval, put your feet up on
28:23
Speaker 1: the desk. What do you do on day one?
28:27
Speaker 3: Well, in that moment will be a very special one.
28:30
Speaker 3: I actually look forward.
28:31
Speaker 2: Let me back up a few hours.
28:32
Speaker 3: I look forward to the moment when it's traditional for
28:35
Speaker 3: the incoming president to usher out the outgoing president. And,
28:39
Speaker 3: you know, on the White House lawn, Donald Trump and
28:42
Speaker 3: Melania Trump will be ready to go off to New
28:45
Speaker 3: York or to Mar-a-Lago or somewhere. Yeah.
28:47
Speaker 1: You know, right. Moscow.
28:49
Speaker 2: Sure.
28:49
Speaker 1: Wherever you want.
28:50
Speaker 3: Right before he leaves to go off into the helicopter,
28:54
Speaker 3: I'm going to tell him adios. So when I get
28:58
Speaker 3: into the Oval Office, then no, my first executive order
29:02
Speaker 3: will be to recommit the United States to the Paris
29:05
Speaker 3: Climate Accord so that we can lead on climate change again.
29:08
Speaker 3: And also, and I think this reflects the experience that
29:11
Speaker 3: I do have having served as a cabinet member. As
29:14
Speaker 3: you know, this administration has changed. undertaken a number of
29:19
Speaker 3: different rule changes that have undermined civil rights, women's rights,
29:23
Speaker 3: the environment, healthcare, education, any number of things. My first
29:28
Speaker 3: order of business will be to have a catalog of that,
29:31
Speaker 3: an index of that, and to immediately, on the first
29:34
Speaker 3: day and the days following that, instruct what will at
29:38
Speaker 3: that point be temporary people and charge of the departments
29:41
Speaker 3: to begin undoing those things that have been done and
29:44
Speaker 3: to go in the right direction on civil rights and
29:48
Speaker 3: education and healthcare. We got to go back in the
29:51
Speaker 3: direction of expanding opportunity instead of taking away from it.
29:55
Speaker 1: Yeah, agreed. I'll ask you a couple of national security questions.
29:59
Speaker 1: So there's been this very frightening increase globally in terrorist
30:03
Speaker 1: attacks by white nationalists. Most recently, there was a lunatic
30:08
Speaker 1: who shot up two mosques in New Zealand. The New
30:10
Speaker 1: York Times this week published an interesting analysis showing that
30:13
Speaker 1: many of these attacks were actually connected, either by direct
30:17
Speaker 1: communication between individuals involved or one was inspired by another.
30:21
Speaker 1: I'm curious what you think about what the U.S. government
30:25
Speaker 1: and also tech companies should do to stop online radicalization
30:30
Speaker 1: and the horrific violence that can come from it.
30:33
Speaker 3: Well, you know, we have seen that, that there's this underworld, um,
30:38
Speaker 3: out there in the internet and social media where people
30:42
Speaker 3: are getting radicalized, right? That's often a word, unfortunately, that
30:46
Speaker 3: has only been used, um, when we talk about, uh,
30:49
Speaker 3: folks in the Middle East or Muslims, you know, has
30:52
Speaker 3: been people, you know, groups, whole groups have been slandered,
30:55
Speaker 3: but it is accurate to say that several of these
30:59
Speaker 3: young men who have gone in and shot up, whether
31:01
Speaker 3: it's a church or a nightclub or other circumstances here
31:05
Speaker 3: and also in other parts of the world, have been radicalized.
31:08
Speaker 3: And so I do think that whether it's Facebook or
31:11
Speaker 3: Twitter or others, that they have to bear some responsibility
31:14
Speaker 3: for cracking down on that, being more vigilant. And they've
31:17
Speaker 3: said that, right? And in some instances they've taken steps,
31:21
Speaker 3: but I don't think that they've done enough. I think
31:24
Speaker 3: it was the FBI director, may have testified recently that
31:29
Speaker 3: this white nationalism is a real threat. And we see that, right?
31:35
Speaker 3: I also, though, I do think that we have to
31:36
Speaker 3: be careful because the president and others would have people
31:41
Speaker 3: almost believe that every time somebody who happens to be
31:44
Speaker 3: Muslim commits a terrorist act, that we should view all
31:47
Speaker 3: people in that way. And, you know, we don't do that.
31:52
Speaker 3: Just like if somebody is white and they go and
31:55
Speaker 3: if you have a white man that goes and shoots
31:57
Speaker 3: up a church or somewhere else. We don't make those
32:00
Speaker 3: kinds of conclusions. We have to come at these challenges
32:03
Speaker 3: where they are, right? And do so in a way
32:06
Speaker 3: that separates the actions of one individual from an indictment
32:11
Speaker 3: of entire groups.
32:12
Speaker 1: Do you think Trump has, I don't know, inspired these
32:16
Speaker 1: groups or made common cause with some of the fringier
32:21
Speaker 1: nationalist groups out there?
32:23
Speaker 3: I think it's fair to say they've gotten inspiration from him.
32:25
Speaker 2: Yeah.
32:26
Speaker 3: No doubt. And that from what I can tell, there
32:31
Speaker 3: have been moments where he seems to either encourage or
32:37
Speaker 3: knowingly does not discourage these beliefs. I'm thinking of after Charlottesville,
32:43
Speaker 3: you know, the very fine people. And yeah, he'll make
32:48
Speaker 3: a comment that this is wrong. It's the wrong thing.
32:50
Speaker 3: But it's never as fervent as he does when you
32:55
Speaker 3: know it's somebody of a different faith yeah yeah somebody
32:59
Speaker 3: of color or different religion especially um incidents in france
33:05
Speaker 3: or europe or other places where you happen to have
33:07
Speaker 3: had someone who is muslim commit one of these attacks
33:11
Speaker 3: and he's all over that yeah right in the strongest
33:13
Speaker 3: terms but will not do that when it's one of
33:16
Speaker 3: these white nationalists.
33:18
Speaker 1: Agreed um It's been about six months, I believe, since
33:22
Speaker 1: the Saudis brutally executed and dismembered a journalist named Jamal
33:26
Speaker 1: Khashoggi and their consulate in Istanbul. This week, Congress voted
33:31
Speaker 1: to end U.S. involvement in the Saudi-led war in Yemen
33:33
Speaker 1: that has put literally 20 million innocent people at risk
33:36
Speaker 1: of starvation. This week, we also learned that the Saudis
33:40
Speaker 1: are about to complete construction on their first nuclear reactor.
33:44
Speaker 1: but they have yet to agree to any international rules
33:46
Speaker 1: that would ensure that that technology is used for civilian
33:49
Speaker 1: purposes and not for weapons. Given the trajectory of the
33:53
Speaker 1: relationship and what we know of Mohammed bin Salman, do
33:56
Speaker 1: you think the Saudis are still our ally?
33:59
Speaker 2: That is a very good question.
34:00
Speaker 3: And, um, you know, frankly, I think that the Obama
34:04
Speaker 3: administration began to take a new look at that relationship.
34:09
Speaker 3: It's also troubling, um, what we continue to find out
34:14
Speaker 3: about the relationship between the president's family and the Saudi
34:19
Speaker 3: royal family. And so, you know, I acknowledge here that
34:23
Speaker 3: I'm not privy to classified information. I don't know what
34:26
Speaker 3: other information there is or how helpful they may have been.
34:32
Speaker 3: But right now, I would say that it certainly raises
34:35
Speaker 3: the question. And it's alarming that Saudi Arabia would be
34:40
Speaker 3: progressing toward nuclear capacity In this way. And there seems
34:46
Speaker 3: to be little accountability right now. Yeah.
34:48
Speaker 1: I mean, just imagining if Iran butchered a journalist who
34:51
Speaker 1: lives in the U.S. and then we found that they
34:53
Speaker 1: were building a nuclear reactor. I think we probably would
34:55
Speaker 1: have invaded five minutes ago. You know, it's just it's
34:59
Speaker 1: a remarkable double standard. And there's just this inertia in Washington,
35:05
Speaker 1: I think, that keeps us from rethinking these relationships. And
35:07
Speaker 1: I'm not totally sure why.
35:09
Speaker 3: Well, and that's why you wonder, is there something else
35:12
Speaker 3: there that we're not getting of value? I mean, that's
35:15
Speaker 3: the question that I have as somebody right now that
35:17
Speaker 3: is not privy to that kind of information. But what
35:20
Speaker 3: I can say is that their march toward nuclear capacity
35:27
Speaker 3: or capability does trouble me, given other circumstances that we've seen.
35:32
Speaker 1: So as we speak, the Chinese government is undertaking what
35:37
Speaker 1: is likely the largest mass detention of a racial or
35:39
Speaker 1: religious group since the Holocaust. Experts estimate that at least
35:43
Speaker 1: one million Uyghurs who are a Muslim minority group are
35:45
Speaker 1: being held in, I guess you'd call them re-education camps.
35:49
Speaker 1: They're forced to renounce their religion, learn Chinese Communist Party propaganda.
35:54
Speaker 1: Some are reportedly being tortured. And I'm just struck by
35:57
Speaker 1: the fact that the world is largely silent on it,
36:00
Speaker 1: and that includes allies of ours like the U.K., I
36:04
Speaker 1: don't know that there's an easy answer here, but do
36:06
Speaker 1: you have a sense of what the U.S. should do
36:09
Speaker 1: to push them on this sort of massive human rights
36:12
Speaker 1: violation or atrocity in plain sight?
36:14
Speaker 3: Well, I think that should be part of any agreements
36:17
Speaker 3: that we forge with China and our continued diplomatic relationship
36:21
Speaker 3: with them. I'm somebody that still believes that the United
36:24
Speaker 3: States has a role to play in leading the world
36:28
Speaker 3: on what we care about, freedom, democracy, opportunity. And that
36:34
Speaker 3: even though this administration has scaled back in a big
36:38
Speaker 3: way its leadership on human rights abuses, we actually need
36:43
Speaker 3: to restore that. And so I would find every single
36:46
Speaker 3: way that we can to apply pressure to.
36:48
Speaker 1: China on this.
36:50
Speaker 3: And not only China, but other countries around the world.
36:53
Speaker 3: We just saw what happened yesterday. with the Sultan of Brunei,
36:55
Speaker 3: for instance. And you were in Los Angeles today. I mean,
36:59
Speaker 3: there's a boycott of one of his hotels over here
37:02
Speaker 3: that he has an interest in.
37:03
Speaker 1: George Clooney writes one op-ed and we're boycotting a bunch
37:06
Speaker 1: of hotels.
37:06
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah. But I mean, the fact is that.
37:09
Speaker 1: It's good stuff. I like it.
37:10
Speaker 3: Yeah, but that ain't the way it's supposed to work either, right?
37:14
Speaker 3: So one of the things that we need to restore
37:17
Speaker 3: is a strong voice of leadership on human rights abuses.
37:21
Speaker 1: Um.
37:23
Speaker 1: So President Trump has had this long back and forth
37:26
Speaker 1: with Kim Jong-un in North Korea. He had this summit
37:30
Speaker 1: that he thinks is historic in Singapore where they, you know,
37:33
Speaker 1: he came back and told us that there was no
37:35
Speaker 1: longer a nuclear threat from North Korea and that everything
37:37
Speaker 1: was solved. That's obviously not true. The negotiations seem to
37:42
Speaker 1: have fallen apart. But as someone who worked in government
37:47
Speaker 1: for a while in the NSC and saw, particularly in
37:49
Speaker 1: the first term, the way inertia in DC conventional wisdom
37:53
Speaker 1: can hamstring a president. I was kind of impressed by
37:58
Speaker 1: Trump saying, fuck you guys. I'm going to meet with them.
38:00
Speaker 1: Who cares? What's the downside? I mean, I guess I'm
38:03
Speaker 1: just curious what you make of that diplomatic effort. And
38:08
Speaker 1: if you've thought about why sometimes in Washington, it seems
38:13
Speaker 1: so much harder to make peace and have talks than
38:16
Speaker 1: it is to go to war.
38:18
Speaker 3: I remember, you know, how much, um, then candidate Obama
38:21
Speaker 3: got pilloried, right, for saying that he would speak with
38:24
Speaker 3: people who are quote unquote enemies without preconditions and so forth.
38:29
Speaker 3: And what we see here with Trump may be a
38:33
Speaker 3: kind of a Nixon in China example, a smaller scale
38:37
Speaker 3: of it, where because he's seen as a tough guy
38:41
Speaker 3: on these issues, in some ways he can get away
38:43
Speaker 3: with more, but it shouldn't be like that. Because the
38:46
Speaker 3: principle of being able to try and negotiate peace should
38:50
Speaker 3: apply no matter who you are, because it's in the
38:53
Speaker 3: nation's best interest. So, um, yes, I do think that
38:57
Speaker 3: that's an approach that we should take. Um, yeah, I
39:01
Speaker 3: also see that frankly, as for me, um, you know,
39:04
Speaker 3: I I'm not part and parcel of Washington. You know,
39:06
Speaker 3: I spent two and a half years there. Uh, I
39:08
Speaker 3: think sometimes folks that spend more time in Washington, right.
39:11
Speaker 3: The more you're influenced by the thinking of, of elite Washington, uh,
39:17
Speaker 3: we shouldn't let that hamper how we go forward. Of course,
39:21
Speaker 3: what we've seen unfold in front of our eyes is
39:23
Speaker 3: that it seems like this president got played. And in fact,
39:28
Speaker 3: misled the American people about what was happening with these talks.
39:33
Speaker 3: And maybe most disappointingly, just from an executive perspective, he
39:39
Speaker 3: does not seem to have the discipline or the energy
39:42
Speaker 3: to put the time in to understand the issues well
39:45
Speaker 3: enough to be prepared One thing that you knew about
39:48
Speaker 3: President Obama is that he studied those books, you know,
39:51
Speaker 3: and he respected the people that were advising him. This
39:54
Speaker 3: president thinks that he can wing everything. And, you know,
39:56
Speaker 3: there's no doubt, of course, that he must have some talents.
39:59
Speaker 3: He wouldn't be where he is without it. But he
40:02
Speaker 3: just seems completely in over his head. And because of that,
40:05
Speaker 3: now they're actually going back and probably their breakout capacity
40:10
Speaker 3: is getting, you know, smaller and smaller, shorter and shorter.
40:14
Speaker 3: So we're we're miss served by a president that is
40:17
Speaker 3: too busy insulting people on Twitter or playing golf or
40:20
Speaker 3: going to Mar-a-Lago instead of putting the time in to actually, uh,
40:25
Speaker 3: you know, get us the kind of deal that we need. Yeah.
40:29
Speaker 1: Low energy Don. They probably made a few more nukes
40:32
Speaker 1: on his watch. Um, final question for you. So whenever
40:36
Speaker 1: someone famous comes into our office and gets asked about Beyonce,
40:41
Speaker 1: it gets picked up literally everywhere.
40:42
Speaker 2: So, uh, Didn't she strike up a deal with Adidas yesterday?
40:46
Speaker 2: I saw that.
40:47
Speaker 1: Tell me about it.
40:47
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, I don't know much about it. I just
40:49
Speaker 2: saw the headlines, right?
40:50
Speaker 1: She's a Texan, right?
40:52
Speaker 2: She is. Houston.
40:52
Speaker 1: Is she going to endorse?
40:54
Speaker 2: I don't know. Well, if she does, I hope she
40:56
Speaker 2: endorses me.
40:56
Speaker 1: Okay, there we go. Beyonce might endorse Secretary Castro. That's
41:00
Speaker 1: your headline out of this. Secretary, thank you so much
41:02
Speaker 1: for coming in. It's a pleasure talking to you, and
41:04
Speaker 1: good luck. Hey, thanks a lot. Thank you.
41:12
Speaker 3: Thank you.