Latest / Pod Save America / "Too Much Crime On Their Hands."

Transcript

"Too Much Crime On Their Hands." · Pod Save America

• 0:20
  Speaker 1: Welcome to Pod Save America. I'm Jon Favreau.
• 0:22
  Speaker 2: I'm Dan Pfeiffer.
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: On today's show, the January 6th committee makes the case
• 0:26
  Speaker 1: that Donald Trump broke the law. Election results in South
• 0:29
  Speaker 1: Carolina and Texas offer hints about November. Committee member Elaine
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: Luria joins to talk about Thursday's big hearing. And later,
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: we close things out with a quick round of Take Appreciator.
• 0:41
  Speaker 1: But first, Strict Scrutiny just dropped a special episode in
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: honor of Pride Month. Leah, Kate, and Melissa are joined
• 0:48
  Speaker 1: by Joshua Matz and Chase Strangio to highlight some of
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: the developments in ongoing litigation related to LGBTQ rights. They'll
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: also be updating us throughout the month as SCOTUS decisions drop.
• 1:00
  Speaker 1: So check it out. Also, check out our brand new
• 1:03
  Speaker 1: line of Pride merch now at the Crooked store. As always,
• 1:06
  Speaker 1: a portion of every order from our Pride collection is
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: going to the Crooked Pride or Else Fund, which supports
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: three incredible organizations that provide community building, gender affirming, and
• 1:15
  Speaker 1: life-saving resources to the queer and transgender community. Shop for
• 1:19
  Speaker 1: all Crooked merch at crooked.com slash store. All right, Dan,
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: let's get to the news. We are recording this segment
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: before Thursday's January 6th hearing. But in our next segment,
• 1:33
  Speaker 1: Dan will get Representative Luria's reaction after the hearing ends.
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: Of course, the committee postponed Wednesday's hearing because apparently their
• 1:40
  Speaker 1: video team doesn't work as hard as the video team
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: here at Crooked. See, I got some laughs from Phoebe there.
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: But despite all that, they've already given us at least
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: three big pieces of news to cover since our last pod. First,
• 1:58
  Speaker 1: The Washington Post reported on an episode that was supposed
• 2:00
  Speaker 1: to be the focus of the postponed hearing. Shortly after
• 2:03
  Speaker 1: the 2020 election, Jeffrey Clark, a mid-level Justice Department official,
• 2:07
  Speaker 1: almost convinced Donald Trump to appoint him attorney general so
• 2:10
  Speaker 1: that he could announce that the DOJ had, quote, identified
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: significant concerns about voter fraud and urged swing states to
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: send their own slates of Trump electors to Congress. Second,
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: the committee released surveillance video of a group who'd been
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: given a tour of the Capitol complex yesterday. by Republican
• 2:27
  Speaker 1: Congressman Barry Loudermilk of Georgia on January 5th. It shows
• 2:32
  Speaker 1: people taking pictures of hallways, stairways, and security checkpoints that,
• 2:36
  Speaker 1: as the committee said, aren't typically of interest to tourists.
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: A day later, on January 6th, several of the people
• 2:44
  Speaker 1: in that tour showed up at the Stop the Steal rally,
• 2:47
  Speaker 1: and one man was filmed saying, quote, We're coming in
• 2:50
  Speaker 1: like white on rice for Pelosi, Nadler, Schumer, and even you, AOC.
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: We're coming to take you out and pull you out
• 2:58
  Speaker 1: by your hairs. Next to him was a man carrying
• 3:01
  Speaker 1: a flagpole with a sharpened end who said it was
• 3:03
  Speaker 1: for a, quote, certain person. And finally, the committee released
• 3:08
  Speaker 1: a video featuring Liz Cheney where she talks about the
• 3:10
  Speaker 1: focus of today's hearing, Thursday's hearing, which is Trump's efforts
• 3:14
  Speaker 1: to pressure Mike Pence to overturn the election. Here's a clip.
• 3:19
  Speaker 3: As a federal judge has indicated, this likely violated two
• 3:22
  Speaker 3: federal criminal statutes. President Trump had no factual basis for
• 3:27
  Speaker 3: what he was doing and he had been told it
• 3:29
  Speaker 3: was illegal. Despite this, President Trump plotted with a lawyer
• 3:34
  Speaker 3: named John Eastman and others to overturn the outcome of
• 3:38
  Speaker 3: the election on January 6th. To give you a sense
• 3:41
  Speaker 3: of the gravity of these issues, here is a clip
• 3:44
  Speaker 3: of one of President Trump's own White House lawyers, Eric Hirschman,
• 3:48
  Speaker 3: who talked to Mr. Eastman the day after January 6th.
• 3:52
  Speaker 4: He started to asked me about something dealing with Georgia
• 3:57
  Speaker 4: and preserving something potentially for appeal. I said to him,
• 4:01
  Speaker 4: are you out of your effing mind? Now I'm going
• 4:04
  Speaker 4: to give you the best free legal advice you're ever
• 4:06
  Speaker 4: getting in your life. Get a great effing criminal defense lawyer.
• 4:10
  Speaker 4: You're going to need it. And then I hung up
• 4:12
  Speaker 4: on him.
• 4:16
  Speaker 1: So Dan, I want to get your reaction to all
• 4:18
  Speaker 1: three pieces of news here. Let's start with a mid-level
• 4:21
  Speaker 1: mouth breather, Jeffrey Clark. trying to get himself appointed attorney
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: general so he can overturn the election. What'd you think
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: about that one?
• 4:28
  Speaker 2: I mean, shoot your shot, insurrectionist. I mean, it's the
• 4:35
  Speaker 2: chutzpah and lack of self-awareness it takes to be a
• 4:39
  Speaker 2: mid-level environmental attorney in the Department of Justice to get
• 4:42
  Speaker 2: not one, not two, but three meetings with the president
• 4:46
  Speaker 2: to convince him to fire all of your superiors, appoint
• 4:49
  Speaker 2: you to be a member of the cabinet in the
• 4:50
  Speaker 2: line of presidential succession, and promising you could overturn an
• 4:54
  Speaker 2: election the president clearly lost. I mean, it is just,
• 4:57
  Speaker 2: God bless that guy. That is unbelievable.
• 4:59
  Speaker 1: But it almost worked. So Trump is thinking about doing it.
• 5:04
  Speaker 1: And the only reason Trump doesn't do it is because
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: there's this emergency meeting where the attorney general, the deputy
• 5:10
  Speaker 1: attorney general, everyone else comes in to the Oval Office
• 5:13
  Speaker 1: with Clark. And they're like, look, you do this. We
• 5:17
  Speaker 1: are going to resign en masse. All the Justice Department
• 5:20
  Speaker 1: officials are going to resign at once. And Trump's probably
• 5:23
  Speaker 1: thinking to himself, well, you know, he probably didn't care
• 5:25
  Speaker 1: about that, but what will that mean for a possible impeachment? Right.
• 5:29
  Speaker 1: And so there's also a great scene where one of the,
• 5:32
  Speaker 1: I think it was the deputy AG turns to Clark
• 5:34
  Speaker 1: and he's like, yeah, you're an environmental lawyer. Go back
• 5:36
  Speaker 1: to your office and we'll call you when there's an
• 5:38
  Speaker 1: oil spill. Which I thought was pretty funny. But anyway,
• 5:44
  Speaker 1: I mean, here's what would happen if Trump said yes
• 5:47
  Speaker 1: and appointed this guy AG, like, You would have had,
• 5:50
  Speaker 1: knowing these state legislatures in some of these competitive states,
• 5:54
  Speaker 1: since they were all Republican and a lot of them
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: MAGA Republicans, would have sent dueling slates of electors, would
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: have sent Trump electors to Congress. Then we would have
• 6:02
  Speaker 1: had to hope that the Republican Senate at the time
• 6:06
  Speaker 1: rejected those electors. Or it could have ended up in
• 6:11
  Speaker 1: the Supreme Court. Or they could have thrown out the
• 6:14
  Speaker 1: electors from the states altogether, which means that the election
• 6:17
  Speaker 1: gets thrown to the House. And we know that if
• 6:19
  Speaker 1: it got thrown to the house, there were enough, um,
• 6:21
  Speaker 1: the way that the house works, there were enough Republicans
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: in the house that they would have thrown the election
• 6:26
  Speaker 1: to Trump. I mean, we were really close if this
• 6:29
  Speaker 1: Jeffrey Clark thing had worked.
• 6:30
  Speaker 2: And there's one part of this story that I think
• 6:32
  Speaker 2: is worth focusing on because it's easy to get distracted
• 6:35
  Speaker 2: at what a nut Clark is and all the drama
• 6:38
  Speaker 2: and the threatens to fire and the guy and the,
• 6:40
  Speaker 2: you know, the deputy attorney general and his muddy jeans
• 6:42
  Speaker 2: showing up, all of that is like great color. But
• 6:46
  Speaker 2: at one point in the meeting, some of the attendees say,
• 6:49
  Speaker 2: we can't just flip a switch and give you the election.
• 6:52
  Speaker 2: And Trump says, according to notes in the meeting, I
• 6:54
  Speaker 2: don't expect you to do that. Just say the election
• 6:57
  Speaker 2: was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the
• 6:59
  Speaker 2: Republican congressman. And that explains everything. I think that is
• 7:04
  Speaker 2: the Rosetta Stone of the entire scandal. This suggests that
• 7:08
  Speaker 2: Trump knew what he was saying about the election being
• 7:11
  Speaker 2: stolen was a lie. He just needed some putative fig
• 7:15
  Speaker 2: leaf so that he could implement his plan and bring
• 7:18
  Speaker 2: along Congress and state legislators to steal the election. That's
• 7:23
  Speaker 2: what it was. Just say it was corrupt, and I
• 7:26
  Speaker 2: will figure it out. And that, I think, that will be,
• 7:28
  Speaker 2: I believe, probably the core of the criminal case against
• 7:32
  Speaker 2: Trump if we are so lucky as to have one.
• 7:35
  Speaker 1: What about the Republican congressman from Georgia who gave a
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: lovely Capitol tour to a gang of insurrectionists?
• 7:41
  Speaker 5: Um.
• 7:43
  Speaker 2: Seems sketchy.
• 7:43
  Speaker 6: I don't know.
• 7:46
  Speaker 2: You probably ought to have asked some questions. Do you
• 7:49
  Speaker 2: want to see the rotunda? Do you want to see
• 7:51
  Speaker 2: the house chamber? Do you want to see the oil
• 7:53
  Speaker 2: paintings or the sculptures of the leaders and the presidents? No,
• 7:57
  Speaker 2: I would like to see the fire exits. Seems like
• 7:59
  Speaker 2: you should ask yourself some questions. And it's worth asking
• 8:04
  Speaker 2: why did Barry Loudermilk, who is actually a real person,
• 8:07
  Speaker 2: I had to Google this a few months ago, Barry Loudermilk,
• 8:10
  Speaker 2: lie about it. He said he did not give this tour.
• 8:13
  Speaker 2: He did not give a tour on January 5th. What
• 8:15
  Speaker 2: is he trying to hide? That is very much worth
• 8:17
  Speaker 2: getting to the bottom of just because it gets at
• 8:19
  Speaker 2: a couple of things. One, did members of Congress, and
• 8:22
  Speaker 2: this has been an allegation for over a year now,
• 8:24
  Speaker 2: did some Republican members of Congress give the insurrectionists, whether
• 8:29
  Speaker 2: it was the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers, other attendees,
• 8:32
  Speaker 2: tours for the specific purpose of scouting out the Capitol
• 8:35
  Speaker 2: for when they took over? It also gets at just
• 8:37
  Speaker 2: the close relationships and cooperation around this day and more
• 8:41
  Speaker 2: broadly between certain members of Congress and the most extreme
• 8:45
  Speaker 2: members of right-wing militias and white supremacist groups. That is,
• 8:49
  Speaker 2: I think, another symptom of this is that the same
• 8:53
  Speaker 2: person who would be saying these things about these members
• 8:57
  Speaker 2: and threatening violence was someone who was getting a tour
• 9:00
  Speaker 2: in the Capitol from the congressperson themselves.
• 9:04
  Speaker 1: I think that's the key point because, you know, the
• 9:05
  Speaker 1: Capitol Police released a letter and the letter said, look,
• 9:09
  Speaker 1: you know, we did not think this tour was a
• 9:12
  Speaker 1: specific threat. You know, we take everything seriously and we
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: weren't too worried about this. And obviously that tour, where
• 9:19
  Speaker 1: they were in the Capitol complex was not ultimately where
• 9:22
  Speaker 1: the rioters entered, where the insurrectionists entered. And so they said,
• 9:27
  Speaker 1: you know, and so of course, Lautermael's like, we're vindicated.
• 9:29
  Speaker 1: But the point remains, like, At a time when they
• 9:34
  Speaker 1: weren't giving tours because of the pandemic, Loudermilk gave a
• 9:37
  Speaker 1: special tour to a bunch of people who the next
• 9:40
  Speaker 1: day were carrying sharpened flagpoles and threatening the lives of
• 9:44
  Speaker 1: Democratic members of Congress. Not a good thing. Whether whether
• 9:50
  Speaker 1: they were on a reconnaissance tour or not, they were
• 9:52
  Speaker 1: part of the insurrectionists that stormed the Capitol and they
• 9:55
  Speaker 1: got a private tour the day before from a Republican congressman.
• 9:57
  Speaker 1: So that's bad enough as it is.
• 9:59
  Speaker 2: Do you know who gives tours typically?
• 10:02
  Speaker 1: The staff.
• 10:03
  Speaker 2: 22-year-old staff assistants.
• 10:05
  Speaker 1: Right, exactly.
• 10:06
  Speaker 2: The fact that this is the member of Congress, I
• 10:08
  Speaker 2: don't know whether it suggests what knowledge they have of
• 10:10
  Speaker 2: what was to come, but it certainly suggests a relationship
• 10:12
  Speaker 2: between this member of Congress and these extreme elements.
• 10:17
  Speaker 5: Yep.
• 10:18
  Speaker 1: So maybe the most consequential piece of news, what did
• 10:20
  Speaker 1: you make of Liz Cheney's video and that Trump lawyer's
• 10:23
  Speaker 1: legal advice for John Eastman to get a great effing
• 10:27
  Speaker 1: criminal defense lawyer? We don't use that word on this pod.
• 10:32
  Speaker 2: Yeah. I was so surprised he edited himself in this.
• 10:39
  Speaker 2: I think just for the purpose of drama, it would
• 10:41
  Speaker 2: have been better if he had said the word.
• 10:43
  Speaker 1: I know.
• 10:44
  Speaker 2: If Liz Cheney had beeped it, that would have been
• 10:45
  Speaker 2: even better.
• 10:47
  Speaker 1: I know. Believe me. That would have been my edit
• 10:49
  Speaker 1: to that if I was running the show.
• 10:51
  Speaker 2: The more talented, hardworking, crooked team would have just beeped
• 10:54
  Speaker 2: it anyway. Even though he said effing, just put the
• 10:56
  Speaker 2: beep in there.
• 10:56
  Speaker 1: Okay.
• 10:58
  Speaker 2: In all seriousness. This is, I think, a really critical
• 11:02
  Speaker 2: point because just as we were just having this conversation
• 11:05
  Speaker 2: about Barry Loudermilk and how people got in the Capitol
• 11:07
  Speaker 2: and all of that, the conversation continues to be pulled
• 11:11
  Speaker 2: towards what happened on January 6th, which is obviously a
• 11:14
  Speaker 2: dark day in America. A deep tragedy happened there. People died.
• 11:17
  Speaker 2: There was damage. People's lives were threatened. But– Even– and
• 11:22
  Speaker 2: this is what is implied in what– in Liz Cheney's
• 11:26
  Speaker 2: opening and then what this Trump attorney says is that
• 11:29
  Speaker 2: even if the mob had never made it inside the Capitol,
• 11:32
  Speaker 2: if the Capitol Police or the National Guard, somebody would
• 11:34
  Speaker 2: be able to stop them from breaching the building and
• 11:36
  Speaker 2: doing damage and stop the violence that led to the deaths,
• 11:41
  Speaker 2: this would still be a crime. The crime was the
• 11:44
  Speaker 2: plot to overturn the election. The riot at the Capitol,
• 11:49
  Speaker 2: the assault at the Capitol was a consequence– of that
• 11:52
  Speaker 2: conspiracy failing. And we cannot lose sight of that because
• 12:00
  Speaker 2: I think it's going to be, you know, we don't
• 12:02
  Speaker 2: really know, maybe we'll know more in these hearings. If
• 12:04
  Speaker 2: the centerpiece of what we interpret to be the crime
• 12:07
  Speaker 2: is what happened on January 6th, it's going to probably
• 12:10
  Speaker 2: be pretty challenging to connect Donald Trump to specifically to
• 12:15
  Speaker 2: the elements that entered the Capitol or a specific plan
• 12:20
  Speaker 2: to enter the Capitol. And it's unlikely you'll be able
• 12:23
  Speaker 2: to have a single piece of evidence that beyond a
• 12:25
  Speaker 2: reasonable doubt will connect Donald Trump to a specific plan
• 12:28
  Speaker 2: to assault the Capitol. But the crime was happening. And
• 12:32
  Speaker 2: what bothers me, I think, and this is why I
• 12:34
  Speaker 2: think these hearings are important and what Liz Cheney does
• 12:36
  Speaker 2: here is important, is we have become sort of numb
• 12:40
  Speaker 2: to the nonviolent parts of the plot to overturn the
• 12:44
  Speaker 2: election in the last year and a half. It's been
• 12:45
  Speaker 2: sort of normalized, particularly as the Republican Party has embraced
• 12:48
  Speaker 2: it going forward, that– We think of that as that's
• 12:52
  Speaker 2: almost become treated as within the normal course of business. Look,
• 12:56
  Speaker 2: Democrats want to run on a $ 15 minimum wage. Republicans
• 12:59
  Speaker 2: want to have the power to overturn the election. Who's
• 13:02
  Speaker 2: to say which is right or wrong? And so continuing
• 13:04
  Speaker 2: to center the fact that what they were doing was
• 13:07
  Speaker 2: a crime. The alternate states of electors were crimes. Lying
• 13:10
  Speaker 2: about it and trying to conspire to stop the counting
• 13:13
  Speaker 2: of the votes was a crime. And staying laser focused
• 13:16
  Speaker 2: on that. And the most important part here is you
• 13:18
  Speaker 2: don't have to believe me. You don't have to believe
• 13:20
  Speaker 2: Liz Cheney. Here's Donald Trump's own attorney saying it's a crime.
• 13:25
  Speaker 1: Well, and more than that, you know, testifying today will
• 13:28
  Speaker 1: be J. Michael Luttig as a former George W. Bush
• 13:32
  Speaker 1: judge who was a runner up for both the Alito
• 13:36
  Speaker 1: and the Roberts nominations. This is a pretty conservative guy, Republican.
• 13:41
  Speaker 1: And he's going to be testifying today about how he
• 13:44
  Speaker 1: told his friend John Eastman that who is the subject of,
• 13:47
  Speaker 1: who's the one who wrote all these memos to Donald
• 13:49
  Speaker 1: Trump saying, like, yeah, Mike Pence can probably overturn the election.
• 13:52
  Speaker 1: And I think the key is, at the time, you
• 13:54
  Speaker 1: were just saying, like, why are we numb to this?
• 13:56
  Speaker 1: At the time, the thinking was, oh, Donald Trump is dumb,
• 14:02
  Speaker 1: and he thinks that Mike Pence has the power to
• 14:05
  Speaker 1: overturn the election, and obviously he doesn't. And I think
• 14:07
  Speaker 1: what they're going to prove in today's hearing is Donald
• 14:10
  Speaker 1: Trump knew that John Eastman's plan was illegal. He was
• 14:14
  Speaker 1: told it was illegal. He knew it was illegal, and
• 14:17
  Speaker 1: he went along with it anyway. And then when Mike
• 14:19
  Speaker 1: Pence refused to go along with the plan, Donald Trump
• 14:22
  Speaker 1: inflamed the mob that threatened Mike Pence's life, and then
• 14:25
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump didn't care. That connection right there is the
• 14:28
  Speaker 1: clearest you're going to get between Trump, the illegality of
• 14:32
  Speaker 1: the plot to overturn the election, and then his decision
• 14:34
  Speaker 1: to incite the mob to cause violence and potentially kill
• 14:37
  Speaker 1: his own vice president. I mean, it's fucking... It's not great. It's...
• 14:42
  Speaker 1: So let's take a step back for a minute and
• 14:44
  Speaker 1: talk about where all this is headed. On one hand,
• 14:47
  Speaker 1: the committee is now clearly making the case that Donald
• 14:50
  Speaker 1: Trump and others committed crimes in trying to overturn the election.
• 14:54
  Speaker 1: On the other, they've been a bit more circumspect on
• 14:57
  Speaker 1: whether they will make a criminal referral to the Department
• 15:01
  Speaker 1: of Justice. The committee's chairman, Benny Thompson, said that they wouldn't.
• 15:05
  Speaker 1: And then basically everyone else on the committee, including the staff,
• 15:09
  Speaker 1: walked back those comments shortly after. saying they haven't decided yet.
• 15:13
  Speaker 1: That's basically as far as they went. What do you
• 15:15
  Speaker 1: think is going on here? Why wouldn't they make a
• 15:19
  Speaker 1: criminal referral if they're very clearly and publicly making the
• 15:22
  Speaker 1: case that Trump committed a crime?
• 15:24
  Speaker 2: There is no reason not to make a criminal referral.
• 15:28
  Speaker 2: I think there was a sense when there was a
• 15:30
  Speaker 2: version of this debate happening a few months ago sort
• 15:34
  Speaker 2: of through anonymous sources, everyone freaked out about it. It
• 15:37
  Speaker 2: was a Twitter moment saying, and I think the argument
• 15:40
  Speaker 2: back then among some of the people who did not
• 15:42
  Speaker 2: want to do a criminal referral was if Merrick Garland
• 15:44
  Speaker 2: were to decide under the advice of career prosecutors to
• 15:48
  Speaker 2: charge Trump, that it would make it more political if
• 15:52
  Speaker 2: it was a referral from a largely Democratic committee in
• 15:56
  Speaker 2: a house controlled by Democrats. That is optics brain. That
• 16:01
  Speaker 2: makes no sense. No one That's not really how it's
• 16:04
  Speaker 2: going to work. And now we have certainly crossed the
• 16:06
  Speaker 2: Rubicon now that you have members of Congress, including, you know,
• 16:10
  Speaker 2: famed liberals like Dick Cheney's daughter making the case that
• 16:14
  Speaker 2: crimes were committed. So I don't think there's no reason
• 16:17
  Speaker 2: not to do it. I think for everyone who is,
• 16:21
  Speaker 2: you know, has melted down about what Congressman Thompson said
• 16:24
  Speaker 2: or the possibility that they won't, it's all it's just
• 16:26
  Speaker 2: what's worth noting. It is a piece of paper with
• 16:30
  Speaker 2: the same value as the next tweet Jon Favreau sends.
• 16:34
  Speaker 2: Like that's all it is, right?
• 16:36
  Speaker 1: So it's very valuable.
• 16:37
  Speaker 2: Yes, exactly.
• 16:39
  Speaker 1: I'm saying it is. So they really need to make
• 16:42
  Speaker 1: that referral.
• 16:42
  Speaker 2: It is digital parchment, right? It is very important. No,
• 16:46
  Speaker 2: it doesn't mean anything. It doesn't impact what Garland does
• 16:51
  Speaker 2: or does not do in this situation. It matters when
• 16:54
  Speaker 2: they make a criminal referral about a crime committed against
• 16:58
  Speaker 2: contempt of Congress, where someone is refusing to cooperate with
• 17:03
  Speaker 2: congressional subpoenas, then that isn't decisive, as we know from
• 17:09
  Speaker 2: the fact that Mark Meadows is still walking free in America.
• 17:13
  Speaker 2: But it has influence. Here, it's a general recommendation of
• 17:18
  Speaker 2: no force. And so I still think they should do it.
• 17:21
  Speaker 2: If you say it's a crime, you should take all
• 17:23
  Speaker 2: the steps to make the case that it is a crime.
• 17:25
  Speaker 2: This would be one of those steps, but it does
• 17:27
  Speaker 2: not materially impact as I understand it, what Merrick Garland
• 17:31
  Speaker 2: and his team may or may not do here.
• 17:34
  Speaker 1: Yeah, no, I hear what you're saying because like, I
• 17:35
  Speaker 1: don't know how many different ways Liz Cheney can say
• 17:37
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump committed a crime because she's now said it
• 17:39
  Speaker 1: a bunch since the beginning of the hearing. So it's
• 17:43
  Speaker 1: not like, certainly not like she's afraid of saying it.
• 17:47
  Speaker 1: You know, we haven't heard as much from some of
• 17:48
  Speaker 1: the other members, but they all, it is, it's, it's,
• 17:51
  Speaker 1: It's a bit of a silly debate for the reasons
• 17:53
  Speaker 1: that you cite, which is like it's silly that they
• 17:56
  Speaker 1: wouldn't just send the referral. But it's also silly to
• 17:58
  Speaker 1: think that if they don't send the referral, somehow the
• 17:59
  Speaker 1: Justice Department is going to be like, maybe they don't
• 18:01
  Speaker 1: want to. Maybe they don't think he committed a crime
• 18:04
  Speaker 1: because they clearly think he committed a crime. Anyway, Democrats
• 18:07
  Speaker 1: on the committee and all of us have no control
• 18:10
  Speaker 1: over what Merrick Garland ultimately decides. We all do have
• 18:13
  Speaker 1: some control over the message coming out of these hearings,
• 18:16
  Speaker 1: especially which parts are emphasized and amplified. We have some
• 18:20
  Speaker 1: exclusive new Navigator polling out today that shows a couple things.
• 18:24
  Speaker 1: 70% of Americans support the committee's investigation. 60% have heard
• 18:29
  Speaker 1: a lot or some about the hearings. 54% would support
• 18:34
  Speaker 1: the Justice Department filing criminal charges against Trump for his
• 18:37
  Speaker 1: role in January 6th. And the top descriptors of Republicans
• 18:41
  Speaker 1: in Congress who support Trump and his attempted coup are, quote, power-hungry, and, quote,
• 18:47
  Speaker 1: appealing to their right-wing extremist base to win elections. Dan,
• 18:52
  Speaker 1: given these numbers and the revelations we've talked about so far,
• 18:54
  Speaker 1: what do you think the most important messages are to
• 18:57
  Speaker 1: be amplifying about these hearings?
• 19:01
  Speaker 2: That this was a crime. It was a criminal conspiracy
• 19:06
  Speaker 2: from the top of the Republican Party to overturn the election,
• 19:10
  Speaker 2: to put in place a radical right-wing agenda that was
• 19:13
  Speaker 2: rejected by the majority of Americans. And I think we
• 19:16
  Speaker 2: have to say it's a crime because of what I
• 19:18
  Speaker 2: mentioned earlier about this fear that we're normalizing insurrection as
• 19:21
  Speaker 2: a political strategy. I want people to say crime so
• 19:25
  Speaker 2: often that if we were playing a drinking game with
• 19:27
  Speaker 2: the word crime, I would want it to end up
• 19:29
  Speaker 2: so that we were all Rudy Giuliani. Let's just focus
• 19:32
  Speaker 2: on crime because there is this tendency towards normalization in
• 19:38
  Speaker 2: our political debate that keeps moving the Overton window of
• 19:40
  Speaker 2: acceptable political conduct in very dangerous ways. So crime, crime, crime, crime, crime.
• 19:45
  Speaker 2: Second point, forward looking. This is an ongoing threat that
• 19:52
  Speaker 2: is happening right now. And last time, as we know
• 19:55
  Speaker 2: from all these stories, this was a plot engineered by
• 19:58
  Speaker 2: some of the dumbest and drunkest people in America. This
• 20:01
  Speaker 2: time around, it's a much different situation. It involves the
• 20:04
  Speaker 2: RNC is on board. They're recruiting people to be part
• 20:07
  Speaker 2: of this plan. It's being funded by people. This is
• 20:09
  Speaker 2: not just the MAGA wing or Donald Trump sowing grievances.
• 20:14
  Speaker 2: It's a very real threat.
• 20:17
  Speaker 1: Yeah, you know, I was kind of hoping that Benny
• 20:20
  Speaker 1: Thompson would have opened the entire hearing, the first hearing, with, like,
• 20:25
  Speaker 1: we meet here tonight as democracy is under attack. Like,
• 20:29
  Speaker 1: forget about the history. You know, like, they really do
• 20:32
  Speaker 1: have to, and this is a job for all of us,
• 20:34
  Speaker 1: bring it forward. And There is rightly a focus on
• 20:38
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump because he was the one who tried to
• 20:40
  Speaker 1: overturn the election. He was the president who tried to
• 20:43
  Speaker 1: stay in power. He was the one who tried to
• 20:44
  Speaker 1: do the attempted coup. But we should also focus on
• 20:48
  Speaker 1: all of the MAGA Republicans around him who not only
• 20:52
  Speaker 1: tried to help with the coup, but are still in
• 20:55
  Speaker 1: power today and are running for office in these midterms.
• 20:59
  Speaker 1: Just as an example, the Democratic Secretary of State in
• 21:03
  Speaker 1: New Mexico just this week announced asked the state Supreme
• 21:07
  Speaker 1: Court to order a MAGA-filled election commission in a rural
• 21:12
  Speaker 1: county in New Mexico to certify the primary results after
• 21:16
  Speaker 1: they refused. They refused to certify the results of a
• 21:19
  Speaker 1: primary election, a Republican primary, in this rural county in
• 21:22
  Speaker 1: New Mexico because they believed in some batshit crazy conspiracy
• 21:27
  Speaker 1: about Dominion voting machines. They didn't have any allegations of fraud.
• 21:31
  Speaker 1: They didn't think anything had gone wrong. But just because
• 21:33
  Speaker 1: Dominion voting machines were used in their primary, they refused
• 21:37
  Speaker 1: to certify the election. And one of the commission members
• 21:40
  Speaker 1: is a Cowboys for Trump founder who was convicted of
• 21:43
  Speaker 1: illegally entering the Capitol grounds on January 6th. This threat
• 21:48
  Speaker 1: is ongoing. There are people, there are MAGA Republican politicians
• 21:52
  Speaker 1: running for Secretary of State, for County Commission, for Governor,
• 21:56
  Speaker 1: for Attorney General, for Congress, all over this country. And
• 22:01
  Speaker 1: they have basically told us That if they take power
• 22:04
  Speaker 1: and it's a close election, they will throw our votes away.
• 22:07
  Speaker 1: They will throw our votes away to make sure that
• 22:09
  Speaker 1: Republicans win because they tried to do it in 2020
• 22:11
  Speaker 1: and they failed, but they want to do it again.
• 22:15
  Speaker 1: And I think that is the most important message coming
• 22:16
  Speaker 1: out of it because, you know, Americans are busy. They're
• 22:20
  Speaker 1: worried about a lot of things. They're worried about inflation.
• 22:21
  Speaker 1: They're worried about all kinds of stuff. And it's easy
• 22:24
  Speaker 1: to see these hearings and think, oh, this is about
• 22:26
  Speaker 1: the past. This is something bad that happened. I believe
• 22:29
  Speaker 1: Trump was responsible. I don't think the Republicans should have
• 22:31
  Speaker 1: gone along with it, blah, blah, blah. But it's in
• 22:33
  Speaker 1: the past. We got to look forward. Well, looking forward
• 22:35
  Speaker 1: means realizing that the threat to our democracy exists right
• 22:39
  Speaker 1: now in all of and in many of the MAGA
• 22:41
  Speaker 1: Republicans who are running for office. I think that we
• 22:43
  Speaker 1: can't lose that point.
• 22:45
  Speaker 2: Yeah, the the difference there is this sense when and
• 22:48
  Speaker 2: all these primaries where it's like big lie candidate wins,
• 22:51
  Speaker 2: big lie candidate, you know, big lie opponent loses all
• 22:54
  Speaker 2: of that. It's treated as this battle within the party
• 22:57
  Speaker 2: between an insurrectionist wing and everyone else. The difference in
• 23:02
  Speaker 2: the Republican Party is not between insurrectionists and non-insurrectionists. It's
• 23:05
  Speaker 2: just in terms of how public you are about your
• 23:08
  Speaker 2: coming insurrection. These big lie candidates are being supported by
• 23:12
  Speaker 2: the party establishment. Herschel Walker is a big lie candidate
• 23:17
  Speaker 2: who has talked about the election conspiracy theories. He is
• 23:20
  Speaker 2: endorsed by Mitch McConnell. I promise you, that if the
• 23:24
  Speaker 2: recent poll in Pennsylvania, which showed Doug Mastroianno only four
• 23:28
  Speaker 2: points behind Josh Shapiro, if the polls look like that
• 23:33
  Speaker 2: in a month or two from now, the Republican Governors
• 23:35
  Speaker 2: Association and the RNC will be supporting Doug Mastroianno's campaign.
• 23:40
  Speaker 2: This is a party-wide conspiracy. Now, it is much bigger
• 23:44
  Speaker 2: than Trump. He is actually just sort of an ancillary
• 23:46
  Speaker 2: part of what's happening. It is now being engineered by
• 23:49
  Speaker 2: much smarter, more dangerous people. And I know you're exactly
• 23:54
  Speaker 2: right about Betty Thompson's missed opportunity. I think in his
• 23:56
  Speaker 2: mind he probably had some– it was important for him
• 23:59
  Speaker 2: to start with that very long story about his hometown.
• 24:03
  Speaker 2: But then he could have gotten to the democracy thing.
• 24:06
  Speaker 1: Yeah. So on that note about some of these Republican
• 24:10
  Speaker 1: primaries that are happening across the country, we did have
• 24:12
  Speaker 1: a few notable results from this week's elections. South Carolina
• 24:16
  Speaker 1: Republican Tom Rice– was one of the 10 House Republicans
• 24:20
  Speaker 1: who voted to impeach Donald Trump for his attempted coup.
• 24:23
  Speaker 1: But on Tuesday, he lost his primary to Trump-endorsed state
• 24:26
  Speaker 1: representative Russell Fry by 51 to 25 percent. But South
• 24:32
  Speaker 1: Carolina Republican Congresswoman Nancy Mace, who voted against impeachment, even
• 24:36
  Speaker 1: as she really pissed off Trump by just criticizing him,
• 24:41
  Speaker 1: won her primary against Trump-endorsed state representative Katie Arrington, 53
• 24:44
  Speaker 1: to 45 percent. Any lessons from these two South Carolina
• 24:49
  Speaker 1: primaries about Trump and the Republican Party dynamics right now?
• 24:53
  Speaker 2: We'll know more about this as the rest of the
• 24:56
  Speaker 2: primary season ends, but it seems thus far that criticizing
• 25:00
  Speaker 2: Trump is a venal political sin within this Republican Party,
• 25:04
  Speaker 2: and voting to impeach him is a mortal political sin.
• 25:06
  Speaker 2: Nancy Mace was very critical of him after January 6th.
• 25:11
  Speaker 2: After that moment, she is She has worked very hard
• 25:14
  Speaker 2: to not necessarily be in his good graces, because he's
• 25:16
  Speaker 2: obviously very against her, but to be very positive towards Trump.
• 25:19
  Speaker 2: She has made finishing the wall a big part of
• 25:22
  Speaker 2: her primary campaign. There was also a.
• 25:25
  Speaker 1: She filmed a video, just an embarrassing video outside of
• 25:29
  Speaker 1: Trump Tower, where she talked about how wonderful Trump is
• 25:32
  Speaker 1: and all the accomplishments that his administration did. It was
• 25:36
  Speaker 1: just so sad.
• 25:37
  Speaker 2: You don't need Trump to be pro-you, but you have
• 25:39
  Speaker 2: to be pro-Trump. And Tom Rice could not be- Like
• 25:41
  Speaker 2: Brian Kemp.
• 25:42
  Speaker 1: Yes, exactly.
• 25:43
  Speaker 2: Brian Kemp is the exact example of how this works.
• 25:46
  Speaker 2: It is worth noting that these are two very different districts.
• 25:50
  Speaker 2: Nancy Mace is in a district that is pretty Republican.
• 25:52
  Speaker 2: It's plus 17 Republican, but Tom Rice's district is nine
• 25:58
  Speaker 2: points more Republican and more conservative because a version of
• 26:01
  Speaker 2: Nancy Mace's district had elected, you know, was won by
• 26:05
  Speaker 2: a Democrat in 2018.
• 26:06
  Speaker 1: Yeah. I mean, no one who truly opposes Donald Trump,
• 26:09
  Speaker 1: who says openly and honestly that what he did was
• 26:11
  Speaker 1: an illegal attempted coup in the Republican Party is going
• 26:15
  Speaker 1: to have a big future in that party. Liz Cheney
• 26:18
  Speaker 1: is down like 30 points to her primary challenger right now.
• 26:22
  Speaker 1: Adam Kinzinger is not running again. You know, out of
• 26:26
  Speaker 1: the 10 Republicans who impeached Donald Trump in the House,
• 26:29
  Speaker 1: I think now five, six aren't coming back to Congress.
• 26:32
  Speaker 5: Yep.
• 26:33
  Speaker 1: So one more notable primary on the Democratic side, a
• 26:36
  Speaker 1: special election in South Texas that was held after Congressman
• 26:39
  Speaker 1: Philemon Vela retired in the middle of his term to
• 26:41
  Speaker 1: become a lobbyist. In an over 80 percent. Yeah. It's
• 26:46
  Speaker 1: got to leave Congress. It's a you know, nothing much
• 26:49
  Speaker 1: is going on in the country. Everything's going swimmingly. Things
• 26:52
  Speaker 1: are cool. It's a great time to just like skip
• 26:55
  Speaker 1: out in the middle of your term and go be
• 26:56
  Speaker 1: a lobbyist. Super cool. Super cool. So in an over
• 27:01
  Speaker 1: 80 percent Latino district. that voted for Joe Biden by
• 27:04
  Speaker 1: a little more than four points in 2020, Republican Mayra
• 27:08
  Speaker 1: Flores beat Democrat Dan Sanchez 51 to 43 percent, making
• 27:13
  Speaker 1: the hardline immigration candidate the first woman born in Mexico
• 27:17
  Speaker 1: to serve as a Republican in Congress and the first
• 27:20
  Speaker 1: time since Reconstruction that a Republican will represent the Rio
• 27:23
  Speaker 1: Grande Valley. But there's a catch. Because of redistricting, in November,
• 27:28
  Speaker 1: Flores will face Democratic Congressman Vicente Gonzalez in a seat
• 27:31
  Speaker 1: that Biden would have won By 16 points. So the
• 27:35
  Speaker 1: new seat, the new district is a Biden plus 16.
• 27:38
  Speaker 1: The one that just that they the special election was
• 27:40
  Speaker 1: held in as a Biden plus four. And this is
• 27:43
  Speaker 1: the main reason that Democrats invested almost no money in
• 27:46
  Speaker 1: this special election. So, Dan, obviously, this result has triggered
• 27:50
  Speaker 1: another round of stories about Democratic weakness with Latino voters.
• 27:53
  Speaker 1: Is it warranted? Is it just another unique circumstance? Is
• 27:57
  Speaker 1: it a little bit of both?
• 27:59
  Speaker 2: This falls under the category of something we haven't said
• 28:01
  Speaker 2: in a long time on this podcast, which is worry
• 28:03
  Speaker 2: about everything, panic about nothing. Like, yes, all the caveats
• 28:06
  Speaker 2: that you put in place are right there. The Democrats
• 28:09
  Speaker 2: did not invest any money in this seat or did
• 28:13
  Speaker 2: not invest as much money in this seat. It's complicated.
• 28:16
  Speaker 2: We will hopefully, maybe even probably get this seat back
• 28:20
  Speaker 2: in the fall.
• 28:22
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I hope so. Biden's 16? Hope so.
• 28:25
  Speaker 2: But we should be winning Biden plus four districts. If
• 28:29
  Speaker 2: we are not winning Biden plus four districts, we are
• 28:31
  Speaker 2: in a lot of trouble. That is worth– that is
• 28:36
  Speaker 2: just as a point of– a data point about the
• 28:39
  Speaker 2: current state of the political environment. But of course, we
• 28:44
  Speaker 2: have to be concerned about what looks like a shift.
• 28:50
  Speaker 2: It's not a gigantic shift. But it is a shift
• 28:53
  Speaker 2: among some segments of non-white voters, Latino voters in parts
• 28:58
  Speaker 2: of the country, black voters in parts of the country,
• 29:00
  Speaker 2: Asian American voters in parts of the country. We have
• 29:02
  Speaker 2: to be concerned about that because if the Republicans go
• 29:06
  Speaker 2: from being a nearly entirely white working class political party
• 29:10
  Speaker 2: to a just mostly white working class political party, Democrats
• 29:13
  Speaker 2: are locked out of power. There is no math where
• 29:16
  Speaker 2: we can win the Senate or Electoral College if we
• 29:18
  Speaker 2: suffer any sort of real dip in our margins among
• 29:23
  Speaker 2: core parts of the Democratic base. So we, like, I
• 29:26
  Speaker 2: don't know why you wouldn't worry about it. Like, what
• 29:28
  Speaker 2: would be the downside? Like, I would rather worry, spend
• 29:31
  Speaker 2: some time trying to figure it out, and maybe it
• 29:32
  Speaker 2: turned out to be totally fine than to just be like,
• 29:35
  Speaker 2: don't worry about it. What would be the upside of that?
• 29:38
  Speaker 2: So yeah, I think we should pay real close attention
• 29:40
  Speaker 2: to what happened here and try to figure out. And
• 29:42
  Speaker 2: there have been some really, you know, some good people,
• 29:44
  Speaker 2: our friends at Eckes Research and others looking at the
• 29:46
  Speaker 2: challenges here, trying to find solutions. But we should be like,
• 29:50
  Speaker 2: this is another data point. And for reasons why Democrats
• 29:52
  Speaker 2: should be concerned and focused on shoring up the parts
• 29:57
  Speaker 2: of our party that have ensured that we've been elected,
• 29:59
  Speaker 2: that helped win us the 2020 election.
• 30:03
  Speaker 1: Because of the Senate, because of the Electoral College, it
• 30:06
  Speaker 1: is extremely difficult for Democrats to win without getting some
• 30:09
  Speaker 1: portion of non-college educated white voters. It is impossible, impossible
• 30:13
  Speaker 1: to win if we also can't get non-college educated Latino
• 30:17
  Speaker 1: voters and increasingly some non-college educated black males. I mean,
• 30:22
  Speaker 1: it is just it's impossible that the math doesn't add up.
• 30:24
  Speaker 1: You can't go find a bunch of college educated progressives
• 30:27
  Speaker 1: who are just hiding out in their homes. It's just
• 30:29
  Speaker 1: it's not going to happen. Look, of course, the Democrats
• 30:32
  Speaker 1: didn't invest at all in this race. So that is
• 30:35
  Speaker 1: that is ridiculous. That is a big explanation for why
• 30:39
  Speaker 1: Dan Sanchez did so poorly. And he's obviously also not
• 30:43
  Speaker 1: the candidate that's going to be running in the fall. Right.
• 30:45
  Speaker 1: So that's a weird we have a we have a
• 30:47
  Speaker 1: sitting congressman. in Vicente Gonzalez, who's running in the fall,
• 30:51
  Speaker 1: who's an incumbent. So that's going to help a lot too.
• 30:53
  Speaker 1: So you're absolutely right. There's all these extenuating circumstances. But like,
• 30:57
  Speaker 1: just to dig into the results a little bit, Cameron
• 30:59
  Speaker 1: County in this district, which is right on the border,
• 31:02
  Speaker 1: it is on the border of Mexico in the Rio
• 31:04
  Speaker 1: Grande Valley. Flores wins that county by a point in
• 31:08
  Speaker 1: this race. Obama beat Romney in that county by 30 points.
• 31:14
  Speaker 1: 30 points. Willisee County, which is just north of Cameron County,
• 31:19
  Speaker 1: Flores wins that by two. Obama won it by 40 points.
• 31:24
  Speaker 1: These aren't like, oh, we just didn't invest a little
• 31:27
  Speaker 1: bit more money and we could have done some more
• 31:28
  Speaker 1: door knocking and there could have been some ads from
• 31:30
  Speaker 1: the DCCC. Like, that's a couple points here and there.
• 31:32
  Speaker 1: That gets you a couple points in there. That's not
• 31:34
  Speaker 1: a difference between a point, two points, and 30 and
• 31:37
  Speaker 1: 40 points. That's a big, big, big difference. And look,
• 31:42
  Speaker 1: Mayra Flores also isn't some like, she's not like a
• 31:45
  Speaker 1: Will Hurd Republican. on the other side of Texas. She's
• 31:49
  Speaker 1: not like some moderate Republican or even a mainstream conservative Republican.
• 31:53
  Speaker 1: She was running around talking about a militarized border. She
• 31:56
  Speaker 1: was like tweeting stuff with QAnon hashtags in her tweets
• 32:02
  Speaker 1: as of a year or two ago. A couple days
• 32:04
  Speaker 1: after the January 6th insurrection, she said, it's time for
• 32:07
  Speaker 1: us all to go buy more guns. She is a
• 32:09
  Speaker 1: pretty extreme Republican. And if Democrats don't start figuring out
• 32:14
  Speaker 1: how to treat Latino voters not as base voters that
• 32:19
  Speaker 1: they just have to activate around the midterm, around during election,
• 32:23
  Speaker 1: but actually persuasion targets where you have to go and
• 32:26
  Speaker 1: talk to them and figure out what their issues are.
• 32:28
  Speaker 1: And by the way, their issues just aren't immigration, which
• 32:31
  Speaker 1: is a patronizing way to treat Latino voters, I think.
• 32:34
  Speaker 1: But in fact, in 2020, the top issue for most
• 32:36
  Speaker 1: Latino voters was the economy. Democrats don't figure out how
• 32:39
  Speaker 1: to talk to Latino voters, who's a huge and growing
• 32:42
  Speaker 1: percentage of the electorate every single year. We're fucked. We're fucked.
• 32:46
  Speaker 1: So like, I know that we can comfort ourselves with
• 32:48
  Speaker 1: all kinds of like, this is an extenuating circumstance excuse.
• 32:52
  Speaker 1: And there are plenty of extenuating circumstances here that made
• 32:54
  Speaker 1: this race unique. And like you said, I would expect
• 32:57
  Speaker 1: that in a Biden plus 16 district, we'll get this
• 32:59
  Speaker 1: back in the fall. But there are some shifts going
• 33:03
  Speaker 1: on in the Rio Grande Valley. And first when it
• 33:05
  Speaker 1: was shifts in Miami-Dade and it was okay, you'd say, okay,
• 33:07
  Speaker 1: it was the Cuban vote in Miami-Dade. Then you go
• 33:09
  Speaker 1: to the Rio Grande Valley and there's shifts there. You're like, okay,
• 33:11
  Speaker 1: now there's shifts there. Now look, a lot of strategists
• 33:13
  Speaker 1: will point out that in Counties across the country where
• 33:17
  Speaker 1: there's a high percentage of college educated Latinos, Democrats are
• 33:19
  Speaker 1: doing fine and there's no attrition. Of course, because college
• 33:23
  Speaker 1: educated voters, we're doing great, whether they're white, black or
• 33:26
  Speaker 1: Latino or Asian. We're doing really great about college educated voters.
• 33:29
  Speaker 1: But we are there is a problem with non-college educated
• 33:32
  Speaker 1: voters in the Democratic Party that is now becoming a
• 33:34
  Speaker 1: problem across races. And we have to figure that out.
• 33:37
  Speaker 2: The demographic shifts in the country. means that certain parts
• 33:42
  Speaker 2: of what were safe Democratic states in the Electoral College
• 33:47
  Speaker 2: are becoming more and more Republican. It's Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio,
• 33:53
  Speaker 2: which Obama won twice, Iowa, which Obama won twice, have
• 33:56
  Speaker 2: moved very quickly in the Republican direction. And the hope
• 34:01
  Speaker 2: is that heavily Latino states like Texas continue to become
• 34:08
  Speaker 2: more diverse and therefore become blue. There is no world
• 34:13
  Speaker 2: in which Texas becomes a blue state if Democrats are
• 34:17
  Speaker 2: losing the Rio Grande Valley. And if this trend, there's
• 34:21
  Speaker 2: going to be a real test for this trend in
• 34:24
  Speaker 2: 2022 in Nevada, which has a very high percentage of
• 34:28
  Speaker 2: non-college educated Latino voters, We can't win Texas. We lose Nevada.
• 34:32
  Speaker 2: Arizona stays hard. We're in huge trouble as a party.
• 34:35
  Speaker 2: And so we have to figure this out. We have
• 34:37
  Speaker 2: to do better across the board, right? We obviously, I
• 34:40
  Speaker 2: believe there is a potential to improve our margins among
• 34:43
  Speaker 2: non-college educated white voters. We have a case to make there.
• 34:45
  Speaker 2: We have to do that. We have to improve our
• 34:47
  Speaker 2: margins and our turnout in every part of the party
• 34:49
  Speaker 2: in order to win because the math is getting harder,
• 34:52
  Speaker 2: particularly when it comes to the Senate.
• 34:54
  Speaker 7: Yeah.
• 34:54
  Speaker 1: And in Nevada, you have all the things we talked
• 34:57
  Speaker 1: about this episode coming together because- There was a primary
• 35:01
  Speaker 1: there this week as well. And Catherine Cortez Masto, who's
• 35:04
  Speaker 1: the Democratic senator from Nevada, who's up, who's going to
• 35:06
  Speaker 1: be in one of the tougher races. We absolutely have
• 35:08
  Speaker 1: to keep her seat in order to hold the Senate.
• 35:10
  Speaker 1: She's now going to be running against Adam Laxalt, who
• 35:13
  Speaker 1: is another election denier, strong Trump supporter. He won that primary.
• 35:18
  Speaker 1: And the secretary of state candidate in Nevada now, who's
• 35:20
  Speaker 1: a Republican there, is the Republican secretary of state candidate
• 35:24
  Speaker 1: in Nevada who won that primary is another election denier.
• 35:28
  Speaker 1: who could overturn future elections. And he just won as well.
• 35:32
  Speaker 1: So Nevada, if we don't win Nevada in 2022, we
• 35:35
  Speaker 1: could have a bunch of MAGA Republicans there who might
• 35:38
  Speaker 1: want to overturn future elections. So it's incredibly important. Everyone
• 35:40
  Speaker 1: go to votesaveamerica.com slash midterm, sign up for midterm madness,
• 35:44
  Speaker 1: pick a region, whether you want to do West, South, Midwest, East.
• 35:48
  Speaker 1: We really need people to sign up because look, all
• 35:51
  Speaker 1: of this can sound scary. I know there's a lot
• 35:53
  Speaker 1: of focus on like, what will Margaret Garland do? And yeah,
• 35:55
  Speaker 1: for sure. But we have the power to to go
• 35:59
  Speaker 1: out there and organize and make sure that these MAGA Republicans,
• 36:03
  Speaker 1: these election deniers, do not win these seats in these
• 36:06
  Speaker 1: competitive districts and these competitive states. We can do it.
• 36:09
  Speaker 1: So everyone sign up, and we've got a lot of
• 36:11
  Speaker 1: work to do. Okay, when we come back, Dan will
• 36:13
  Speaker 1: talk to Representative Elaine Luria of Virginia, who is on
• 36:17
  Speaker 1: the 1-6 Committee.
• 36:28
  Speaker 2: Joining us now is one of the members of the
• 36:30
  Speaker 2: January 6th Committee in our Congresswoman of Virginia, Elaine Luria.
• 36:33
  Speaker 2: Welcome to the pod.
• 36:33
  Speaker 5: Thank you.
• 36:34
  Speaker 2: I wanted to start with this hearing, which felt different
• 36:39
  Speaker 2: in a lot of ways from the previous two. It
• 36:41
  Speaker 2: was obviously much more kind of in the weeds about
• 36:44
  Speaker 2: specific provisions of the 12th Amendment, Electoral Council Act. What
• 36:48
  Speaker 2: was the committee trying to communicate with this hearing?
• 36:52
  Speaker 5: Well, I think we were trying to get across that,
• 36:54
  Speaker 5: you know, we have examined every aspect of the law,
• 36:57
  Speaker 5: every claim that was made by, for example, John Eastman
• 37:00
  Speaker 5: and other people who had this crazy theory of a
• 37:03
  Speaker 5: way that the vice president could just unilaterally overthrow the
• 37:06
  Speaker 5: results of the voters and the election. And we really
• 37:08
  Speaker 5: examine that with both a renowned former conservative federal judge.
• 37:14
  Speaker 5: as well as the legal advisor to the former vice president.
• 37:17
  Speaker 5: And they unequivocally said across all of their testimony that
• 37:21
  Speaker 5: there was no merit to this legal theory.
• 37:24
  Speaker 7: And they went into.
• 37:24
  Speaker 5: Depth about kind of all the different iterations of it.
• 37:27
  Speaker 5: Was it essentially to delay? Was it to choose a
• 37:32
  Speaker 5: different slate of fake electors? Kind of all the different
• 37:34
  Speaker 5: scenarios that have been laid out there. They just, the
• 37:36
  Speaker 5: purpose was to go through them methodically and debunk them
• 37:39
  Speaker 5: because they had no legal merit.
• 37:42
  Speaker 2: It also felt like, in the questioning, Congressman Aguilar and
• 37:47
  Speaker 2: your counsel tried to get really at the point that
• 37:48
  Speaker 2: both Eastman and President Trump knew that there was no
• 37:54
  Speaker 2: legal merit to these claims and made them anyway. Why
• 37:56
  Speaker 2: was this so important to establish that they pushed them
• 37:59
  Speaker 2: while knowing that these claims are untrue or unfounded?
• 38:03
  Speaker 5: Yeah, that really stood out to me too in the
• 38:05
  Speaker 5: line of questioning because they talked about this meeting on
• 38:07
  Speaker 5: January 4th and the president, the vice president, Mark Short,
• 38:10
  Speaker 5: the vice president's chief of staff, others were there And
• 38:13
  Speaker 5: during that conversation, Eastman indicated that he didn't think there
• 38:17
  Speaker 5: was really a legal merit to this plan or idea
• 38:22
  Speaker 5: that he had.
• 38:23
  Speaker 7: This scheme.
• 38:25
  Speaker 5: But he kind of said, but the Electoral Count Act,
• 38:27
  Speaker 5: I think that's unconstitutional. So he's just going to a
• 38:30
  Speaker 5: law that's been on the books since 1887, his own
• 38:32
  Speaker 5: personal opinion that he doesn't like it.
• 38:34
  Speaker 7: He thinks it's unconstitutional. And so therefore, the Electoral Count Act,
• 38:38
  Speaker 7: let's just violate it.
• 38:40
  Speaker 5: And then he turns right back around on January 5th,
• 38:42
  Speaker 5: another meeting with Mark Short, the legal advisor to the
• 38:44
  Speaker 5: vice president, and tries to pressure him again, goes through
• 38:46
  Speaker 5: all these different schemes. And then again, this was really
• 38:51
  Speaker 5: the most shocking to me on January 6th, after there's
• 38:54
  Speaker 5: been a riot, after the vice president's life has been
• 38:58
  Speaker 5: in danger, he's been evacuated to a secure location in
• 39:00
  Speaker 5: the basement of the Capitol, and.
• 39:02
  Speaker 7: They come back for the certification.
• 39:04
  Speaker 5: He essentially says, well, now the Electoral Count Act, we've
• 39:08
  Speaker 5: determined that it's not so sacrosanct because you took more
• 39:11
  Speaker 5: than two hours to debate this particular state in the
• 39:15
  Speaker 5: midst of a riot and insurrection, of course. And just
• 39:19
  Speaker 5: file it one more time. I wrote this down, I
• 39:22
  Speaker 5: implore you to consider one more relatively minor violation. This
• 39:27
  Speaker 5: is the advice being provided essentially you know, they're urging
• 39:31
  Speaker 5: the vice president to take this action. And in stark
• 39:34
  Speaker 5: contrast to this crazy theory, someone who's trying to essentially
• 39:38
  Speaker 5: encourage others to break the law.
• 39:40
  Speaker 7: The former vice president, he was steadfast.
• 39:42
  Speaker 5: And we had just witness after witness after witness say
• 39:45
  Speaker 5: that there was never any doubt in his mind that
• 39:47
  Speaker 5: this was illegal, that he wasn't going to do this.
• 39:50
  Speaker 5: And I've said a lot throughout the evaluation and course
• 39:54
  Speaker 5: of this investigation that there were a few people, the
• 39:57
  Speaker 5: right people, who did the right.
• 39:59
  Speaker 7: Thing at the right place at the right time.
• 40:01
  Speaker 5: And the former vice president He was steadfast in his
• 40:04
  Speaker 5: adherence to the law, his adherence to the Constitution, and
• 40:07
  Speaker 5: I think that clearly saved the day while his life
• 40:10
  Speaker 5: was in danger.
• 40:10
  Speaker 2: And there was also time spent in the hearing on
• 40:15
  Speaker 2: this statement that President Trump put out prior to January 6th,
• 40:20
  Speaker 2: saying that he and Mike Pence were on the same page.
• 40:24
  Speaker 1: Mm-hmm.
• 40:25
  Speaker 2: Why was it so significant that Trump was dishonest, not
• 40:29
  Speaker 2: just about what was legally possible, but what about the
• 40:32
  Speaker 2: vice president actually believed?
• 40:35
  Speaker 5: Well, so the topic of this was the pressure on
• 40:37
  Speaker 5: the vice president. So this was just one of those
• 40:39
  Speaker 5: means of pressure on him. If the president puts out
• 40:43
  Speaker 5: a false statement, essentially telling the world that the vice
• 40:45
  Speaker 5: president agrees with me, it puts the former vice president
• 40:49
  Speaker 5: in this position where he has.
• 40:50
  Speaker 7: To clearly and unambiguously ambiguously.
• 40:53
  Speaker 5: Come back and state that he does not agree with
• 40:56
  Speaker 5: this legal opinion, which he does prior to convening the
• 41:00
  Speaker 5: session on January 6th. But it is a method of
• 41:03
  Speaker 5: this pressure campaign on the former vice president. And that
• 41:07
  Speaker 5: stood out a lot in the hearing today as well.
• 41:10
  Speaker 2: And there also seemed to be a specific effort to
• 41:13
  Speaker 2: connect the pressure campaign on the vice president, the dishonest
• 41:20
  Speaker 2: assertions from the president and john eastman about the power
• 41:23
  Speaker 2: of the vice president to the actual violence that happened
• 41:27
  Speaker 2: on january 6th what was the committee thinking and trying
• 41:30
  Speaker 2: to draw that connection is the belief that absent that
• 41:33
  Speaker 2: effort the the creation of the expectation the vice president
• 41:37
  Speaker 2: had the power to do something was going to do
• 41:39
  Speaker 2: that and then not doing it is a precipitating event
• 41:42
  Speaker 2: that led to the violence is that is that what
• 41:44
  Speaker 2: you're getting at.
• 41:46
  Speaker 7: I think that's true.
• 41:47
  Speaker 5: And I think, you know, when you look at this
• 41:49
  Speaker 5: 224 tweet, the one where the president comes out and says,
• 41:52
  Speaker 5: Mike Pence didn't have the courage to do what he
• 41:55
  Speaker 5: needed to do.
• 41:56
  Speaker 7: And then you immediately switch.
• 41:58
  Speaker 5: To, you know, a video clip of multiple of the
• 42:01
  Speaker 5: rioters and people who ultimately stormed the Capitol, you know,
• 42:04
  Speaker 5: yelling and screaming, bring out Pence, hang Mike Pence. He
• 42:07
  Speaker 5: didn't have the courage to act. He didn't have the
• 42:09
  Speaker 5: courage to do the right thing. There's clearly a connection
• 42:11
  Speaker 5: because these people are anticipating and waiting. And they think
• 42:14
  Speaker 5: that like Pence is the pivotal figure. Because of this
• 42:17
  Speaker 5: pressure campaign, because of these statements, essentially the one you
• 42:20
  Speaker 5: mentioned where Trump said that Pence agreed with him. When
• 42:23
  Speaker 5: we know that's not true, then Pence puts out a
• 42:25
  Speaker 5: statement saying this legal theory is BS. I'm not going
• 42:31
  Speaker 5: to do this. I'm going to do what the Constitution
• 42:34
  Speaker 5: tells me to do, the 12th Amendment.
• 42:35
  Speaker 7: I'm just going to open the envelopes and they're.
• 42:37
  Speaker 5: Going to be counted, not be changed from what the
• 42:40
  Speaker 5: voters sent and the real electoral slates that came to Congress.
• 42:46
  Speaker 2: There has been some confusion and ambiguity about whether the
• 42:50
  Speaker 2: committee would make a criminal referral to the Department of Justice.
• 42:53
  Speaker 2: You helped clear some of that confusion up in a
• 42:55
  Speaker 2: tweet this morning where you said this was something the
• 42:56
  Speaker 2: committee had to vote on. It was your belief that
• 42:59
  Speaker 2: the committee had a responsibility that if criminal activity was found,
• 43:03
  Speaker 2: that such a referral should be made. You've obviously been
• 43:07
  Speaker 2: part of this process for a year now. You've heard
• 43:09
  Speaker 2: this hearing. Many of your colleagues have already on the
• 43:12
  Speaker 2: record asserted that crimes were committed. What is your view
• 43:15
  Speaker 2: about whether crimes have been committed by the president or
• 43:19
  Speaker 2: his allies or any of the people we've been talking about?
• 43:23
  Speaker 5: So I think it's very clear that there's criminal activity here.
• 43:26
  Speaker 5: And this is substantiated by a federal judge in the
• 43:28
  Speaker 5: case that's been reviewed as far as releasing the emails
• 43:31
  Speaker 5: from Eastman. Judge Carter essentially says, you know, there's sufficient
• 43:36
  Speaker 5: evidence to show that a crime is likely. And, you know,
• 43:39
  Speaker 5: there are certain counts of that defrauding the U.S. government
• 43:43
  Speaker 5: conspiracy to interfere with congressional proceedings. And we've referenced that
• 43:48
  Speaker 5: over and over and over again as we present this information.
• 43:51
  Speaker 5: And so, you know, I stand by my opinion. thought that,
• 43:55
  Speaker 5: you know, when we as Congress, whether it's in this
• 43:58
  Speaker 5: investigation or any other work that we do, become aware
• 44:01
  Speaker 5: of criminal activity, it's our duty that we refer that
• 44:03
  Speaker 5: to the appropriate authorities. Now, the question for the committee,
• 44:06
  Speaker 5: I don't think there's as much disagreement as perhaps has
• 44:08
  Speaker 5: been portrayed in the last couple of days. I think
• 44:10
  Speaker 5: it's a question of really, you know, what does a
• 44:13
  Speaker 5: criminal referral mean?
• 44:15
  Speaker 7: How do we do that?
• 44:16
  Speaker 5: I feel like the hearings we're doing right now, we're
• 44:18
  Speaker 5: presenting everything very publicly.
• 44:20
  Speaker 7: We intend to.
• 44:22
  Speaker 5: The chairman has said that we'll provide this information to
• 44:24
  Speaker 5: the Department of Justice that we've collected throughout our investigation. So,
• 44:28
  Speaker 5: you know, we're already going to pass it all along
• 44:31
  Speaker 5: in addition to what you're seeing through the hearings.
• 44:35
  Speaker 2: Chairman Thompson said today that he thought that based on
• 44:37
  Speaker 2: a report last night from the New York Times that
• 44:40
  Speaker 2: Eastman had reportedly claimed to have some knowledge about debates
• 44:43
  Speaker 2: inside the Supreme Court. that he wanted the committee to
• 44:48
  Speaker 2: talk to Ginny Thomas, the wife of Justice Clarence. Do
• 44:50
  Speaker 2: you have anything you can tell us about when that
• 44:52
  Speaker 2: might happen and what the process would be to get
• 44:54
  Speaker 2: that to happen?
• 44:57
  Speaker 5: So it's really the policy of the committee to not
• 44:59
  Speaker 5: talk about people that we might ask to testify or approach,
• 45:02
  Speaker 5: but this has become sort of very public in the
• 45:04
  Speaker 5: last day or so. And it's my understanding that during
• 45:07
  Speaker 5: the hearing, and I have to go back and check this,
• 45:09
  Speaker 5: but that Ginny Thomas put out a statement saying she's
• 45:11
  Speaker 5: happy to come talk to the committee.
• 45:13
  Speaker 7: So that really kind of simplifies this if that's really true.
• 45:17
  Speaker 5: And, you know, it is a case where we're still
• 45:18
  Speaker 5: continuing to collect information for our investigation, even as we're
• 45:22
  Speaker 5: presenting the information we've already gathered. So, you know, there
• 45:26
  Speaker 5: is information from the recent Eastman tranche of emails that
• 45:30
  Speaker 5: we received that lead us to believe that, you know,
• 45:33
  Speaker 5: it's probably someone we need to hear from.
• 45:36
  Speaker 2: The committee has been focused on and telling, I think,
• 45:39
  Speaker 2: of this very powerful story about this plot to overturn
• 45:43
  Speaker 2: the 2020 election, right? That includes, but goes beyond the
• 45:47
  Speaker 2: violence at the Capitol on January 6th. This is happening
• 45:50
  Speaker 2: in the context of a similarly ongoing plot all across
• 45:56
  Speaker 2: the country to possibly do the.
• 45:58
  Speaker 6: Same thing in the 2024 election.
• 46:01
  Speaker 2: I was struck by turning Chairman Thompson, turning it back
• 46:05
  Speaker 2: over to Judge Ludick to talk about this at the
• 46:06
  Speaker 2: end of the hearing. How are you thinking about what
• 46:08
  Speaker 2: role the committee plays, not just in telling the story
• 46:11
  Speaker 2: of what happened in 2020, but the ongoing threat to
• 46:14
  Speaker 2: democracy and the integrity and legitimacy of our elections?
• 46:17
  Speaker 5: Well, I think that's a really important point about the
• 46:20
  Speaker 5: committee and some critics of us might say, well, like,
• 46:22
  Speaker 5: why are you just looking at the past? And I'm like,
• 46:24
  Speaker 5: this is not about the past. I mean, we're evaluating
• 46:26
  Speaker 5: things to have lessons learned from the past, but this
• 46:29
  Speaker 5: is an ongoing threat today. It's an ongoing threat for
• 46:31
  Speaker 5: the future. And that really pivots back to the core
• 46:34
  Speaker 5: reason for the committee. We're a legislative committee, so we
• 46:37
  Speaker 5: provide oversight and legislative recommendations to prevent something like this
• 46:40
  Speaker 5: from happening in the future. So one of the things,
• 46:42
  Speaker 5: for example, that was talked about in today's hearing a
• 46:44
  Speaker 5: few times was the mention of the Electoral Count Act.
• 46:47
  Speaker 5: So this was a piece of legislation that's been on
• 46:49
  Speaker 5: the books since 1887. And it was actually something they
• 46:52
  Speaker 5: tried to weaponize and turn around and reinterpret.
• 46:56
  Speaker 7: And so is it sufficient?
• 46:59
  Speaker 5: Are there things that we could do to make that
• 47:01
  Speaker 5: particular legislation stronger?
• 47:02
  Speaker 7: And there's other things as well.
• 47:04
  Speaker 5: If we're looking at security of the Capitol, the response
• 47:07
  Speaker 5: to these types of incidents within the Capitol region, the
• 47:09
  Speaker 5: National Guard, things like online disinformation and how that is monitored,
• 47:14
  Speaker 5: domestic terrorism, we've come to see not only in this case,
• 47:18
  Speaker 5: but for example, the recent tragic shooting in Buffalo that
• 47:20
  Speaker 5: you know, our domestic terrorism statutes, really, we need to
• 47:24
  Speaker 5: look at them. So there's just, you know, these are
• 47:26
  Speaker 5: examples of things that we're talking about through the committee.
• 47:29
  Speaker 5: And in our final report, you know, that's really one
• 47:31
  Speaker 5: of the key elements of this is providing those recommendations.
• 47:35
  Speaker 2: Congressman Lurie, thank you so much for taking time out
• 47:37
  Speaker 2: of what I mentioned. It's a very, very busy day
• 47:38
  Speaker 2: to join us here on Positive American to update us
• 47:40
  Speaker 2: about these hearings. Thank you so much.
• 47:42
  Speaker 5: Yeah, thank you for having me.
• 47:54
  Speaker 1: All right. After a busy news week, it's time once
• 47:56
  Speaker 1: again for another round of Take Appreciators with our Chief
• 47:58
  Speaker 1: Take Officer, Elijah Cohn. Elijah, take it away.
• 48:01
  Speaker 8: Hey, guys. We're back to the past now. We just
• 48:04
  Speaker 8: jumped forward in time for the listeners and we're back.
• 48:07
  Speaker 8: Back to the morning before the hearings happened.
• 48:09
  Speaker 1: It's confusing. It's confusing.
• 48:11
  Speaker 8: All right. So I'm going to explain the rules again.
• 48:13
  Speaker 8: Welcome back to the Take Appreciators. I'm going to share
• 48:15
  Speaker 8: some takes with you all. The producers have seen these takes.
• 48:18
  Speaker 8: John and Dan have not. They will react and rate
• 48:20
  Speaker 8: them on a scale of one to four politicos. with
• 48:23
  Speaker 8: Ford being the worst. John and Dan, are you ready?
• 48:26
  Speaker 1: Born ready. Ready as ever.
• 48:27
  Speaker 2: Just glad to be here with the Jeffrey Clark of
• 48:29
  Speaker 2: Crooked Media. Thank you, Elijah.
• 48:31
  Speaker 1: Wow.
• 48:33
  Speaker 6: Really flattering.
• 48:34
  Speaker 1: I guess too many compliments to the video team earlier
• 48:37
  Speaker 1: in the episode. No, it's the chutzpah.
• 48:40
  Speaker 2: He's like, I got a pitch. Take me out from
• 48:42
  Speaker 2: behind the camera.
• 48:44
  Speaker 6: I got to cut us back down.
• 48:47
  Speaker 1: That's so funny.
• 48:48
  Speaker 6: All right. Well, on that note, let's start with the
• 48:50
  Speaker 6: January 6th hearings.
• 48:52
  Speaker 8: We talked about this a bit in the A Block,
• 48:54
  Speaker 8: but this piece ran the morning before the hearings actually
• 48:58
  Speaker 8: started in the New York Times. This piece is titled,
• 49:01
  Speaker 8: The January 6th Committee Has Already Blown It.
• 49:06
  Speaker 6: Here's a quote.
• 49:07
  Speaker 1: Oh, I think I know this.
• 49:08
  Speaker 8: We don't need a committee to simply regurgitate what happened
• 49:11
  Speaker 8: on January 6th, 2021. We need a committee that will
• 49:14
  Speaker 8: preserve democracy on January 6 2025 and january 6 2029
• 49:18
  Speaker 8: we need a committee to locate the weaknesses in our
• 49:21
  Speaker 8: democratic system in society and find ways to address them guys.
• 49:26
  Speaker 1: Who wrote it um our our good friend and mentor
• 49:29
  Speaker 1: david brooks wrote it that.
• 49:31
  Speaker 8: Is correct it is david brooks and as i promised
• 49:34
  Speaker 8: i'm i'm writing dropping the quote in the slack so
• 49:36
  Speaker 8: you guys can see it if you want to take some.
• 49:39
  Speaker 1: More and I here's the thing. I think Dan and
• 49:42
  Speaker 1: I have pretty much given a version of this advice,
• 49:46
  Speaker 1: maybe not so trollishly written, but it is incredibly important
• 49:51
  Speaker 1: not just to focus on the past, but to focus
• 49:53
  Speaker 1: on how to fix democracy going forward because it is continued.
• 49:57
  Speaker 1: It is still under threat by the existence of mega Republicans. Now,
• 50:00
  Speaker 1: the idea that this Congress, which can't fucking get anything done,
• 50:04
  Speaker 1: is suddenly going to pass a bunch of reforms to
• 50:07
  Speaker 1: make sure this doesn't happen again. does seem a bit fanciful,
• 50:10
  Speaker 1: and also the fault of the Republicans in Congress who
• 50:12
  Speaker 1: won't go along with it, as well as two Democrats
• 50:15
  Speaker 1: who we will not name who have a fondness for
• 50:18
  Speaker 1: the filibuster. But other than that, I sort of agree
• 50:20
  Speaker 1: with it.
• 50:22
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I agree with the idea. What I don't agree
• 50:24
  Speaker 2: with is the lazy crutch of the false choice, right?
• 50:28
  Speaker 1: Yeah, and the headline is super New York Times trolly.
• 50:32
  Speaker 2: Yeah, and we can't truly blame David Brooks for the headline.
• 50:37
  Speaker 2: That is someone else's fault.
• 50:39
  Speaker 1: Which again, we'd love to name some names. We've been
• 50:41
  Speaker 1: attacking headline writers for years on this show.
• 50:45
  Speaker 2: That's a great hot take.
• 50:46
  Speaker 1: Show yourself. Reveal yourself.
• 50:50
  Speaker 2: Headlines need a byline is our take. I give this
• 50:57
  Speaker 2: one one and a half politicos.
• 51:01
  Speaker 1: Yeah, one and a half politicos for the take. Three
• 51:04
  Speaker 1: politicos for the headline writer.
• 51:06
  Speaker 8: I mean, do you guys think it's valid to say
• 51:08
  Speaker 8: that this is a key part of preserving democracy in
• 51:12
  Speaker 8: 2025 and 2029? This is a key part of what
• 51:15
  Speaker 8: he's looking for?
• 51:17
  Speaker 1: What is this? And what was this in that scenario? Like,
• 51:20
  Speaker 1: what was this referring to?
• 51:21
  Speaker 6: Oh, revisiting January. Yeah, revisiting January 6th.
• 51:25
  Speaker 1: I think it's part, look, I think to the extent
• 51:27
  Speaker 1: that January, these hearings have any influence over the elections whatsoever.
• 51:32
  Speaker 1: And by influence, I don't just mean a swing voter
• 51:35
  Speaker 1: changing their mind, but reminding Democrats and organizers and activists
• 51:39
  Speaker 1: what's at stake, I do think it's part of the puzzle.
• 51:42
  Speaker 1: It's part of what we need to do to preserve democracy,
• 51:46
  Speaker 1: which is, I think, why we're talking about it so much.
• 51:48
  Speaker 6: Well, we can go on to another one.
• 51:50
  Speaker 1: Sure.
• 51:50
  Speaker 8: Also January 6th. This one from The Atlantic. This piece
• 51:54
  Speaker 8: is titled, Mike Pence is an American hero.
• 51:57
  Speaker 1: Okay.
• 51:58
  Speaker 3: Okay.
• 51:59
  Speaker 1: Okay.
• 52:00
  Speaker 8: This piece suggests that Pence needs more praise for not
• 52:04
  Speaker 8: going along with Trump on January 6th. Specifically, it suggests
• 52:08
  Speaker 8: that Congress name a building after him or that Joe
• 52:11
  Speaker 8: Biden give him the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Then it
• 52:14
  Speaker 8: makes this argument, quote, about one in 20 Republican voters
• 52:19
  Speaker 8: prefer Pence to Trump for 2024. Democrats ought to be
• 52:23
  Speaker 8: trying to pry these voters away from the Republican Party
• 52:25
  Speaker 8: in the event that Trump runs again by making it
• 52:28
  Speaker 8: clear that the Democrat Party appreciates Mike Pence as a
• 52:31
  Speaker 8: hero of democracy, they might just persuade a small but
• 52:35
  Speaker 8: crucial percentage of these Pence Republicans to cross over in 2024.
• 52:38
  Speaker 6: Who wrote it? Is it Bill Kristol?
• 52:44
  Speaker 2: Is it Bill Kristol's other name, David Frum?
• 52:51
  Speaker 6: It's not.
• 52:52
  Speaker 1: Honestly, Bill Kristol and David Frum are too smart to
• 52:55
  Speaker 1: write something like that. I've heard this take go around.
• 52:59
  Speaker 2: Clip that and put that on the socials immediately.
• 53:04
  Speaker 1: It is funny, though, because I've heard this take go
• 53:06
  Speaker 1: around and I didn't bother to see who actually wrote
• 53:08
  Speaker 1: it because I was so like, come on.
• 53:10
  Speaker 2: I've never heard of this guy. Is it Jonathan Last?
• 53:13
  Speaker 6: It is Jonathan Lass.
• 53:15
  Speaker 1: There you go.
• 53:15
  Speaker 2: Jonathan Lass is a good writer. This is not a
• 53:18
  Speaker 2: good take, but it's a good writer.
• 53:21
  Speaker 1: There's a lot of these Republicans who are speaking out
• 53:24
  Speaker 1: about Trump and the insurrection and all that stuff for
• 53:26
  Speaker 1: doing the bare minimum. I would say that Liz Cheney
• 53:29
  Speaker 1: is doing above the bare minimum. Liz Cheney holds extremely
• 53:33
  Speaker 1: conservative views that I find abhorrent. But I think that
• 53:36
  Speaker 1: the courage she has shown on this issue is commendable.
• 53:40
  Speaker 1: Mike Pence... did the fucking bare minimum by not illegally
• 53:46
  Speaker 1: overturning an election. And then, you know, now he's like
• 53:49
  Speaker 1: sort of kind of speaking out and taking these like
• 53:52
  Speaker 1: oblique shots at Trump that aren't much. Fuck that. Come on. No,
• 53:55
  Speaker 1: I am.
• 53:56
  Speaker 5: I am.
• 53:56
  Speaker 1: Mike Pence does not get an award.
• 53:58
  Speaker 7: No.
• 54:00
  Speaker 2: I mean, this is, I guess, suggesting that Mike Pence
• 54:04
  Speaker 2: should get the Presidential Medal of Freedom for the simple
• 54:07
  Speaker 2: act of not committing a crime is like the ultimate
• 54:09
  Speaker 2: example of participation trophy culture from the Republicans.
• 54:12
  Speaker 1: He didn't stop a crime.
• 54:14
  Speaker 2: He didn't speak out about a crime. He just quietly
• 54:17
  Speaker 2: did not commit the crime. So that's point one. Point
• 54:21
  Speaker 2: two is one thing that's never been said about Mike
• 54:24
  Speaker 2: Pence before is that he has a small but enthusiastic base.
• 54:28
  Speaker 2: There's no such thing as a Pence Republican.
• 54:29
  Speaker 5: No.
• 54:32
  Speaker 2: Mike, no one cares about Mike Pence. He's the plain
• 54:35
  Speaker 2: yogurt of politicians. The idea if we could, if we
• 54:37
  Speaker 2: were just nice enough to Mike Pence, we could get
• 54:38
  Speaker 2: these Pence folks to cross over. They do not care.
• 54:41
  Speaker 2: The Pence Republican is a placeholder for mildly non-insurrectionist Republican voters.
• 54:48
  Speaker 2: And those are available to Democrats potentially in 2025, but
• 54:51
  Speaker 2: it's not, it doesn't require giving Mike Pence an award.
• 54:56
  Speaker 1: And by the way, again, Mike Pence never been a fan.
• 55:01
  Speaker 1: But if he had like delivered a speech the day
• 55:04
  Speaker 1: after the insurrection or the week after or the month
• 55:07
  Speaker 1: after where he sort of just tore into Donald Trump
• 55:10
  Speaker 1: and everything that happened, I would have a different view
• 55:12
  Speaker 1: of this. But he did not do that. He just
• 55:15
  Speaker 1: decided to slink away because he somehow thinks he's going
• 55:18
  Speaker 1: to run for president again and there's going to be
• 55:20
  Speaker 1: people who support him in any significant majority. Yeah, it's crazy.
• 55:25
  Speaker 2: Can you be president of the Bulwark? Is that a job?
• 55:27
  Speaker 1: And I don't even want to make fun of the
• 55:29
  Speaker 1: Bulwark because the Bulwark is full of really talented, smart
• 55:32
  Speaker 1: writers too. Um, you know what? This gets three and
• 55:36
  Speaker 1: a half. I'm not going to give it a full playbook,
• 55:37
  Speaker 1: but it gets three and a half.
• 55:40
  Speaker 2: I'm going to go with three just to be slightly different. Okay.
• 55:43
  Speaker 5: Okay. All right.
• 55:46
  Speaker 8: Well, we're going to move away from January 6th for
• 55:48
  Speaker 8: our last, uh, take here and hopefully this will get
• 55:53
  Speaker 8: you guys to a full playbook.
• 55:56
  Speaker 1: Which is what which is your goal.
• 55:58
  Speaker 2: Now you're definitely not getting one that is guaranteed.
• 56:03
  Speaker 6: Oh just wait and see.
• 56:07
  Speaker 8: This one is from the wall street journal and it's
• 56:10
  Speaker 8: titled cannabis and the violent crime search.
• 56:14
  Speaker 1: Oh no oh god yeah i know.
• 56:17
  Speaker 8: This piece makes the argument that weed is more potent
• 56:21
  Speaker 8: and is linked to psychosis and violent behavior. And then
• 56:24
  Speaker 8: it makes this insane point. Here is an abridged quote.
• 56:29
  Speaker 8: The Uvalde shooter fits a pattern. Mass shooters at Gabby
• 56:32
  Speaker 8: Gifford's meeting, Aurora, Colorado, Pulse nightclub, Sunderland Springs, and Marjory
• 56:37
  Speaker 8: Stoneman Douglas high school were all reported to be marijuana users.
• 56:41
  Speaker 8: It could be a coincidence, but increasing evidence suggests a connection.
• 56:47
  Speaker 6: Ooh, guys. Who wrote it?
• 56:50
  Speaker 1: I don't know who wrote it. It wasn't the editorial board,
• 56:52
  Speaker 1: was it?
• 56:52
  Speaker 6: It was not. It was a member of the editorial board.
• 56:56
  Speaker 2: I mean, is it Kim Strassel?
• 56:59
  Speaker 6: It is not.
• 57:00
  Speaker 2: I mean, it's the only member of the editorial board
• 57:01
  Speaker 2: whose name I've ever heard.
• 57:03
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I don't know the rest, so you're just going
• 57:04
  Speaker 1: to have.
• 57:05
  Speaker 6: To tell us. It's Alicia Finley.
• 57:07
  Speaker 1: Never heard of her.
• 57:09
  Speaker 2: Yeah, never heard of her either. Is that an alias,
• 57:11
  Speaker 2: like Barry Loudermilk?
• 57:13
  Speaker 5: No.
• 57:15
  Speaker 6: Maybe. I mean, I'd want to hide my real name
• 57:18
  Speaker 6: after this take.
• 57:19
  Speaker 1: Look, without saying anything else, I will just note that personally,
• 57:23
  Speaker 1: I am one of the most non-confrontational people you'll ever
• 57:25
  Speaker 1: meet to the point of it being a fault.
• 57:31
  Speaker 2: I do appreciate this person leaning into the causation correlation
• 57:37
  Speaker 2: debate by saying, could be a coincidence.
• 57:43
  Speaker 1: I mean, it's just, that is one of the stupidest
• 57:45
  Speaker 1: fucking things I've literally ever heard. Yeah, full playbook. You win, Elijah.
• 57:49
  Speaker 1: You got it.
• 57:50
  Speaker 2: Okay, but here's where I think this take really lends
• 57:54
  Speaker 2: itself in, where it says, many violent people have used marijuana. Therefore,
• 58:00
  Speaker 2: there's a chance marijuana contributes to violence. But do you
• 58:04
  Speaker 2: know what 100% of violent people use?
• 58:07
  Speaker 6: Oxygen.
• 58:09
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I would look into oxygen. I would look into it.
• 58:12
  Speaker 1: It's just not a coincidence, is it? There are no conspiracies,
• 58:16
  Speaker 1: but there are no coincidences, as Steve Bannon always says.
• 58:20
  Speaker 2: I wanted to deny you, Elijah, the full playbook because
• 58:23
  Speaker 2: you wanted it so bad, but the power of the
• 58:24
  Speaker 2: take compels me to give this one a full playbook.
• 58:29
  Speaker 6: Wow, I did it.
• 58:30
  Speaker 1: You did it, Elijah.
• 58:31
  Speaker 8: And just in case it didn't go without saying, you
• 58:33
  Speaker 8: know what else all those shooters had in common?
• 58:36
  Speaker 6: They had access to guns, obviously.
• 58:38
  Speaker 2: Come on!
• 58:40
  Speaker 1: I mean, I felt like that was the obvious one,
• 58:42
  Speaker 1: but yeah, but apparently not obvious to the Wall Street
• 58:45
  Speaker 1: Journal editorial board member whose name I have already forgotten.
• 58:48
  Speaker 1: Elijah Cohn, chief take officer. Thank you, as always. Thanks
• 58:51
  Speaker 1: to Representative Elaine Luria for joining us on a busy day.
• 58:55
  Speaker 1: We will see you. We have a live show in
• 58:57
  Speaker 1: Oakland Sunday night, and that pod will be released on Monday.
• 59:02
  Speaker 1: So check it out. We'll talk to you later.
• 59:04
  Speaker 2: Bye, everyone.