Latest / Pod Save America / “PizzaGaetz.”

Transcript

“PizzaGaetz.” · Pod Save America

• 0:20
  Speaker 1: Welcome to Pod Save America. I'm Jon Favreau.
• 0:22
  Speaker 2: I'm Dan Piper.
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: We have lots to talk about today, from Bill Taylor's
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: testimony to the brave Republican freedom fighters who tried to
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: disrupt the impeachment inquiry... We're also going to talk about
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: why Democrats who like talking to reporters are freaking out
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: about our candidates and all the latest 2020 news. We
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: apologize today for the delayed pod and the sound on
• 0:41
  Speaker 1: Dan's side, but we've had quite a day trying to
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: get this to work because Dan's on vacation and I'm
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: traveling as well.
• 0:49
  Speaker 3: Yeah, we have been to two studios. We've tried several
• 0:52
  Speaker 3: phone lines and here we are.
• 0:54
  Speaker 1: But, you know, this is not a long-term problem. It's
• 0:56
  Speaker 1: just today. So you all know when you all tweeted
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: us about it. All right. A few housekeeping notes before
• 1:00
  Speaker 1: we start. On this week's Pod Save the World, Tommy
• 1:03
  Speaker 1: and Ben cover the latest with Syria, Brexit, and explain
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: how Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau pulled out a narrow
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: victory up in Canada. And you can watch the rest
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: of their interview with former National Security Advisor Susan Rice,
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: which was featured last night on Sean Hannity's show. Like
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: all of the other content we produce here at Crooked Media. Finally,
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: Crooked Media is starting a brand new daily podcast, Whataday.
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: It's a daily news podcast starting on Monday, October 28th.
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: You'll be able to hear What A Day every morning,
• 1:33
  Speaker 1: Monday through Friday, with new episodes available at 5 a.m. Eastern.
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: Our new hosts, Akilah Hughes and Gideon Resnick, will cut
• 1:40
  Speaker 1: through the chaos and crimes to break down the biggest
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: news of the day, help you understand what matters and
• 1:45
  Speaker 1: how you can fix it, all in 15 minutes or less.
• 1:48
  Speaker 1: The trailer is live now. So do us a favor,
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: as you're listening to this pod, or right after, Go
• 1:55
  Speaker 1: to crooked.com slash whataday and subscribe to Whataday on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher,
• 2:01
  Speaker 1: wherever you listen to your podcasts. We need everyone subscribing
• 2:05
  Speaker 1: because we want this thing to hit number one when
• 2:08
  Speaker 1: it launches on Monday. So do us a favor. Help
• 2:11
  Speaker 1: us out. Go subscribe. It's going to be great. It's
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: going to be great.
• 2:14
  Speaker 3: Subscribe to Whataday and unsubscribe from The Daily.
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: Dan!
• 2:18
  Speaker 3: I'm kidding. The Daily is great.
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: Such a love it thing to say.
• 2:25
  Speaker 2: All right.
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: All right, let's get to the news. On Tuesday, we
• 2:29
  Speaker 1: learned about testimony that I think almost guarantees that Donald
• 2:33
  Speaker 1: Trump will be impeached by the House of Representatives. The
• 2:36
  Speaker 1: testimony came from Bill Taylor, an Army veteran and career
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: diplomat who's been appointed to serve in every administration since Reagan's,
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: including this one, where he is currently Trump's top diplomat
• 2:47
  Speaker 1: in Ukraine. For those of you who don't remember, Bill
• 2:50
  Speaker 1: Taylor is the guy who texted European Union Ambassador Gordon Sondland, quote,
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: I think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help
• 2:58
  Speaker 1: with a political campaign, end quote. Well, in a 15-page
• 3:02
  Speaker 1: opening statement that leaked to the press, Taylor testified that
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: the president himself was in fact withholding taxpayer-funded assistance from
• 3:10
  Speaker 1: a U.S. ally in exchange for help with his re-election campaign.
• 3:13
  Speaker 1: Here's the money quote from the testimony. Quote, Ambassador Sondland
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: tried to explain to me that President Trump is a businessman.
• 3:20
  Speaker 1: And when a businessman is about to sign a check
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: to someone who owes him something, he said, the businessman
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: asks that person to pay up before signing the check. Dan,
• 3:30
  Speaker 1: two questions for you. One, is that how business works?
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: And two, why are Democrats saying that Bill Taylor's testimony
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: is the most significant they've heard in the entire impeachment inquiry?
• 3:42
  Speaker 3: Well, it is how business works unless you're Donald Trump,
• 3:45
  Speaker 3: who is famous, of course, for not paying people for
• 3:47
  Speaker 3: goods received and services provided. Right. But I guess in
• 3:51
  Speaker 3: the case of foreign policy blackmail, that's when he really
• 3:54
  Speaker 3: adheres to the common rules of business. Look, this testimony
• 3:58
  Speaker 3: is incredibly significant. In a normal world, Taylor is an
• 4:03
  Speaker 3: unimpeachable source. He lays out in great detail that there
• 4:07
  Speaker 3: is a quid pro quo. Even some of the other
• 4:10
  Speaker 3: people we've heard from have had also very damning things
• 4:13
  Speaker 3: to say about how Trump and his minions inside and
• 4:16
  Speaker 3: outside the government-conducted business left open some vagueness around the
• 4:22
  Speaker 3: specificity of a quid pro quo, that it was just
• 4:24
  Speaker 3: pressure or there was a disconnect between those two things.
• 4:27
  Speaker 3: There was just a coincidence that Trump was demanding something
• 4:30
  Speaker 3: absurd from a foreign country. At the same time, he
• 4:33
  Speaker 3: was resisting Congress's legal will for said money to be provided.
• 4:38
  Speaker 3: But here you have the full criminal conspiracy laid out
• 4:42
  Speaker 3: by a career diplomat who was a firsthand witness to
• 4:45
  Speaker 3: all of this and spoke to all of the parties.
• 4:47
  Speaker 3: And so In a world of smoking guns, this is
• 4:49
  Speaker 3: the smokiest.
• 4:50
  Speaker 1: The smokiest gun. So, look, I think it's also, you know,
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: he hears this, you know, Taylor's testimony is based on
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: what he hears directly from Gordon Sondland, who had been
• 5:04
  Speaker 1: a little squishy during his testimony. There was a lot
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: of I do not recalls. We now have reports in
• 5:09
  Speaker 1: the days after Bill Taylor's testimony that Gordon Sondland is
• 5:13
  Speaker 1: thinking about coming back to revise his testimony. Yeah. But
• 5:18
  Speaker 1: so and so, you know, this is Gordon Sondland telling
• 5:21
  Speaker 1: Bill Taylor, this is what President Trump has told me.
• 5:25
  Speaker 1: We also found out that, you know, Bill Taylor said
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: that the Ukrainians eventually in early September knew that the
• 5:34
  Speaker 1: aid was withheld as well. The other thing that I
• 5:37
  Speaker 1: thought was interesting, too, is what Trump and Giuliani and
• 5:42
  Speaker 1: Sondland and all these goobers, what they wanted Zelensky to do,
• 5:46
  Speaker 1: the president of Ukraine. It's not like, you know, these
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: folks really cared about corruptions and wanted some investigations into corruption. And,
• 5:53
  Speaker 1: you know, Burisma just happened to be one of the
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: companies that they picked. They wanted President Zelensky to go
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: on CNN and announce on CNN the Ukrainian government would
• 6:04
  Speaker 1: be investigating Burisma, the firm that Joe Biden's son was on.
• 6:09
  Speaker 1: So it just goes to show you that it's like
• 6:10
  Speaker 1: it doesn't have anything to do with an investigation. It
• 6:13
  Speaker 1: was just wanting a foreign government to smear a potential
• 6:17
  Speaker 1: political opponent. That's what he wanted.
• 6:19
  Speaker 3: I rarely use the term savvy and Trump in the
• 6:22
  Speaker 3: same sentence, but this is a very savvy understanding of
• 6:25
  Speaker 3: how the modern political media works.
• 6:27
  Speaker 1: Yep.
• 6:28
  Speaker 3: Trump knows from 2016 that all he has to do
• 6:32
  Speaker 3: is get someone to say that Biden is Hunter Biden,
• 6:35
  Speaker 3: the Biden family is under investigation. And that will be
• 6:38
  Speaker 3: in every story written about Joe Biden for the rest
• 6:40
  Speaker 3: of time. It is what was so devastating to Hillary Clinton.
• 6:43
  Speaker 3: And so he doesn't want an actual investigation. He just
• 6:45
  Speaker 3: wants some finery to hang the accusations of corruption on.
• 6:51
  Speaker 3: And he knows the press will run with it. And
• 6:53
  Speaker 3: I mean, this is Trump. This is Giuliani. They know
• 6:56
  Speaker 3: what they're doing here. It is very specific. And that's
• 6:57
  Speaker 3: why they don't want that. They wanted him to say
• 6:59
  Speaker 3: it on CNN. And I think in part because they
• 7:02
  Speaker 3: think that that is influential in the Democratic primary, which
• 7:05
  Speaker 3: I don't know if it's savvy or not, but it's
• 7:06
  Speaker 3: very clear what Trump was trying to do here. And
• 7:08
  Speaker 3: it was get Ukraine to be involved in the American election.
• 7:12
  Speaker 2: Full stop.
• 7:13
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I think the other thing worth pointing out is
• 7:17
  Speaker 1: part of the one other reason this was, you know,
• 7:19
  Speaker 1: fairly compelling testimony is Taylor, who is this career diplomat,
• 7:24
  Speaker 1: been a diplomat his whole life, talks about going to
• 7:27
  Speaker 1: Ukraine and, you know, visiting with some of the people
• 7:31
  Speaker 1: in Ukraine fighting Russian aggression who are on the front
• 7:33
  Speaker 1: lines and And was talking about how, you know, people
• 7:38
  Speaker 1: in Ukraine are going to die because they didn't get
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: this assistance, this military assistance. And it was all held
• 7:44
  Speaker 1: up because of Donald Trump and for political reasons. And
• 7:48
  Speaker 1: it's like there's, you know, real world consequences to withholding
• 7:52
  Speaker 1: congressionally appropriated aid like that.
• 7:54
  Speaker 3: Yeah, it's illegal and immoral.
• 7:56
  Speaker 1: Dan, let's talk about the various responses to Taylor's incriminating
• 7:59
  Speaker 1: testimony from the president and Republicans in Congress. So Trump's
• 8:03
  Speaker 1: first reaction was to tweet a quote from some idiot
• 8:06
  Speaker 1: Republican congressman who was on Fox that said, quote, neither
• 8:10
  Speaker 1: Taylor or any other witness has provided testimony that the
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: Ukrainians were aware that military aid was being withheld. Dan,
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: what's wrong with that defense?
• 8:19
  Speaker 2: It's wrong.
• 8:21
  Speaker 3: Journalistic hero Ken Vogel published a story in The New
• 8:25
  Speaker 3: York Times which said they, of course, were aware of it.
• 8:28
  Speaker 3: How could they not possibly aware of it? And there
• 8:30
  Speaker 3: is documents that prove that They knew about it. So
• 8:34
  Speaker 3: this is part of the risks, I would say, of
• 8:40
  Speaker 3: forming your anti-impeachment messaging strategy around things random people say
• 8:45
  Speaker 3: on Fox News.
• 8:47
  Speaker 1: Well, I will say before the Vogel story was even published,
• 8:52
  Speaker 1: Bill Taylor himself testified that the Ukrainians knew. He said
• 8:56
  Speaker 1: President Trump did insist that President Zelensky go to a
• 8:59
  Speaker 1: microphone and say he's opening investigations of Biden. that President
• 9:02
  Speaker 1: Zelensky himself had to, quote, clear things up and do
• 9:04
  Speaker 1: it in public. President Trump said it was not a
• 9:07
  Speaker 1: quid pro quo. Ambassador Sondland said that he had talked
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: to President Zelensky and his aide, Mr. Yermak, and told
• 9:12
  Speaker 1: him that, although this was not a quid pro quo,
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: if President Zelensky did not clear things up in public,
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: we would be at a stalemate.
• 9:21
  Speaker 3: Look, it's not a quid pro quo, but if you
• 9:24
  Speaker 3: don't provide the quo, we're not providing the quid, just
• 9:27
  Speaker 3: as an FYI.
• 9:28
  Speaker 1: So Taylor testifies that Sondland told him, They did know
• 9:31
  Speaker 1: that the aid was being withheld for political purposes on
• 9:35
  Speaker 1: September 1st. And then Vogel has a story that runs
• 9:40
  Speaker 1: in The New York Times that says it was actually
• 9:41
  Speaker 1: much earlier this summer that the Ukrainians knew. And The
• 9:44
  Speaker 1: New York Times has documents to prove that. And then
• 9:47
  Speaker 1: the AP reports a couple hours after that yesterday that
• 9:52
  Speaker 1: Zelensky had been worried since before he took office as
• 9:55
  Speaker 1: president that he would be asked by Trump to investigate
• 9:59
  Speaker 1: the Bidens. And he was already worried that he would
• 10:01
  Speaker 1: get drawn into U.S. domestic politics and be pressured to
• 10:05
  Speaker 1: investigate the Bidens. And that if he didn't do that,
• 10:08
  Speaker 1: his very fragile relationship with his most important ally, the
• 10:12
  Speaker 1: United States, as he's facing aggression from Russia, would be
• 10:15
  Speaker 1: in jeopardy. So it was all right there. It was
• 10:19
  Speaker 1: all right there. So the next Trump excuse is that
• 10:23
  Speaker 1: Bill Taylor is a deep state never-Trumper. The White House
• 10:26
  Speaker 1: released a statement the night of Taylor's testimony calling him a, quote,
• 10:30
  Speaker 1: radical unelected bureaucrat who was part of a, quote, coordinated
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: smear campaign. And then Trump himself tweeted the next day,
• 10:37
  Speaker 1: never-Trumper Republican John Bellinger represents never-Trumper diplomat Bill Taylor, in parentheses,
• 10:43
  Speaker 1: who I don't know, in testimony before Congress, exclamation point.
• 10:48
  Speaker 1: So what's the problem with this defense?
• 10:50
  Speaker 2: Well, it's obviously not true.
• 10:51
  Speaker 3: You went through at the beginning of this podcast, which, frankly,
• 10:54
  Speaker 3: for us who've been dealing with this feels like 10
• 10:56
  Speaker 3: years ago, but went through Taylor's very long resume. He
• 11:01
  Speaker 3: is someone who has worked for Republicans and Democrats. He
• 11:03
  Speaker 3: is a public servant through and through. There is nothing
• 11:07
  Speaker 3: to suggest that he is a partisan hack, a member
• 11:09
  Speaker 3: of the deep state or anything like that. I will
• 11:12
  Speaker 3: say there is a factual problem with this for sure.
• 11:17
  Speaker 3: But I think as Democrats and people who care about
• 11:21
  Speaker 3: the rule of law and facts and things like that,
• 11:24
  Speaker 3: we should be– at least we should recognize that Trump
• 11:28
  Speaker 3: had some measure of success taking Bob Mueller, who was
• 11:31
  Speaker 3: someone who had unimpeachable bipartisan– public servant credentials as well
• 11:38
  Speaker 3: and turned him into a bogeyman for just enough Republicans
• 11:42
  Speaker 3: to ensure that the report was not taken seriously by
• 11:46
  Speaker 3: his base or by any of the members, Republican members
• 11:48
  Speaker 3: of Congress. And so this is an absurd strategy on
• 11:51
  Speaker 3: its face, but absurdity has some success when amplified by
• 11:55
  Speaker 3: a right-wing propaganda network.
• 11:57
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I do think it will be harder this time,
• 12:00
  Speaker 1: and it will be harder because Bill Taylor does not
• 12:03
  Speaker 1: stand alone here. you know, Fiona Hill, who was on
• 12:08
  Speaker 1: Trump's National Security Council, you know, and she was a
• 12:11
  Speaker 1: Russia specialist. She testified. Gordon Sondland testified. And even though
• 12:15
  Speaker 1: he's a Trump loyalist, seems to be maybe changing his
• 12:18
  Speaker 1: story and revising his testimony. You know, the ambassador to Ukraine,
• 12:23
  Speaker 1: Marie Yovanovitch, testified. So there's a number of, you know,
• 12:28
  Speaker 1: a Defense Department official. There's a number of Trump-appointed officials.
• 12:32
  Speaker 1: I mean, Bill Taylor was appointed by fucking Mike Pompeo.
• 12:37
  Speaker 1: No one is.
• 12:38
  Speaker 2: Like three weeks ago.
• 12:39
  Speaker 1: Three weeks ago. No one is a bigger Trump kiss-ass
• 12:42
  Speaker 1: in the entire federal government than Mike Pompeo. Or at
• 12:44
  Speaker 1: least he's like top three or four, at least. We
• 12:47
  Speaker 1: don't want to give him the award yet.
• 12:48
  Speaker 2: Stephen Miller has some things to say.
• 12:49
  Speaker 1: Stephen Miller's up there. Bill Barr's up there. But they're all...
• 12:51
  Speaker 1: He's close. So Mike Pompeo thought that they should give
• 12:55
  Speaker 1: this guy this never-Trump Never Trump or unelected bureaucrat a
• 12:59
  Speaker 1: job in the administration. So I do think you're right.
• 13:02
  Speaker 1: Like Trump and Fox and everyone else will be trying
• 13:05
  Speaker 1: their hardest to show that Bill Taylor is biased, that
• 13:08
  Speaker 1: every single person who testified against Trump is biased. That's
• 13:12
  Speaker 1: their strategy. If you testify, whatever you say, whether it's
• 13:16
  Speaker 1: the truth or not the truth, if you testify and
• 13:18
  Speaker 1: it hurts Donald Trump, you are a deep state elected
• 13:20
  Speaker 1: bureaucrat or you're working with the Democrats. That's it. That's
• 13:25
  Speaker 1: what they got. So a number of Republicans have already
• 13:30
  Speaker 1: made the transition from embarrassing excuses to deeply embarrassing stunts.
• 13:37
  Speaker 1: The day after Bill Taylor testified, Trump reportedly encouraged a
• 13:41
  Speaker 1: group of House Republicans to obstruct the impeachment inquiry by
• 13:46
  Speaker 1: physically storming the secure office where a Defense Department official
• 13:50
  Speaker 1: was testifying. These Republican freedom fighters were led by human
• 13:54
  Speaker 1: frat paddle Matt Gaetz. who chanted, let us in, let
• 13:58
  Speaker 1: us in, before quietly sitting at a conference table to
• 14:01
  Speaker 1: eat the pizza that they ordered. Dan, what prompted this
• 14:05
  Speaker 1: brave protest? Any problems you see with the basic logic
• 14:09
  Speaker 1: behind it?
• 14:11
  Speaker 3: I would say, just Adam Schiff, if you're listening, that
• 14:14
  Speaker 3: I think there may be a flaw in your strategy
• 14:19
  Speaker 3: to run these secret partisan hearings to keep Republicans in
• 14:22
  Speaker 3: the dark. So the advice I give you is maybe
• 14:25
  Speaker 3: stop inviting all the Republican members of the committee to
• 14:27
  Speaker 3: all the depositions.
• 14:28
  Speaker 2: It's like, what are we doing?
• 14:30
  Speaker 3: It's just so, it's like, it's not a secret process.
• 14:34
  Speaker 3: There are Republicans in the room. There are people, the
• 14:37
  Speaker 3: Republican leadership decided not to put on the committees that
• 14:39
  Speaker 3: are holding the hearings. And it, it is, it is,
• 14:45
  Speaker 3: it really like human frat paddle.
• 14:47
  Speaker 2: Is these brilliant way. And I don't know, was that
• 14:49
  Speaker 2: Tommy or love it?
• 14:50
  Speaker 1: I can't remember which one of them did.
• 14:52
  Speaker 2: Um, Let's go with Tommy.
• 14:56
  Speaker 3: It's a perfect way to describe Matt Gaetz, obviously, because
• 15:00
  Speaker 3: he's just this absurd creature of the Trump era. But
• 15:03
  Speaker 3: there is this frat, like low-rent frat house atmosphere that
• 15:09
  Speaker 3: is the modern Republican Party, that the only response here
• 15:11
  Speaker 3: cannot be some sort of intellectual argument or a fact-based
• 15:15
  Speaker 3: response or looking at the law. It has to be
• 15:18
  Speaker 3: a stunt. It has to be an absurd stunt of
• 15:20
  Speaker 3: a bunch of grown men. I think there are almost
• 15:24
  Speaker 3: entirely men. And that's just based on the fact that
• 15:27
  Speaker 3: there are Republicans in the house, which is almost all
• 15:29
  Speaker 3: white men and who went stormed a room and ordered
• 15:33
  Speaker 3: pizza and begged to be arrested.
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 15:36
  Speaker 2: They can be heroes of what?
• 15:38
  Speaker 3: I don't know.
• 15:39
  Speaker 2: It's so stupid.
• 15:40
  Speaker 3: It's just so dumb.
• 15:41
  Speaker 1: There's so many problems with their argument here. It's, it's
• 15:43
  Speaker 1: hard to know where to begin, but I think we
• 15:46
  Speaker 1: should with, um, the fact that, you know, yes, these
• 15:49
  Speaker 1: are these hearings that are being conducted right now, And
• 15:52
  Speaker 1: they're more interviews than they are like full blown hearings.
• 15:55
  Speaker 1: They are being conducted behind closed doors. But what you
• 16:00
  Speaker 1: wouldn't know from listening to Trump or the Republicans or
• 16:03
  Speaker 1: any fucking person on Fox is that they're being conducted
• 16:08
  Speaker 1: by Democrats and Republicans. Like you said, Republicans who are
• 16:12
  Speaker 1: on the Intelligence Committee, who are on the Oversight Committee
• 16:15
  Speaker 1: and who are on the Judiciary Committee are all in
• 16:17
  Speaker 1: the room. And Democrats who are on those three committees
• 16:21
  Speaker 1: are all in the room. Democrats who are not on
• 16:24
  Speaker 1: those committees aren't allowed in, just like Republicans who aren't
• 16:28
  Speaker 1: on those committees aren't allowed in. It's that fucking simple.
• 16:32
  Speaker 1: In fact, a quarter of the Republicans who were part
• 16:35
  Speaker 1: of the protest, who stormed the meeting, were already allowed in.
• 16:43
  Speaker 1: They were already allowed into the meeting if they just
• 16:46
  Speaker 1: wanted to. They did it as a stunt to get
• 16:49
  Speaker 1: press attention. It was on fucking believable.
• 16:54
  Speaker 2: Do you think it was smart or stupid?
• 16:57
  Speaker 1: Uh, I think it was as a stunt. I think
• 16:59
  Speaker 1: it's stunts go. I mean, I don't know. I think
• 17:02
  Speaker 1: it's pretty fucking stupid, but like, did they get a
• 17:04
  Speaker 1: day's worth of headlines about how they stormed into a meeting?
• 17:08
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 17:09
  Speaker 1: Although I have to say, you know, we, we criticize
• 17:11
  Speaker 1: the media often, like every single nonpartisan reporter and outlet, um,
• 17:16
  Speaker 1: reported that it was a stunt, that it was ridiculous
• 17:19
  Speaker 1: and explained what was really true. Even on Fox, I saw,
• 17:22
  Speaker 1: you know, Andrew Napolitano, Judge Napolitano on Fox and Friends
• 17:25
  Speaker 1: this morning talking about how, like, this is what happens.
• 17:28
  Speaker 1: You don't want witnesses to coordinate testimony. So you do
• 17:31
  Speaker 1: these initial interviews in a closed session privately. And then
• 17:37
  Speaker 1: Adam Schiff has already said we're going to hold public hearings.
• 17:41
  Speaker 1: And we're going to make all of this testimony public.
• 17:44
  Speaker 1: He has already said that. So the crazy thing is
• 17:47
  Speaker 1: that all these Republicans and Trump are like the Democrats
• 17:49
  Speaker 1: and their socialist closed door Soviet style hearings. What are
• 17:53
  Speaker 1: they doing? Like as if we're afraid of public hearings.
• 17:57
  Speaker 1: I can't fucking wait for the public hearings. Like it
• 18:00
  Speaker 1: might be a short term tactic to get them through
• 18:03
  Speaker 1: right now to try to get a few good headlines.
• 18:06
  Speaker 1: But it's going to blow up in their face as
• 18:07
  Speaker 1: soon as there are public hearings.
• 18:08
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 18:10
  Speaker 3: The idea that they want this to happen in public
• 18:12
  Speaker 3: is insane. This has been the problem. This is why
• 18:17
  Speaker 3: this has been hard for Democrats. I understand the process
• 18:20
  Speaker 3: they're going through. It's the right process to come to
• 18:22
  Speaker 3: a measured, reasoned, fully investigated decision. But we live in
• 18:28
  Speaker 3: an online video world, and print stories are not going
• 18:32
  Speaker 3: to drive a conversation. So just a bunch of headlines
• 18:34
  Speaker 3: about what Bill Taylor said is not the same as
• 18:37
  Speaker 3: an event where Bill Taylor is delivering testimony. People are
• 18:40
  Speaker 3: tuning in on their television or watching the clips online.
• 18:43
  Speaker 3: That will be so much more powerful. When we were
• 18:49
  Speaker 3: in the White House and the Republicans would constantly do
• 18:51
  Speaker 3: stupid shit, I always used to try to explain to
• 18:53
  Speaker 3: people that the congressional Republican strategy is not... This is
• 18:57
  Speaker 3: not a chess checkers conversation because that's insulting to checkers.
• 19:01
  Speaker 3: It's basically they want to do whatever gets them through
• 19:03
  Speaker 3: the next caucus meeting.
• 19:04
  Speaker 2: It's like whatever.
• 19:06
  Speaker 3: just makes the next lunch they're going to have to
• 19:08
  Speaker 3: have with the crazies less uncomfortable. And now it's basically like,
• 19:11
  Speaker 3: how do you get to the next Trump tweet? What
• 19:14
  Speaker 3: are we going to do for the next five minutes
• 19:17
  Speaker 3: without any thought of what happens in minutes six through
• 19:20
  Speaker 3: one million?
• 19:21
  Speaker 2: And that's what that is.
• 19:22
  Speaker 3: Now, the way in which there is some logic to
• 19:24
  Speaker 3: this is, Republicans have understood since the beginning of Obama's
• 19:31
  Speaker 3: presidency that stunts like this work because what they do
• 19:34
  Speaker 3: is they surf the natural cynicism of the American public.
• 19:38
  Speaker 3: And so people don't have– most people who are not
• 19:41
  Speaker 3: news obsessive like us and many of the people listening,
• 19:43
  Speaker 3: they just are– they're just like looking at the headlines
• 19:46
  Speaker 3: either on the chyron about on the TV or as
• 19:48
  Speaker 3: they're scrolling through Facebook or whatever.
• 19:50
  Speaker 2: Social media they use.
• 19:51
  Speaker 3: And all you hear is a bunch of people yelling
• 19:53
  Speaker 3: at each other. And then they immediately default to both
• 19:57
  Speaker 3: sides are bad.
• 19:58
  Speaker 2: It's like, oh, there's a big mess here. It must
• 20:00
  Speaker 2: be something.
• 20:01
  Speaker 3: And so throwing a bunch of mud around can dirty
• 20:04
  Speaker 3: up the process for a lot of people who are
• 20:06
  Speaker 3: naturally cynical about politics. And these are the people that
• 20:09
  Speaker 3: we need to turn out, right? And so when you,
• 20:13
  Speaker 3: you know, same thing happened with healthcare. People, they didn't
• 20:15
  Speaker 3: pay attention to healthcare in 2010 when we were trying
• 20:18
  Speaker 3: to pass it into what the actual specifics of the
• 20:20
  Speaker 3: bill were. It was just a bunch of people yelling
• 20:22
  Speaker 3: at each other at town halls. And a bunch of
• 20:24
  Speaker 3: people were yelling at each other. It seems like it
• 20:25
  Speaker 3: might be problematic. And so I think that is the
• 20:27
  Speaker 3: underlying logic to the idiocy of yesterday is just make
• 20:31
  Speaker 3: the whole thing seem so messy that people will tune
• 20:33
  Speaker 3: out while ensuring that Trump's base turns out. That's sort of,
• 20:36
  Speaker 3: there's a political process here that I think is something
• 20:39
  Speaker 3: we should keep our eyes on.
• 20:40
  Speaker 1: Well, and I will say, even people who aren't cynical
• 20:43
  Speaker 1: about politics and who do pay attention to the news,
• 20:47
  Speaker 1: the logic here is to try to confuse them as
• 20:49
  Speaker 1: much as possible. I mean, my dad, who pays a
• 20:52
  Speaker 1: lot of attention to the news, I was talking to
• 20:55
  Speaker 1: him last night about this whole thing. And he's like,
• 20:57
  Speaker 1: I didn't know that Republicans were allowed in some of
• 21:00
  Speaker 1: these meetings. He's like, I thought that he's like, Schiff
• 21:03
  Speaker 1: should make that clear. I don't know. I've been paying
• 21:05
  Speaker 1: attention to the news all day. I didn't know they
• 21:06
  Speaker 1: were allowed in some of the hearings. Like, so there
• 21:08
  Speaker 1: is They are just trying to confuse people, even people
• 21:11
  Speaker 1: who pay a lot of attention to this stuff. And
• 21:13
  Speaker 1: it's easy. I mean, I don't think I knew until
• 21:15
  Speaker 1: two days ago, three days ago, that three committees worth
• 21:19
  Speaker 1: of Republicans were in the fucking room, you know? So,
• 21:23
  Speaker 1: you know, you can see why they're doing this. And
• 21:24
  Speaker 1: I will say also, when there are public hearings, I
• 21:27
  Speaker 1: think the public hearings will be very strong. I think
• 21:30
  Speaker 1: they'll be able to be choreographed at that point because
• 21:33
  Speaker 1: Schiff and Pelosi and all the Democrats will have all
• 21:35
  Speaker 1: the testimony they need and they'll be able to figure out, like,
• 21:37
  Speaker 1: Who should we hear from and what order to make
• 21:39
  Speaker 1: sure it's the most compelling story as possible? But Republicans
• 21:43
  Speaker 1: will try to make those hearings a fucking circus because
• 21:46
  Speaker 1: they're going to get time to speak and they're going
• 21:48
  Speaker 1: to say crazy shit and they're going to yell and
• 21:50
  Speaker 1: they're going to try to do what they did in
• 21:51
  Speaker 1: that Corey Lewandowski hearing and try to make it seem
• 21:55
  Speaker 1: like it's so much of a circus that everyone's like,
• 21:57
  Speaker 1: why is everyone yelling at each other during these impeachment hearings?
• 22:00
  Speaker 1: So there is going to be a similar challenge even
• 22:02
  Speaker 1: when these hearings are public.
• 22:04
  Speaker 2: Yeah, for sure.
• 22:05
  Speaker 1: I will say, we forgot to mention one more thing
• 22:07
  Speaker 1: about how fucking stupid that stunt was, is the interviews
• 22:14
  Speaker 1: were being held in what's known as a secure compartment
• 22:18
  Speaker 1: information facility, known as a SCIF, is the acronym there.
• 22:22
  Speaker 1: And they have some of these in the White House,
• 22:24
  Speaker 1: in the Situation Room. They have some in Congress. Basically,
• 22:27
  Speaker 1: they're places you can go and have meetings where you
• 22:31
  Speaker 1: don't bring any cell phones in, any laptops, anything else,
• 22:34
  Speaker 1: because you want to be secure as possible. And so
• 22:36
  Speaker 1: if people are hacking, if there's listening devices, whatever else,
• 22:39
  Speaker 1: you can make sure that this is, you know, that
• 22:42
  Speaker 1: this is clear of all that. And you can basically
• 22:44
  Speaker 1: discuss classified information, right? And these fucking goobers charge in
• 22:50
  Speaker 1: there with their cell phones into a skiff, which you
• 22:53
  Speaker 1: are never supposed to do. Never. These same Republicans who are,
• 22:58
  Speaker 1: you know, They care a lot about operational security when
• 23:01
  Speaker 1: it comes to private emails and email servers and all
• 23:04
  Speaker 1: that bullshit. But they'll just barge into a fucking skiff,
• 23:08
  Speaker 1: which you're never supposed to do, with their cell phones.
• 23:11
  Speaker 3: John, I don't want to seem cynical here, but I
• 23:14
  Speaker 3: don't think they really care about the use of private
• 23:18
  Speaker 3: email servers.
• 23:18
  Speaker 2: I don't think that was sincere. Damn.
• 23:19
  Speaker 1: No.
• 23:21
  Speaker 3: The other part about this that was funny was, I know,
• 23:25
  Speaker 3: I know, I'm sorry. I always feel bad when I
• 23:27
  Speaker 3: burst the last bubbles of optimism and hope.
• 23:30
  Speaker 2: So naive, yeah.
• 23:34
  Speaker 3: The other part about this that's sort of funny is
• 23:37
  Speaker 3: Kevin McCarthy, this is, they violated House rules. Like, you're
• 23:40
  Speaker 3: not allowed to do that. The parliamentarian ruled on that today.
• 23:43
  Speaker 3: But yesterday, Kevin McCarthy, who is really a doofus, just
• 23:49
  Speaker 3: truly a doofus, went out and explained that It's not
• 23:52
  Speaker 3: these members' fault. They don't know these rules because they're
• 23:55
  Speaker 3: not on the Intelligence Committee, which is the whole point.
• 23:58
  Speaker 3: The reason they're not in the room is because they're
• 24:01
  Speaker 3: not on the Intelligence Committee. Thank you, Kevin McCarthy. I'm
• 24:03
  Speaker 3: sure that sounded smart in the mirror when you were
• 24:05
  Speaker 3: practicing it while combing your hair.
• 24:09
  Speaker 1: I guess Lindsey Graham today, as we're recording this, Lindsey
• 24:11
  Speaker 1: Graham is also going to introduce a resolution in the
• 24:14
  Speaker 1: Senate that is an official, you know, disapproval of the
• 24:19
  Speaker 1: House's impeachment process and how it's a closed-door secret process. Like,
• 24:23
  Speaker 1: do you think he's going to get all the Republican
• 24:26
  Speaker 1: votes for this? Do you think, I mean, it's clearly
• 24:28
  Speaker 1: not just Matt Gaetz and his frat buddies storming a
• 24:33
  Speaker 1: skiff here, but this is, it seems like this is
• 24:35
  Speaker 1: a broader Republican strategy now. Is it, Is it smart?
• 24:39
  Speaker 1: Do you think Graham's going to succeed? I know McConnell's
• 24:41
  Speaker 1: backing Graham in this resolution.
• 24:43
  Speaker 3: Well, I mean, I'm interested to see if McConnell will
• 24:45
  Speaker 3: actually bring this to the floor and force Cory Gardner,
• 24:49
  Speaker 3: Martha McSally, Susan Collins, et cetera, to vote on this.
• 24:52
  Speaker 3: Because it seems like a lose-lose. Because if any Republicans
• 25:00
  Speaker 3: vote against it, like either the vulnerable Republicans I mentioned
• 25:05
  Speaker 3: or someone like Elisa Murkowski, who... you know, has been
• 25:08
  Speaker 3: known to buck the party at times. If any of
• 25:10
  Speaker 3: them vote against it, that's a giant blow to Trump
• 25:12
  Speaker 3: and would put this bipartisan, it was basically able to
• 25:16
  Speaker 3: show some bipartisan support, including Republican senators for it. And
• 25:20
  Speaker 3: if he passes it on a party line vote and
• 25:22
  Speaker 3: forces all of these Republicans running in blue and purple
• 25:26
  Speaker 3: states of presidential election year to say that they disapprove
• 25:30
  Speaker 3: of looking into presidential crimes, Right. Which is different than
• 25:33
  Speaker 3: saying I've looked at this.
• 25:35
  Speaker 2: It's troubling.
• 25:35
  Speaker 3: It doesn't reach the level of conviction. Yeah, that's a
• 25:39
  Speaker 3: that's a much worse position for people. And so I
• 25:40
  Speaker 3: would I am surprised. I would be surprised if McConnell
• 25:43
  Speaker 3: brought this to the floor and see. I understand why
• 25:45
  Speaker 3: Graham did it, because he knows Trump's mad at him.
• 25:48
  Speaker 3: And this is the legislative equivalent of John Cusack standing
• 25:51
  Speaker 3: outside holding.
• 25:52
  Speaker 2: Up a boombox. So he's just trying to send a
• 25:54
  Speaker 2: message to Trump.
• 25:55
  Speaker 3: And so. But I think the long-term play here seems
• 26:01
  Speaker 3: not helpful for the Republican Party.
• 26:12
  Speaker 1: So we're talking about Lindsey Graham and the Senate resolution.
• 26:15
  Speaker 1: Not all of the Republican senators have gone with Trump
• 26:19
  Speaker 1: and Matt Gaetz and Lindsey Graham and fully defending everything already.
• 26:24
  Speaker 1: Here's a quote from one Republican senator about Bill Taylor's testimony, quote,
• 26:28
  Speaker 1: the picture coming out of it, based on the reporting
• 26:31
  Speaker 1: that we've seen, I would say is not a good one.
• 26:34
  Speaker 1: But I would say also that until we have a
• 26:36
  Speaker 1: process that allows for everybody to see this in full transparency,
• 26:39
  Speaker 1: it's pretty hard to draw any hard and fast conclusions.
• 26:42
  Speaker 1: That was John Thune, the number two Republican in the Senate,
• 26:47
  Speaker 1: second ranking Senate Republican. There were similar wait and see
• 26:51
  Speaker 1: comments from senators like Susan Collins and Mitt Romney. Pierre Delecto.
• 26:55
  Speaker 1: And this week, the Daily Caller contacted the offices of
• 27:01
  Speaker 1: all 53 Republican senators and found only seven who said
• 27:05
  Speaker 1: that they definitively oppose the impeachment inquiry into Trump. So,
• 27:10
  Speaker 1: you know, we can't really predict anything here, but do
• 27:13
  Speaker 1: you think the chances of 20 Republicans voting to convict
• 27:16
  Speaker 1: Trump have increased this week with Taylor's testimony? Have the
• 27:21
  Speaker 1: politics changed at all? What do you think?
• 27:23
  Speaker 3: I don't think the chances of Trump being removed from
• 27:25
  Speaker 3: office have increased. I do not. Even though the impeachment number,
• 27:29
  Speaker 3: polling numbers have moved, what drives Republican fealty to Trump
• 27:34
  Speaker 3: is the Republican base.
• 27:35
  Speaker 2: And that has not moved.
• 27:36
  Speaker 3: And I don't, and I have no reason to believe
• 27:38
  Speaker 3: it is going to move because it's, it is, it's
• 27:41
  Speaker 3: at 38%, right? Because a lot of these people are
• 27:43
  Speaker 3: in these very, who would make these decisions in these
• 27:45
  Speaker 3: very Republican States. And they're definitely afraid of a primary
• 27:47
  Speaker 3: where the filing deadlines have not passed in a lot
• 27:49
  Speaker 3: of States. So, This process will end before those filing
• 27:54
  Speaker 3: deadlines do pass.
• 27:55
  Speaker 2: So I think that's very unlikely.
• 27:57
  Speaker 3: I think we should be clear-eyed about that and not
• 28:01
  Speaker 3: get anyone's hopes up. And certainly allow the media to
• 28:04
  Speaker 3: move what is success from an inquiry that tells a
• 28:10
  Speaker 3: story to the country with a trial and reveals information
• 28:14
  Speaker 3: to whether Trump is removed or not, because that is
• 28:16
  Speaker 3: the game we are destined to lose. I do think
• 28:19
  Speaker 3: the Republicans are finding all of their previous defenses to
• 28:22
  Speaker 3: be much and much harder to sustain. So I suspect
• 28:25
  Speaker 3: we're going to see a strategic retreat of sorts where
• 28:28
  Speaker 3: you are not adamantly opposed to the inquiry itself, but
• 28:34
  Speaker 3: you become adamantly opposed that what is discovered in the
• 28:36
  Speaker 3: inquiry reaches a level worthy of removal.
• 28:39
  Speaker 1: Yeah. And that's where they end up, right? That's the
• 28:41
  Speaker 1: final excuse from all the Republicans, even even someone like Collins,
• 28:45
  Speaker 1: and honestly, it mirrors their final excuse in the Kavanaugh confirmation, right?
• 28:50
  Speaker 1: Which was, you know, Susan Collins said something like, yeah,
• 28:53
  Speaker 1: maybe there was wrongdoing, but we can't really be sure,
• 28:55
  Speaker 1: and it doesn't rise to the level of stopping this
• 28:57
  Speaker 1: appointment and all that kind of bullshit. You can see them,
• 29:01
  Speaker 1: and you can see even the ones who are up
• 29:03
  Speaker 1: in 2020 ultimately saying, well, look, I supported the inquiry
• 29:07
  Speaker 1: because I think it was important to get to the
• 29:08
  Speaker 1: bottom of this, but I don't believe it rises to
• 29:10
  Speaker 1: the level of an impeachable offense. So, knowing... That's where
• 29:14
  Speaker 1: they're going to end up. And knowing that one of
• 29:19
  Speaker 1: our big political goals here has never been like, yeah,
• 29:21
  Speaker 1: we really think that 20 Republicans are going to have
• 29:24
  Speaker 1: the courage to fucking remove this guy from office. But
• 29:27
  Speaker 1: we want to make sure we want to make life
• 29:29
  Speaker 1: as hard on some of these Senate Republicans who are
• 29:32
  Speaker 1: up in purple states. We want to make it as
• 29:34
  Speaker 1: hard as possible for them to vote to protect Trump.
• 29:39
  Speaker 1: How should Democrats respond? respond to that argument that it
• 29:42
  Speaker 1: just doesn't rise to the level of an impeachable offense?
• 29:45
  Speaker 3: I think it is to make the case in as
• 29:48
  Speaker 3: clear and dramatic terms as possible that it does, right?
• 29:51
  Speaker 3: This is like, you have to explain simply and clearly
• 29:54
  Speaker 3: how this.
• 29:55
  Speaker 2: Is an abuse of power.
• 29:56
  Speaker 3: And the I mean, we really are– where you have
• 30:00
  Speaker 3: a quid pro quo around military aid for a vulnerable
• 30:05
  Speaker 3: ally in exchange for a politically motivated investigation to interfere
• 30:10
  Speaker 3: in an upcoming election, that is an A-plus answer to
• 30:15
  Speaker 3: a poli-sci question of what is an impeachable offense. That
• 30:18
  Speaker 3: is exactly what they were thinking about. And you have
• 30:20
  Speaker 3: to make that case. You have to do it clearly
• 30:23
  Speaker 3: and succinctly. And I do think– we've been involved in
• 30:26
  Speaker 3: this– we, the world, and then even some of us
• 30:29
  Speaker 3: internally at Positive America Committee have been discussing, should it
• 30:33
  Speaker 3: be just Ukraine? Should it be other things? Should it
• 30:37
  Speaker 3: be broader? I'm generally for broader, but I do think
• 30:42
  Speaker 3: some of the things we've heard about how focusing this
• 30:43
  Speaker 3: around abuse of power from this president, with that being
• 30:47
  Speaker 3: the framing concept with what's happened in Ukraine as the
• 30:50
  Speaker 3: centerpiece of that, is a very powerful argument.
• 30:53
  Speaker 2: And you have to.
• 30:55
  Speaker 3: Why these Republicans who were trying to have it both
• 30:58
  Speaker 3: ways are full of shit. And that means making the
• 31:00
  Speaker 3: case simply, clearly, and every day between now and whatever
• 31:03
  Speaker 3: day this trial comes to a conclusion.
• 31:06
  Speaker 1: So I like focusing it on abuse of power. But
• 31:10
  Speaker 1: I do think that proving that Donald Trump's behavior towards
• 31:16
  Speaker 1: Ukraine is part of a larger pattern and that he
• 31:20
  Speaker 1: has done this kind of thing, that he has abused
• 31:22
  Speaker 1: his power time and time again, helps make it more
• 31:26
  Speaker 1: difficult for Republicans in Congress to vote to acquit. And
• 31:33
  Speaker 1: I think if you can say it wasn't just Ukraine,
• 31:37
  Speaker 1: he tried to he asked China to investigate the Bidens.
• 31:40
  Speaker 1: And today, Trump's trade representative, Peter Navarro, was asked if
• 31:45
  Speaker 1: investigating the Bidens has ever come up during the trade
• 31:48
  Speaker 1: talks with China. And he said he wouldn't answer. So
• 31:52
  Speaker 1: there's another possibility. Like, I think you need to show that, look,
• 31:56
  Speaker 1: this guy is using the power of the presidency and
• 31:59
  Speaker 1: abusing the power of the presidency to do whatever it
• 32:02
  Speaker 1: takes to win reelection. And we cannot have free and
• 32:05
  Speaker 1: fair elections in 2020 if this man remains in office
• 32:09
  Speaker 1: because he has already proven time and again he will
• 32:12
  Speaker 1: stop at nothing, at nothing, to try to get foreign
• 32:16
  Speaker 1: help to win this election on his behalf. And I
• 32:18
  Speaker 1: think the way we need to frame it ultimately is
• 32:21
  Speaker 1: a vote to acquit. is a vote to greenlight foreign
• 32:24
  Speaker 1: interference in the 2020 election. It's not about Trump. It's
• 32:27
  Speaker 1: not about defending Trump or opposing Trump. If you are
• 32:30
  Speaker 1: Susan Collins and you vote to acquit, you just voted
• 32:34
  Speaker 1: to give the green light for foreign interference in the
• 32:37
  Speaker 1: 2020 election. That's what your vote is about. And if
• 32:39
  Speaker 1: Democrats run those ads, they would be completely fucking fair
• 32:43
  Speaker 1: in Maine, in Arizona, all the places where Republicans are at.
• 32:46
  Speaker 2: And even if they weren't fair, you could still run
• 32:48
  Speaker 2: them on Facebook without any problems. Ha ha ha!
• 32:52
  Speaker 1: That is right. Yeah, everyone go check out AOC's questioning
• 32:55
  Speaker 1: of Mark Zuckerberg yesterday and Katie Porter's and everyone's. It
• 32:59
  Speaker 1: was fantastic. But yeah, look, I'm not for widening the
• 33:05
  Speaker 1: inquiry in a way that will confuse the storyline because
• 33:08
  Speaker 1: I think we have a good, understandable, accessible storyline right now.
• 33:11
  Speaker 1: But I am for proving that Donald Trump's abuse of
• 33:15
  Speaker 1: power with regard to Ukraine is part of a larger
• 33:18
  Speaker 1: pattern and making sure that the American people know what
• 33:20
  Speaker 1: that pattern is. and making sure that the senators who
• 33:24
  Speaker 1: are voting on this know what that pattern is and
• 33:26
  Speaker 1: feel the pressure.
• 33:27
  Speaker 3: And I think the way we can bring in all
• 33:29
  Speaker 3: the various strains of this in one story is something
• 33:31
  Speaker 3: along the lines of Donald Trump has abused his office
• 33:34
  Speaker 3: to enrich himself, reward his friends, and punish his enemies.
• 33:38
  Speaker 3: And so that gets you corruption, which is, I think,
• 33:41
  Speaker 3: whether it's Doonbeck or the G7 or any of that,
• 33:44
  Speaker 3: it gets the things he's done to reward donors, and
• 33:48
  Speaker 3: it gets to the foreign election interference.
• 33:50
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 33:50
  Speaker 1: And I think just and put our and put free
• 33:52
  Speaker 1: and fair elections at risk, you know, put our democracy
• 33:55
  Speaker 1: at risk. I think I think getting into people's heads
• 33:57
  Speaker 1: that we might not have a fair election because Donald
• 33:59
  Speaker 1: Trump has, you know, whether it's Bill Barr or President Zelensky,
• 34:03
  Speaker 1: he's using all of the using all the powers of
• 34:06
  Speaker 1: his presidency to make sure he wins. And and we
• 34:09
  Speaker 1: can't be sure we know about the Ukraine one because
• 34:11
  Speaker 1: of a brave whistleblower. I mean, even Bill Taylor, who's
• 34:14
  Speaker 1: like a good guy in all this because he came
• 34:16
  Speaker 1: forward and is, you know, speaking out. Bill Taylor, if
• 34:20
  Speaker 1: not for the whistleblower, wouldn't have said anything. And we
• 34:23
  Speaker 1: would never have known about all this. So think about
• 34:25
  Speaker 1: all of the other abuses of power that are going
• 34:27
  Speaker 1: on in the administration if this is the only one
• 34:29
  Speaker 1: that we know about right now.
• 34:39
  Speaker 2: All right.
• 34:39
  Speaker 1: Let's talk about 2020. It is apparently that time of
• 34:42
  Speaker 1: the campaign season where Democratic donors and strategists and people
• 34:44
  Speaker 1: who love taking calls from reporters freak out over the
• 34:48
  Speaker 1: field of Democratic candidates. Here's Jonathan Martin in the New
• 34:51
  Speaker 1: York Times. Quote, Democratic leaders are engaging in a familiar right,
• 34:55
  Speaker 1: fretting about who is in the race and longing for
• 34:57
  Speaker 1: a white knight to enter the contest at the last minute.
• 35:00
  Speaker 1: And here's the Washington Post. Quote, in conversations with 17
• 35:03
  Speaker 1: state and national party leaders, nearly all expressed some level
• 35:07
  Speaker 1: of unease with where the field stands and a deepening
• 35:10
  Speaker 1: concern that the leading contenders would struggle mightily against Trump.
• 35:14
  Speaker 1: These party leaders are reportedly kicking around the idea of
• 35:16
  Speaker 1: trying to get a variety of candidates to enter the race,
• 35:19
  Speaker 1: from Michael Bloomberg and Bob Iger to John Kerry and
• 35:21
  Speaker 1: Deval Patrick to Sherrod Brown and even Hillary Clinton. Dan,
• 35:27
  Speaker 1: where have we seen these pieces before?
• 35:31
  Speaker 2: Every election.
• 35:33
  Speaker 3: Every election.
• 35:34
  Speaker 2: Happens every single time.
• 35:35
  Speaker 1: It's a democratic tradition.
• 35:36
  Speaker 2: I mean, frankly, it's a.
• 35:38
  Speaker 3: Bipartisan tradition like no other because that's how we got
• 35:41
  Speaker 3: Rick Perry in the race in 2012 and Fred Thompson
• 35:44
  Speaker 3: in 2004. There is something about the primary process that
• 35:48
  Speaker 3: is very diminishing of candidates. You go a year of
• 35:52
  Speaker 3: tremendous scrutiny, debates, getting in debate exchanges with fourth-tier candidates,
• 35:58
  Speaker 3: reporters coming after you, making gaffes. And so, like, you
• 36:03
  Speaker 3: would do all of that before you ever get a
• 36:05
  Speaker 3: single vote. So every, like it is a, all of
• 36:08
  Speaker 3: every candidate's flaws are on full display and you don't have,
• 36:13
  Speaker 3: without actionable elections, you don't have any validation of whether
• 36:17
  Speaker 3: there was reason for your anxiety. And so we, we've
• 36:20
  Speaker 3: seen this every single time.
• 36:21
  Speaker 2: It's not surprising.
• 36:22
  Speaker 3: What is interesting about it to me this time is
• 36:25
  Speaker 3: two things. One, there's more anxiety this time because Trump
• 36:30
  Speaker 3: is bad. And this is, this is the scariest election
• 36:32
  Speaker 3: we're ever going to have. And it feels like a
• 36:34
  Speaker 3: lot of what this country is about and democracy is
• 36:37
  Speaker 3: about is on the ballot this time. And second is
• 36:40
  Speaker 3: that these party leaders who are quoting these stories have
• 36:42
  Speaker 3: never had less influence, right? They just, there's, there's not,
• 36:47
  Speaker 3: there's no, there's no, it's been a long time, but
• 36:48
  Speaker 3: there's no smoke filled room somewhere where a bunch of
• 36:51
  Speaker 3: donors and state party chairs can put a candidate on
• 36:54
  Speaker 3: the ballot. Like the, all of the power has been
• 36:57
  Speaker 3: pushed down to the grassroots. And you can see that
• 36:59
  Speaker 3: by the fact that Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are
• 37:03
  Speaker 3: at the top of this race with Joe Biden, two
• 37:05
  Speaker 3: people who do not have a ton of establishment support.
• 37:08
  Speaker 3: And the other person who is lurking in the backgrounds
• 37:10
  Speaker 3: is the 38-year-old mayor of South Bend, Indiana, who couldn't
• 37:13
  Speaker 3: even win the DNC chairmanship two years ago. And so
• 37:17
  Speaker 3: these are not candidates the party leaders are picking. So
• 37:20
  Speaker 3: I wouldn't sweat this one too much.
• 37:23
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I should say the other reason everyone's so scared
• 37:26
  Speaker 1: is not only that Trump's awful and, you know, would
• 37:30
  Speaker 1: be a catastrophe if he got a second term, but
• 37:33
  Speaker 1: that we lost to him in the first place. And
• 37:35
  Speaker 1: we all got it wrong, right? And so it is
• 37:38
  Speaker 1: like everyone is so much more nervous this time about
• 37:43
  Speaker 1: who we're going to choose as a nominee. And I
• 37:46
  Speaker 1: think that's getting there, too. Now, the issue here, though,
• 37:49
  Speaker 1: is the worry among... the party leaders and donors is
• 37:54
  Speaker 1: not necessarily reflected in the Democratic electorate. According to a
• 37:58
  Speaker 1: poll of Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters conducted by YouGov after
• 38:01
  Speaker 1: the last debate, 83% described themselves as satisfied with the
• 38:05
  Speaker 1: field and 45% described themselves as enthusiastic. So, yeah, we'd
• 38:10
  Speaker 1: like the enthusiastic number to be up there, but 83%
• 38:12
  Speaker 1: of people being satisfied, and you look at approval ratings
• 38:15
  Speaker 1: for some of these candidates, Elizabeth Warren's approval ratings among
• 38:18
  Speaker 1: Democrats is incredibly high. Pete Buttigieg's approval rating among Democrats
• 38:23
  Speaker 1: is incredibly high. Joe Biden's is pretty high. Bernie Sanders
• 38:26
  Speaker 1: is pretty high. There's four candidates right there who have very,
• 38:29
  Speaker 1: very high approval ratings with the Democratic electorate.
• 38:32
  Speaker 3: The other thing here is let's just hypothetically say you
• 38:35
  Speaker 3: as a donor or a party leader or just a
• 38:38
  Speaker 3: random voter are nervous or have some reason to not
• 38:42
  Speaker 3: be in love with the top three or top four,
• 38:44
  Speaker 3: the people.
• 38:44
  Speaker 2: You just listened to. Yeah.
• 38:46
  Speaker 3: There are plenty of other great candidates in the race
• 38:49
  Speaker 3: that you could support. You could support Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar,
• 38:52
  Speaker 3: or Kamala Harris, or a better word, like, lack of
• 38:55
  Speaker 3: candidates is not our problem, right?
• 38:57
  Speaker 2: So we don't need to go dragging people out of
• 39:00
  Speaker 2: retirement to get into the race. It's just, it's an
• 39:03
  Speaker 2: absurd proposition.
• 39:05
  Speaker 1: Well, especially people, look, look, you and I, and we've
• 39:08
  Speaker 1: done this, right? You and I could make a case
• 39:11
  Speaker 1: why each one of these candidates in the field, at
• 39:14
  Speaker 1: least the leading candidates... And some of the ones in
• 39:16
  Speaker 1: the second tier could beat Donald Trump in a case
• 39:20
  Speaker 1: why they could lose to Donald Trump.
• 39:22
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 39:22
  Speaker 1: And with some candidates, there are different reasons for each.
• 39:25
  Speaker 1: But I also all the candidates that have been mentioned
• 39:28
  Speaker 1: in the piece who aren't running and people want to.
• 39:30
  Speaker 1: jump in, I could do the same thing with them
• 39:32
  Speaker 1: about strengths they have and weaknesses they have. The truth is,
• 39:36
  Speaker 1: every single one of these candidates has strengths and they
• 39:38
  Speaker 1: have weaknesses. No one is perfect. We are not going
• 39:41
  Speaker 1: to nominate the perfect Democratic candidate. We never have. We
• 39:46
  Speaker 1: never have. Like, we can go back and look at
• 39:48
  Speaker 1: all the stories about party leaders, and I'm sure there's
• 39:51
  Speaker 1: a fucking whole bunch of Ed Rendell quotes about why
• 39:53
  Speaker 1: Barack Obama is a weak general election nominee, why Barack
• 39:57
  Speaker 1: Obama can't win against John McCain, especially John McCain, who
• 40:00
  Speaker 1: at the time was this maverick, independent hero. Like, oh, no. Like,
• 40:05
  Speaker 1: you know, Barack Obama up against John McCain, that's going
• 40:07
  Speaker 1: to be horrible. So, like, I do think there is... Look,
• 40:11
  Speaker 1: I understand. I get the concern that... people have right
• 40:14
  Speaker 1: now that we're not going to win. I have it
• 40:16
  Speaker 1: every fucking day. But I think, you know, if I
• 40:20
  Speaker 1: as I go down the list of candidates, like I said,
• 40:22
  Speaker 1: I can give you a case why each one of
• 40:24
  Speaker 1: them wins and I can give you a case why
• 40:25
  Speaker 1: they lose. And and all that we can do is
• 40:28
  Speaker 1: work our fucking asses off to for whoever the Democratic
• 40:31
  Speaker 1: nominee is to make sure that they do it. I mean,
• 40:34
  Speaker 1: in a lot of ways, it's up to us.
• 40:36
  Speaker 3: If you have anxiety, go to a phone bank and
• 40:39
  Speaker 3: call an undecided voter.
• 40:40
  Speaker 2: Don't call Jonathan Martin.
• 40:43
  Speaker 1: Yeah. I mean, that's the biggest. So, you know, so
• 40:46
  Speaker 1: the piece says, you know, they're worried about Biden because
• 40:48
  Speaker 1: of his campaign. He's sort of, you know, even though,
• 40:50
  Speaker 1: you know, his poll numbers are fairly steady, but he's
• 40:53
  Speaker 1: slipping a lot in Iowa. So they're worried about Biden
• 40:55
  Speaker 1: for all that. And then they say they're worried about
• 40:57
  Speaker 1: Warren because, you know, she's taken positions that are too liberal.
• 41:01
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 41:01
  Speaker 1: And what they really mean here is her position on
• 41:04
  Speaker 1: Medicare for all. So we should stop to talk about
• 41:06
  Speaker 1: that just because partly in response to these concerns about
• 41:11
  Speaker 1: her position on Medicare for all, which she was challenged
• 41:13
  Speaker 1: on during the last debate, the senator announced on Sunday
• 41:17
  Speaker 1: that in a few weeks she'll release her plan on
• 41:20
  Speaker 1: how to pay for it. So, first of all, you know,
• 41:23
  Speaker 1: how concerning is her embrace of Bernie Sanders' Medicare for
• 41:27
  Speaker 1: All legislation? Do you think it's a smart move that
• 41:30
  Speaker 1: she is finally going to release specifics on how to
• 41:34
  Speaker 1: pay for it? And also, did she really have a choice?
• 41:39
  Speaker 2: I think.
• 41:40
  Speaker 3: What was smart, there is plenty of evidence and plenty
• 41:44
  Speaker 3: of reason for political concern around Medicare for All. The
• 41:51
  Speaker 3: polling is clear that there are risks there. There are
• 41:54
  Speaker 3: risks in every policy, and the question isn't what the
• 41:56
  Speaker 3: policy is, it's how do you sell that policy. What
• 42:00
  Speaker 3: I think was smart was Elizabeth Warren, unlike all the
• 42:03
  Speaker 3: other candidates, not named Bernie Sanders, backed Bernie Sanders' bill.
• 42:09
  Speaker 3: back in 2017. When she did that, she knew she
• 42:14
  Speaker 3: was making a decision that that was going to be
• 42:16
  Speaker 3: her approach in the presidential campaign, that she wouldn't back
• 42:18
  Speaker 3: that bill to get liberal excitement as you were thinking
• 42:24
  Speaker 3: about running for president and then have a different approach.
• 42:26
  Speaker 3: Being for that bill and then being for a different
• 42:28
  Speaker 3: bill has been problematic for a bunch of other candidates,
• 42:31
  Speaker 3: senators who had done that. Elizabeth Warren has run an
• 42:36
  Speaker 3: excellent campaigns thus far. The only place where I think
• 42:39
  Speaker 3: she has made real mistakes since she actually got in
• 42:42
  Speaker 3: the race has been around the question of the pay for,
• 42:46
  Speaker 3: and it's been, it's been a topic of every debate.
• 42:49
  Speaker 3: It has been, and even though I know what she
• 42:52
  Speaker 3: is trying to do there, it hasn't come off well.
• 42:54
  Speaker 3: And it's, and it seems very typical politician to someone
• 42:57
  Speaker 3: who has branded themselves as an atypical politician. And so
• 43:00
  Speaker 3: she needs an answer. I am, Frankly, very fascinating to
• 43:03
  Speaker 3: see what you say, because I think the better answer
• 43:07
  Speaker 3: would have been to just follow Bernie's lead and just
• 43:11
  Speaker 3: say what Bernie was saying, both in the primary and
• 43:14
  Speaker 3: the general, because now she's going to have this new
• 43:18
  Speaker 3: plan that's going to get attacked from 13 different directions,
• 43:20
  Speaker 3: depending on how many candidates you think are still in
• 43:22
  Speaker 3: the race, as opposed to siding yourself with Bernie and
• 43:26
  Speaker 3: with where she originally was.
• 43:28
  Speaker 1: Well, and let's look at what Bernie has done, right?
• 43:31
  Speaker 1: Bernie has a list of potential pay-fors in his legislation,
• 43:36
  Speaker 1: potential pay-fors. One of those is some percentage on a
• 43:41
  Speaker 1: payroll tax, which would hit, of course, working and middle-class families.
• 43:46
  Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders has been open about the fact that, yes,
• 43:51
  Speaker 1: taxes might go up on some working middle-class families, but
• 43:55
  Speaker 1: your premiums will go down to zero along with your
• 43:58
  Speaker 1: co-pays and deductibles, so you'll be fine in the end.
• 44:01
  Speaker 1: So that's where Bernie is. Elizabeth Warren, by saying your
• 44:05
  Speaker 1: costs will go down and not saying anything about taxes,
• 44:08
  Speaker 1: but promising, pledging she will not sign a piece of
• 44:11
  Speaker 1: legislation that has costs go up for middle class families.
• 44:16
  Speaker 1: By saying that, yes, she doesn't want to give the
• 44:19
  Speaker 1: Republicans a talking point of her saying taxes will go up,
• 44:23
  Speaker 1: but it's clear she just doesn't agree with that pay for.
• 44:28
  Speaker 1: which is why she's finding her own, right? She doesn't
• 44:30
  Speaker 1: want that payroll tax increase or else she probably would
• 44:32
  Speaker 1: have just figured out a way to say it in
• 44:35
  Speaker 1: a different way, right? Like she's looking at other funding options.
• 44:37
  Speaker 1: So what she's trying to do is solve this puzzle
• 44:40
  Speaker 1: of how to fund this very, very expensive program. Like, yes,
• 44:45
  Speaker 1: we know that Medicare for All is going to ultimately
• 44:47
  Speaker 1: bring healthcare costs down because right now we have so
• 44:50
  Speaker 1: much waste in healthcare and part of that waste is
• 44:52
  Speaker 1: overhead and unnecessary tests and all the bullshit. that insurance
• 44:56
  Speaker 1: companies do and hospitals do and all this kind of
• 44:58
  Speaker 1: stuff that we don't need to get into, but there's
• 44:59
  Speaker 1: a lot of waste. But still, to get the program
• 45:02
  Speaker 1: off the ground, it does need financing. And, you know,
• 45:06
  Speaker 1: I agree that for someone who's come out with so
• 45:09
  Speaker 1: many plans and so many details, including like, you know,
• 45:12
  Speaker 1: go on my website and type in your student loan
• 45:15
  Speaker 1: amount and you'll figure out exactly how much you get
• 45:17
  Speaker 1: relieved in your student loans or wealth, you know, like
• 45:20
  Speaker 1: she's been so specific on so many different things. It
• 45:22
  Speaker 1: would have been, I think it would have been a
• 45:25
  Speaker 1: a mistake and it would have just been, it's core
• 45:28
  Speaker 1: to who she is, right, to talk about plans and details.
• 45:30
  Speaker 1: And so I don't think she had an option. I
• 45:32
  Speaker 1: don't think she had another option. Now, the question is,
• 45:35
  Speaker 1: when she comes out with a plan, how do you
• 45:36
  Speaker 1: come up with a plan to pay for this that
• 45:38
  Speaker 1: doesn't either get attacked by Bernie Sanders on the left
• 45:43
  Speaker 1: by saying, oh, you're actually a sellout, you didn't stick
• 45:45
  Speaker 1: with my Medicare for All plan, or get attacked by,
• 45:49
  Speaker 1: you know, folks in the center and the oh, this
• 45:53
  Speaker 1: is crazy. It's going to raise taxes on people, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
• 45:57
  Speaker 1: It's a tough needle to thread. I'll say that.
• 46:00
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 46:00
  Speaker 3: I mean, I think this problem could have been solved.
• 46:03
  Speaker 3: She made this an issue by not answering it or
• 46:07
  Speaker 3: trying to reframe the question. And I think maybe thinking
• 46:09
  Speaker 3: that her reframing could hold. But once you're doing a
• 46:12
  Speaker 3: debate every month and you're taking questions from reporters all
• 46:15
  Speaker 3: the time and questions from people at town halls, that
• 46:18
  Speaker 3: becomes less sustainable. And it certainly becomes less sustainable as
• 46:20
  Speaker 3: you get near the top. And it gives an incentive
• 46:22
  Speaker 3: to people like Pete Buttigieg or Joe Biden or some
• 46:25
  Speaker 3: others to make a point, a very fair point about that.
• 46:29
  Speaker 3: And the question that I always sort of wondered is, A,
• 46:32
  Speaker 3: why not just say, I'm open, like, is there a
• 46:35
  Speaker 3: way you could say, I'm open to a number of
• 46:37
  Speaker 3: ways of paying for it, but my principle is no
• 46:41
  Speaker 3: one who makes less than X will see their.
• 46:44
  Speaker 2: Taxes raised, right?
• 46:46
  Speaker 3: Like, that... like, like, does that pass some green eye
• 46:50
  Speaker 3: shade budget test? No, but the Republicans just passed a
• 46:54
  Speaker 3: trillion dollar tax cut for wall street and told everyone's
• 46:57
  Speaker 3: going to be paid for. And it's added a trillion
• 46:59
  Speaker 3: dollars of deficit, like six, seven minutes. So I think
• 47:02
  Speaker 3: there was like, there was probably a way to stake
• 47:04
  Speaker 3: out a principle here and then leave the details for later.
• 47:07
  Speaker 3: Now I, I'd be interested to see, like, is this
• 47:09
  Speaker 3: going to be a super detailed, like all the columns
• 47:12
  Speaker 3: and numbers add up and how that plays politically, both
• 47:17
  Speaker 3: Right now, in a moment where I think she is
• 47:19
  Speaker 3: going to be the focus of attacks. And I assume
• 47:21
  Speaker 3: the deadline for this is the November.
• 47:24
  Speaker 1: 20th debate, right?
• 47:26
  Speaker 2: She has to have that answer by then.
• 47:28
  Speaker 1: Yeah, there was a story that Jeff Stein at the
• 47:30
  Speaker 1: Washington Post ran today, just before we started recording, about
• 47:33
  Speaker 1: some of the advisors, her economic advisors, outside advisors, trying
• 47:37
  Speaker 1: to help her with this. And the campaign did say
• 47:39
  Speaker 1: they're going to have it out by the next debate.
• 47:42
  Speaker 1: They also said one of the things they're looking at,
• 47:43
  Speaker 1: which seems like a good place to go, is Some
• 47:47
  Speaker 1: kind of employer tax so that, you know, employers right now,
• 47:51
  Speaker 1: you know, spend money to cover their employees under Medicare
• 47:55
  Speaker 1: for all. Employers won't be spending any money on covering
• 47:58
  Speaker 1: their employees ever again because the government is paying for that.
• 48:01
  Speaker 1: So do you say to employers who are right now
• 48:04
  Speaker 1: covering their employees, all right, the money that you spend
• 48:06
  Speaker 1: on your employees right now for coverage, you're going to
• 48:08
  Speaker 1: pay in taxes. Now, it's still a tax increase, but
• 48:11
  Speaker 1: is it more politically palatable to say I'm going to
• 48:13
  Speaker 1: raise taxes on employers than employees and middle class families? Yeah, probably. Now,
• 48:18
  Speaker 1: does that get you all the way there? I don't
• 48:20
  Speaker 1: think it does. I think you still need a couple
• 48:22
  Speaker 1: more pay-fors, but that's one place I could see her going.
• 48:25
  Speaker 3: All right.
• 48:27
  Speaker 1: Let's end by discussing something that we do think is
• 48:31
  Speaker 1: worth freaking out over, which is the Democrats' information warfare
• 48:34
  Speaker 1: strategy for 2020. On Sunday, Matthew Rosenberg and Kevin Roos
• 48:39
  Speaker 1: of The New York Times published a very well-reported piece
• 48:41
  Speaker 1: that lays out how the Trump campaign has spent three
• 48:43
  Speaker 1: years building a, quote, sophisticated, digital marketing effort that includes
• 48:48
  Speaker 1: targeted ads, tested content, and data collection. Democrats, according to
• 48:52
  Speaker 1: the story, are quite far behind and not nearly as
• 48:55
  Speaker 1: focused on digital ad spending, message testing, or data collection.
• 48:58
  Speaker 1: So everyone who listens knows that we're concerned about this
• 49:03
  Speaker 1: at Pod Save America. But do you want to explain
• 49:06
  Speaker 1: just how concerned we are and why?
• 49:09
  Speaker 2: We're quite concerned. We're quite concerned.
• 49:11
  Speaker 3: And it falls on, I think, a couple of different reasons.
• 49:17
  Speaker 3: One is simply this is a product.
• 49:20
  Speaker 2: Of Trump's immense incumbency advantage.
• 49:23
  Speaker 3: Barack Obama started his reelection campaign in April of 2011,
• 49:27
  Speaker 3: which gave him a little over a year and a
• 49:29
  Speaker 3: half to build infrastructure, test messages, build tech, accumulate data.
• 49:36
  Speaker 3: Trump formed his reelection committee five hours after he was
• 49:39
  Speaker 3: sworn into office in January of 2017. And they have
• 49:43
  Speaker 3: been raising and spending money at an incredible clip. And
• 49:47
  Speaker 3: what that allows you to do is accumulate a ton
• 49:49
  Speaker 3: of data about who to target and how to target
• 49:52
  Speaker 3: them so that you will be incredibly efficient and effective
• 49:57
  Speaker 3: in your advertising spend in the general election once you
• 50:00
  Speaker 3: know who your opponent is. In addition to just building
• 50:03
  Speaker 3: up your supporters, you know, defining the conversation with the
• 50:07
  Speaker 3: money you're spending right now, you're going to know so
• 50:09
  Speaker 3: much more about the electorate than the Democrat is going
• 50:12
  Speaker 3: to be. Because the Democrats are focused, rightfully, the Democratic
• 50:16
  Speaker 3: candidates are focused, rightly, on primarily winning four states, two
• 50:19
  Speaker 3: of which are highly unlikely to vote for the Democrat
• 50:22
  Speaker 3: in the fall. And within those states, they're not targeting
• 50:24
  Speaker 3: swing voters. They're mostly targeting traditional primary voters, certain Democratic voters.
• 50:31
  Speaker 3: And they're spending their money not on learning how to
• 50:34
  Speaker 3: persuade voters, but on building up their email list and
• 50:39
  Speaker 3: building up their fundraising databases. That's where they're spending their money.
• 50:42
  Speaker 3: You can't even compare the money the Democrats are spending
• 50:45
  Speaker 3: and the money Trump is spending because they're two different things.
• 50:47
  Speaker 3: The money Democrats are spending has very limited, if any,
• 50:50
  Speaker 3: utility for how you're actually going to wage it in
• 50:53
  Speaker 3: the general election. The second problem is, and this is
• 50:57
  Speaker 3: very well revealed in the story, which is there's just
• 51:00
  Speaker 3: a fundamental.
• 51:01
  Speaker 2: continues to.
• 51:02
  Speaker 3: Be this fundamental disconnect between how a lot of Democrats,
• 51:05
  Speaker 3: not all of them, but a lot of Democrats view
• 51:08
  Speaker 3: political communications. I've said this before, but Democrats view political
• 51:12
  Speaker 3: communications as public relations when it is really in this
• 51:15
  Speaker 3: day and age, modern information warfare, which means it is
• 51:20
  Speaker 3: Using data, it is targeting, it is trying to shift
• 51:22
  Speaker 3: the online conversation in your way, in your direction, to
• 51:26
  Speaker 3: understand how you persuade, not by telling the New York
• 51:29
  Speaker 3: Times or CNN or even Ponce of America things. It's
• 51:31
  Speaker 3: how you take content and information and put it in
• 51:35
  Speaker 3: front of the voters who need to hear it. It
• 51:39
  Speaker 3: is almost hand-to-hand persuasion. through digital advertising, through organic content,
• 51:44
  Speaker 3: et cetera. Too much of the structures around democratic communications
• 51:49
  Speaker 3: continues to be set up around how you communicate to
• 51:51
  Speaker 3: the press. There's a lot of incentives within a primary
• 51:53
  Speaker 3: to do that because democratic primary voters pay attention to
• 51:58
  Speaker 3: the press. The third thing that is very concerning is
• 52:01
  Speaker 3: that Facebook is the primary engine for all of this.
• 52:03
  Speaker 3: Facebook provides conservatives with a structural advantage. it is, there
• 52:08
  Speaker 3: is an algorithmic reward for outrage. And outrage is the
• 52:11
  Speaker 3: coin of the realm in Republican politics. And so Republican messages,
• 52:15
  Speaker 3: which drive outrage, go further on Facebook. Republican ads that
• 52:20
  Speaker 3: drive outrage reach more people more efficiently than Democratic ads.
• 52:24
  Speaker 3: And so in order to figure out how to match them,
• 52:26
  Speaker 3: we need to be spending money and working on it
• 52:28
  Speaker 3: right now. And with a couple of exceptions that we
• 52:31
  Speaker 3: can talk about, there's just been this giant vacuum on
• 52:34
  Speaker 3: the Democratic side for a long time.
• 52:36
  Speaker 2: So- Yes.
• 52:38
  Speaker 3: How's that?
• 52:38
  Speaker 2: That scare you?
• 52:39
  Speaker 1: No, that's great. I mean, look, I'm there. So because
• 52:42
  Speaker 1: there's something wrong with me, I got into it with
• 52:44
  Speaker 1: Nate Silver over the story on Sunday because he spent
• 52:48
  Speaker 1: most of Sunday tweeting about how wrong and overblown it
• 52:50
  Speaker 1: was at one point saying, quote, there's nothing magic about
• 52:53
  Speaker 1: digital ad spending. We're supposed to believe that the Trump
• 52:55
  Speaker 1: campaign is a bunch of super geniuses for spending extensively
• 52:58
  Speaker 1: on Facebook ads, whereas everyone who works for one of
• 53:00
  Speaker 1: the 19 Democratic campaigns is an idiot. Far more likely
• 53:04
  Speaker 1: is that they've studied this stuff with some empirical rigor.
• 53:07
  Speaker 1: rather than buying into the largely evidence-free media mythology about
• 53:10
  Speaker 1: the effectiveness of digital campaign ads. Dan, so what is,
• 53:16
  Speaker 1: what is Nate, what is Nate right about and what
• 53:19
  Speaker 1: is he wrong about?
• 53:20
  Speaker 3: What Nate is right about is the Trump campaign is not,
• 53:22
  Speaker 3: they are not, they are not geniuses, right? The Trump
• 53:24
  Speaker 3: campaign are not geniuses. They are, they were more lucky
• 53:26
  Speaker 3: than good in 2016, but they stumbled on something that
• 53:30
  Speaker 3: was incredibly effective, which was they ran a modern digital
• 53:35
  Speaker 3: marketing campaign where they beta tested a thousands of different
• 53:38
  Speaker 3: messages to see which one worked best and then double
• 53:41
  Speaker 3: downs on the ones that worked. And they did that
• 53:44
  Speaker 3: out of necessity, not out of genius. But it did work.
• 53:47
  Speaker 3: It's very hard to pull apart Nate's argument because there
• 53:49
  Speaker 3: are elements of it that are right. The Trump campaign
• 53:52
  Speaker 3: are not geniuses and they spent the last few years
• 53:54
  Speaker 3: telling everyone they are geniuses and basically lying about what
• 53:57
  Speaker 3: they did in 2016.
• 53:59
  Speaker 2: That is true.
• 54:00
  Speaker 3: It's not that the Democrats have studied this to figure
• 54:01
  Speaker 3: out it doesn't work because they have no incentive right
• 54:03
  Speaker 3: now to be doing the things that Trump is doing
• 54:06
  Speaker 3: because they're trying to get Democratic primary voters. So I
• 54:11
  Speaker 3: cannot tell you with 100 percent certainty that digital ads
• 54:15
  Speaker 3: are magical, mythical, like all other things. They have to
• 54:18
  Speaker 3: be done right to work. What I do know is
• 54:21
  Speaker 3: that we are being massively outspent in an area that matters.
• 54:26
  Speaker 3: And in order to do it well in the fall,
• 54:27
  Speaker 3: you have to be learning how to do it well now.
• 54:30
  Speaker 1: Yeah, where I really where I fundamentally disagree with Nate.
• 54:32
  Speaker 1: I mean, obviously, digital ads aren't magic. No one is
• 54:36
  Speaker 1: arguing that like the Trump campaign found some secret sauce
• 54:40
  Speaker 1: with digital ads and, you know, they have this magic
• 54:44
  Speaker 1: recipe that, you know, they can hack into our brains
• 54:47
  Speaker 1: and figure it out and win the election that way.
• 54:49
  Speaker 1: And Democrats, it's not that. It goes back to how
• 54:52
  Speaker 1: do you communicate with voters, right? This is the decision
• 54:56
  Speaker 1: that every campaign has to make is what do you
• 54:59
  Speaker 1: say to voters and how do you say it to them?
• 55:01
  Speaker 1: Where do you reach them? Where do you find them?
• 55:03
  Speaker 1: And it used to be that you found a lot
• 55:05
  Speaker 1: of voters, most voters, on television. And there was three
• 55:09
  Speaker 1: news channels and everyone watched the nightly news. And then
• 55:12
  Speaker 1: if you ran a political ad, that's how you got
• 55:14
  Speaker 1: your message across in addition to getting stories on the
• 55:17
  Speaker 1: nightly news about your campaign that day. That world is gone.
• 55:21
  Speaker 1: It has been gone for a very long time. And
• 55:24
  Speaker 1: it is increasingly harder to find the voters who we
• 55:27
  Speaker 1: need to win the election. Not very engaged partisans on
• 55:31
  Speaker 1: both sides. But the folks that we were talking about earlier,
• 55:34
  Speaker 1: when the impeachment hearing stuff, who are either cynical about
• 55:36
  Speaker 1: politics or who are disengaged from politics, who casually pay
• 55:40
  Speaker 1: attention to the news, where do you find those people?
• 55:42
  Speaker 1: You find them on their phones. They are not watching
• 55:45
  Speaker 1: television anymore. They're not watching the news anymore. Even older
• 55:49
  Speaker 1: people who are the most reliable television watchers are now
• 55:53
  Speaker 1: on Facebook more than ever. Young people are on their phones.
• 55:56
  Speaker 1: They're on Instagram. They're on Snapchat, right? And the question is,
• 56:00
  Speaker 1: are Democratic campaigns reaching people where they are? How do
• 56:05
  Speaker 1: you figure out a way to reach people where they are?
• 56:07
  Speaker 1: And the Trump campaign, like you said, not through genius,
• 56:09
  Speaker 1: but by necessity, because they were so far behind in
• 56:12
  Speaker 1: the Republican primary for so long and didn't think they
• 56:15
  Speaker 1: would beat Hillary Clinton and think they were going to
• 56:16
  Speaker 1: get outspent by Hillary Clinton. They had to, out of necessity,
• 56:20
  Speaker 1: figure out ways to reach people in hard to reach
• 56:23
  Speaker 1: places on Facebook and test ads and do all this
• 56:26
  Speaker 1: kind of shit. And the Trump campaign will, you know,
• 56:29
  Speaker 1: Plouffe was talking about this. David Plouffe was talking about this,
• 56:31
  Speaker 1: that like Brad Parscale basically admitted it, that it was
• 56:33
  Speaker 1: out of necessity that they did these things. They were
• 56:35
  Speaker 1: able to take risks and be creative because they didn't
• 56:39
  Speaker 1: have any other shot. Democratic campaigns aren't as willing to
• 56:42
  Speaker 1: take those risks. And like you said, we are at
• 56:45
  Speaker 1: a moment right now where all of these candidates are
• 56:47
  Speaker 1: focusing on winning the primary as they should be. But
• 56:50
  Speaker 1: that means that there's only one side that is reaching
• 56:53
  Speaker 1: voters where a lot of them are, which is on Facebook.
• 56:57
  Speaker 1: or some of the other platforms where, I mean, they're
• 56:59
  Speaker 1: also running stuff on YouTube, on cable, right? The Trump
• 57:02
  Speaker 1: campaign is spending money everywhere. And they are reaching people
• 57:05
  Speaker 1: where they are with messages that they are testing in
• 57:07
  Speaker 1: real time to see if they work in real time,
• 57:11
  Speaker 1: not some like focus group and poll. And then they
• 57:13
  Speaker 1: go into the field afterwards. They're sending out messages, they're
• 57:15
  Speaker 1: testing them, and then they're getting the feedback and they're
• 57:17
  Speaker 1: changing their ads. And on our side, you know, I
• 57:21
  Speaker 1: know Priorities USA, which is the big Democratic super PAC
• 57:24
  Speaker 1: on our side, said that they're actually now outspending Trump
• 57:26
  Speaker 1: in some of the battleground states on digital, the six
• 57:30
  Speaker 1: battleground states that are the closest, which is great, good
• 57:32
  Speaker 1: for priorities. We've talked a lot about ACRONYM, Tara McGowan's
• 57:36
  Speaker 1: organization that David Plouffe is now sitting on. They're about
• 57:39
  Speaker 1: to launch an entire effort to go fund digital advertising
• 57:43
  Speaker 1: that's as creative and interesting as what the Trump campaign
• 57:45
  Speaker 1: has been doing. So that's great, too. But like, you
• 57:48
  Speaker 1: don't have to believe in magic to think that digital
• 57:50
  Speaker 1: advertising is effective. It's just about communicating with voters and
• 57:54
  Speaker 1: where you do it and how.
• 57:56
  Speaker 2: Right. And it's just his view is like, let's leave
• 57:58
  Speaker 2: no stone unturned. Right.
• 58:00
  Speaker 3: Like that, like how it works, how effective it is,
• 58:05
  Speaker 3: like that's all going to matter in the execution. But
• 58:07
  Speaker 3: what I do fundamentally believe is, and it's not just
• 58:11
  Speaker 3: like the thing we just can't do again is the
• 58:13
  Speaker 3: digital advertising is happening over here and the press department's
• 58:15
  Speaker 3: happening over here.
• 58:16
  Speaker 2: It's all of a, peace.
• 58:18
  Speaker 3: It's all of a strategy of persuasion and pushback and
• 58:22
  Speaker 3: shaping the conversation in American politics because Trump has all
• 58:26
  Speaker 3: the wind in his back in doing this. He has
• 58:27
  Speaker 3: a giant bully pulpit. He has a state-run propaganda organization.
• 58:31
  Speaker 3: The economics of digital ads on media outlets push towards
• 58:35
  Speaker 3: Trump content. Facebook's algorithm push towards Trump content. So we
• 58:38
  Speaker 3: need an all-hands-on-deck holistic effort to push back on it.
• 58:42
  Speaker 3: I was very excited to see the news about priorities.
• 58:44
  Speaker 3: I'm very excited to see what Acronym does.
• 58:46
  Speaker 2: The more the merrier. Let's get in there and get
• 58:47
  Speaker 2: this done. Good.
• 58:48
  Speaker 1: Okay. On that note, we will see you guys next week.
• 58:52
  Speaker 1: And because everyone is still traveling to different places, I
• 58:55
  Speaker 1: believe that you and Lovett are doing the Monday pod
• 58:58
  Speaker 1: next week.
• 58:59
  Speaker 2: We are.
• 58:59
  Speaker 1: And then Tommy and I are doing the Thursday pod
• 59:03
  Speaker 1: next week because we'll both be on the road too.
• 59:05
  Speaker 1: So that is the schedule for next week. And everyone
• 59:07
  Speaker 1: have a great weekend.
• 59:09
  Speaker 2: One day people will write... books about the effort to
• 59:11
  Speaker 2: record this pod today.
• 59:14
  Speaker 3: Bye, everyone.
• 59:14
  Speaker 1: I will not be writing that book. Bye. Pod Save
• 59:20
  Speaker 1: America is a product of Crooked Media. The senior producer
• 59:23
  Speaker 1: is Michael Martinez. Our assistant producer is Jordan Waller. It's
• 59:26
  Speaker 1: mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick. Kyle Seglin is our
• 59:29
  Speaker 1: sound engineer. Thanks to Carolyn Reston, Tanya Somanator, and Katie
• 59:32
  Speaker 1: Long for production support. And to our digital team, Elijah Cohn,
• 59:36
  Speaker 1: Narmel Coney, and Yael Freed, and Milo Kim, who film
• 59:38
  Speaker 1: and upload these episodes as a video every week.