Debating Biden's Gaza Problem (with Mehdi Hasan)

Approach would look like in Gaza and how Ukraine funding complicates things. We'll also talk about what's happening with House Republicans trainwreck of impeachment efforts. And in case you missed it, Donald Trump tells Laura Ingraham that he is America's Alexei Navalny. Seems like an apt comparison, right? No, no problems there.

Can you give us sort of that brief history of what happened back in 1982 and how you think it applies to what's happening in Gaza today?

They're trying to defeat the PLO, who are hiding in tunnels. Tommy sound familiar. And they say we will not leave till we wipe them out, and in the process of trying to wipe them out. They're killing thousands of civilians in Beirut, the capital of Lebanon. And at one point, the nightly news is showing an image of a child with limbs missing.

Again, sound familiar? Ronald Reagan apparently sees this. He writes later in his memoir These images shocked me. And he calls, Begin, and he says, You need to stop this now. What we're watching is a Holocaust.

Reagan used the H word, Tommy, and Begin says, I know what a Holocaust is. Don't try and lecture me, Mr. President, along those lines. And yet 20 minutes later, Begin rings back and says to Reagan, It's over.

I've told Sharon to stop the bombing. And the reason I opened the piece with that anecdote is because. Reagan apparently put down the phone and said to his deputy chief of staff. I didn't realise I had that kind of power now, whether he meant it or not, whether it was snark, who knows, but American presidents have a lot of power. Tommy, you know that, I know that.

You know that from working in the White House, I know that from covering presidents for decades. And the idea that Joe Biden today, and I get it. A lot of listeners of Pod Save America will say Joe Biden is trying. He wants to stop the war. We keep hearing leaks that he wants a ceasefire.

He doesn't like Netanyahu, he's effing and blinding about Bibi. But what can we do? Israel is upset after October, the 7th, rightly upset it wants to take out Hamas.

We don't have the leverage, and the purpose of my piece was to say, not only do we have leverage in the form of arms and finances and diplomatic protection, but we've always had leverage. Ronald Reagan could do it, George Bush senior could do it, and Joe Biden can do it too.

He can make that call. And one of the things I cite in the piece is Israeli officials have said openly We can't do this without America. Defence Minister Gallant early on in the conflict. When he was asked, Why are you letting aid in by his own right wing backbenchers? He said The Americans told us to what are we supposed to say?

No, Yitzhak Brick, a very top Israeli general, told me, said, If they turn off the tap, everyone knows we can't carry on fighting. So the Israeli military officials are saying, we need the Americans, and yet our government is not saying all right. Then do what we tell you to. And that leads you to the very unfortunate conclusion that the Biden administration doesn't want to stop the fighting.

It's not that it can't, it's that it won't.

But I think the bigger problem for Biden here would be Bibi Netanyahu, because, for those who don't know, Netanyahu is only in power. Because he cobbled together a coalition of some of the most odious right wing, racist ministers in Israeli politics, and some of those ministers, a guy named Itamar Ben-Gavir could topple his coalition government at any time. And so what Netanyahu is primarily worried about is, you know, if they withdraw support for the coalition and he has to face an election, Netanyahu's party, the Likud, would get crushed, according to polls. He'd lose the PM job, and he would lose any future hope of using his power as prime minister. To get immunity for the many crimes he has committed and is facing prosecution for. I think you're absolutely right that Biden pressed Netanyahu to stop bombing Gaza back in 2021..

It was reported in books that he said, All right, you're out of runway. We got to stop this.

But just to acknowledge that there's a. There's a scenario where Biden trying to tell Netanyahu what to do and then Netanyahu telling him off ends up being good. Politics for Bibi. And maybe there's a scenario where Bibi goes around Biden to Congress and get some sort of veto proof bill passed of assistance. So, look, I think there's a lot more that Biden can and should be doing. But, you know, I think there are some limits to our leverage.

Uncomfortable question, I know for a lot of listeners, and number two, I would say just on a general point, not just about Israel. Tommy and you and I've discussed this before. Sometimes there's value just in the fight, right? We have a president right now whose poll numbers aren't so great, who is getting beaten up on all sides? By members of his own party, by members of the media, and by, of course, the Republican Party.

And sometimes there is value in the fight. Netanyahu is not a popular figure. If Biden picks a fight with him, and Netanyahu tries to go to Congress, tries to go to Speaker Johnson or even Chuck Schumer. I don't think that's bad politically for Biden. In an election year where actually cozying up to Netanyahu could cost him, states like Michigan could cost him. A lot of young voters, people of color, Arab American voters. So I think there's a moral reason and a strategic reason to put pressure on Israel to end this morally unsustainable and strategically disastrous war. But also there's domestic political reasons why picking a fight with Netanyahu is far from a bad thing to do.

Because, not because I think poorly of Joe Biden, because I think incredibly poorly of Bibi Netanyahu. He's a corrupt, racist, bad leader who, you know, a year ago was trying to shred the Israeli judicial system, right? You had literally millions of protesters on the street every single weekend protesting him.

Barack Obama was humiliated by Netanyahu, who turned up and undermined his Iran negotiations in Congress on American soil.

We're in the midst of one of the worst, you know? A former U.N. official told the BBC this week. Tommy that the kill rate in Gaza, by his calculation, the kill rate, the rate of killings is higher than in any episode of violence or conflict. Since Rwanda, right, that is where we are right now, where former U.N. officials are pointing out what the death toll looks like right now. 30,000 people, which is a conservative estimate, killed in just over four months. So in that moment, you know, put aside all the nonsense about whatever friendship you had, put aside whatever nonsense. Yes, he's a Zionism in his gut.

And we can have that debate later about Zionism. But just from a personal standpoint, as president of the United States, what is he doing here, what is he achieving here, what is he getting here? Even if I wasn't pro-Palestinian, forget your politics in the Middle East.

I just don't get it from a domestic political situation. What is going on? It's election year. Do we want this really happening in November? Does he think he can win with this happening in November?

I do think like the U.S. should be conditioning assistance to Israel at a bare minimum. So that, you know, the IDF has to adhere to international law and limit civilian casualties. Some people have gone further than that. Bernie Sanders has suggested that we should condition U.S. military assistance to say Israel must also make progress towards a Palestinian state. I think the U.S. needs to stop vetoing every call for a ceasefire at the U.N. It happened again this week.

I did see Mehdi that. Al Jazeera reported that the U.S. has drafted a U.N. resolution calling for a temporary ceasefire, the release of hostages. And it overtly states that we oppose a ground offensive in Rafa. So I think that's a good step and listen to folks listening who think this is bias against Israel. I just want to say the reason I support this set of policy, guidelines or proposals is because I think it will save innocent Palestinian lives in Gaza. But I also think a negotiated ceasefire is the only way to get the remaining hostages back alive. And I think that getting the two parties into a political process that will solve the underlying tensions that fuel this cycle of violence, year after year after year is the only way to get to a durable peace.

You cannot kill every member of Hamas, you cannot kill an idea the Israeli military are saying, you cannot kill.

Something like 99 of the hostages have been released in that way. How many of the Israelis saved, rescued through military action? Two, three, I think three, yeah. How many did they kill?

We're now hearing numbers that they may have killed up to 10, 15, 20 in the Israeli press of their own hostages through airstrikes. And we know about the three they shot dead who were carrying white flags. So it's been a disaster, even for Israeli innocence, this war. Let's be clear about that. Yeah, and listen, I can't even.

But I do think that getting a ceasefire, getting to a negotiated settlement that gets the hostages back is the best way to create a durable peace for everyone involved. Here, one quick thing before we go to break, we have some great stuff planned for members of the friends of the pod community here at Crooked. So, on Friday, February 23rd, the host of the excellent new Crooked series Dissident at the Doorstep will host an AMA to answer all of your questions about the series. If you haven't listened to Dissident at the Doorstep, you are missing out. It is on the pod Save the World feed.

You can listen to it right now. It's the incredible story of a blind Chinese human rights activist who escapes house arrest. Makes it to the U.S. Embassy in China and ultimately to the United States, after President Obama negotiated his release. And then, a few years later, winds up at the January 6th insurrection, chanting away Just an unbelievable story. If you're not a member of the Friends of the Pod community, you have time.

Go to Crooked.

Com Slash Friends to join and to learn more.

I do want to turn to the domestic politics you mentioned, Betty. One place, it's clear, is in Michigan. Michigan has a large Arab American and Muslim American population. The state's primary is on February 27th.

There's a bunch of Democrats in Michigan, including Rashida Tlaib and the mayor of Dearborn, who are encouraging Michiganders to vote uncommitted. So not vote for Biden, but to write an uncommitted. We talked with an activist organizer in former Cori Bush Stafford, named Abbas Alouia, about the uncommitted movement. He was also a part of the meeting that recently happened in Michigan with some senior members of President Biden's National Security team. Here's a clip. Part of what this movement is coming out of is people have been calling the representatives.

They've been calling the White House, they've been protesting in the streets. You know what if you won't hear us when we are calling our representatives or when we are protesting in the streets? Maybe you'll hear us when we show you that we've got some votes of people who you can count out. Biden's 2020 margin of victory in Michigan was 154,000 votes.

According to NPR, Michigan is home to about 200,000 registered voters who are Muslim, and 300,000 people who claim ancestry from the Middle East and North Africa. If enough of those voters just stay home in November, they don't have to vote for Trump, they could just stay home. It could have an enormous impact. Mehdi, What do you think of this uncommitted movement in Michigan?

And what are you hearing from Arab American and Muslim American friends about Gaza? And what it means for their vote in this upcoming election? And what it might take to get them back if they're leaving the Democratic Party because of the policy? Tommy, I'm so glad you guys have raised.

I think I came back from Thanksgiving and tweeted I met a bunch of Muslim family members and friends. Not a single one is voting for Biden, and these are all ex-Biden voters. People got very upset. I know a lot of people in Dearborn, including Abdullah Hammoud, the mayor of Dearborn, and not a single one is going to vote for Biden, they say right now.

Now, the uncommitted strategy that Abbas, who I also know, laid out there is exactly that. They're not saying we're never going to vote for Biden, they're saying we're trying to put pressure on Biden to come around with the political tool that we have. This is a democracy, and I think that is a legitimate strategy.

No one is saying, go vote Trump, no one is saying they're all the same. They're saying President Biden, can you hear us? and my worry is he's not hearing them. I mentioned to people at the White House a while ago. What are you doing about Georgia?

I spoke to a Democratic Party official just this week who said, Well, you know, we're trying our best. But we also believe we can still win Michigan without that vote. That's a risky strategy, given how close the votes have been in, not just Michigan, by the way. Tommy Big Muslim and Arab American populations in Georgia in the Atlanta area. Very, very narrow margin of victory there Wisconsin, less so in Pennsylvania. So it's a real issue. And the question then becomes, How do you engage the voters?

And my worry is a lot of white liberals who I interact with, a lot of elected Democrats just say, but what about Trump? What about the Muslim ban? Yeah, that doesn't work, right? And Abdullah Hamoud wrote a wonderful piece for The New York Times this week.

I urge everyone to read it. And he says, Look, when people come to me as the mayor of Dearborn and say I lost 80 members of my family. Which people have come and told him, right? There are people who have lost dozens and dozens of family members in Gaza. You can't say to them, yeah, but Trump would have got 100 dead. That just doesn't work.

You cannot insult them and say, Well, what about the Muslim ban? They don't care about the Muslim ban if they've lost 80 members of their family. So you need to meet people where they are, understand the pain and grief that they're going through. And one of the criticisms of Biden is he's this great empath, the comforter in chief. We haven't seen that much empathy for Arab American communities.

We didn't even get a mention of the Palestinian death toll when he did his 100 day statement about the war in Gaza. So we need to see a much more empathy, but also on a policy position, understand where these people are coming from and understand why they're doing what they're doing. Don't just dismiss them as, oh, this is 2016, lefties again, or this is people who, you know, Turkey's voting for Christmas. They don't know how bad it's going to be with Trump, they know.

But people are hurting right now, and that has to be the starting point. A lot of people in Michigan are hurting from direct connection to loved ones who they've lost. And therefore, the administration has to work out what are they going to offer. And if they're going to say nothing, then take your chances in November.

I'm super stressed about Michigan.

Any issue with empathy and try to listen to people. And the reason, you know, Mehdi, we mentioned at the top. President Biden sent John Finer, his deputy National Security advisor, Samantha Power, the head of USAID, who's a genocide scholar, to Michigan to meet with Abbas and other members of the community in Michigan. John Finer was very clear that they realized they have made mistakes when it comes to messaging, John said in this meeting. An audio recording of it leaked out to the New York Times and other places, John said. We have left a very damaging impression based on what has been a wholly inadequate public accounting for how much the president, the administration and the country values the lives of Palestinians.

He also said there was no excuse for the release of that White House statement. You just mentioned around the 100 day of the war mark that did not address or acknowledge the loss of Palestinian life. I've noticed in Biden's comments since that meeting that he has put much more emphasis on the empathy part of it. I do think that there's a lot of work to do still on the policy, like we talked about.

They could not do what they do without American weapons. Biden has gone around Congress, I think, twice now, to get those weapons sent faster. When Trump did it in Yemen, Democrats were up in arms. I'm glad to see some Democrats trying to be consistent and say, let's not do that with Israel. But look, yeah, empathy is at the center of this.

If you talk to a lot of Arab Americans and Palestinian Americans, they do feel dehumanized. They do feel like their lives don't count. They do feel like they're not getting the same attention or concern as American citizens or as American citizens of Arab and Palestinian descent. And that is a problem. And Joe Biden, as I say in my Guardian piece, this is a guy who lost two children.

This is a guy who lost his wife, this is a man who's always been famous, rightly. So for showing empathy, being able to help ordinary people with their grief. And yet we haven't seen that with the Palestinian-American community. I know some of the five Muslims who went to the White House a few months ago to talk to Biden about this. And they said he was very different than private.

He was very apologetic for denying the Palestinian death toll. Tommy, Remember, he did that at the beginning of Congress? He meant to say Hamas, and he said, I don't believe the Palestinians. It's an outrageous thing to say he's never publicly withdrawn that remark or apologized.

Great for John Finer to say it, but let's be honest, Tommy, nobody knows who John Finer is. Has to come from the top, Truman Buck, stops here, etc. It has to be Joe Biden making these amends and trying to reach out to American citizens who are, as I say, genuinely hurting. Because they are witnessing what they believe to be, and what I believe to be a genocide in the.

One very concerning finding is that among Black voters and voters between the age of 18 to 29, they are considerably more likely. To feel like the outcome of a Trump versus Biden election will have no difference. For them personally, they just are like, they're completely apathetic. And obviously, for political addicts like you and me, and listeners of this show, that makes you want to pull your hair out, it's maddening.

But I do think it speaks to a broader lack of faith in a political system that provides a headwind for Democrats. Because we're the party that believes in government and believes that government can do things to help people. And Republicans overtly say things like, No, I want to drown government in the bathtub, I want to make it that.

They love pessimism, they love all of that stuff, they love depressing turnout, as we know, and you're right, it's not just young voters, black voters.

The New York Times ran a piece recently from a bunch of Black pastors in Georgia who said the lack of a ceasefire is a real problem for us. With our congregations. It's a moral issue for us in Georgia, that wasn't Muslims in mosques, that was Christians in churches, so it is a problem across the board.

And intersectionality is a real thing, even if the right don't like that word. One member of Congress told me right at the beginning of this conflict that they had a meeting scheduled with a bunch of young climate change activists in their office. And when they rang them, when they called them to say, Is it still happening? They're like, we don't give an f about climate change right now, we only care about Gaza, right?

So a lot of these young activist groups, they are all interconnected. If you care about climate change, you will tend to care about Gaza, you tend to care about police violence. These issues are interconnected, and therefore you need a kind of offering across the board that engages with young voters.

And you've got to do the right thing. So my worry is all of these things meld together and just hurt Biden across the board and the Democrats need to realize this point. A lot of the people I hear complaining about Biden's Gaza policy, they're now saying stuff like, and he's really old and he falls over. Because, of course, once you go down the TikTok or Instagram or Twitter rabbit hole of being anti someone, the algorithm serves you up everything else.

So it becomes very easy to lose a voter on one issue and then they're anti you on everything.

And how do you avoid being intimidated while also trying to listen to feedback and genuinely be balanced in your coverage? It's such an important question and right now.

But I'll tell you what every newsroom has heard of these groups. Because you get badgered into, why is your headline this? and why is your reporter showing bias? And, as you say, why do they tweet this? In this recent case, it's Louisa Lovelock, who is a British journalist at The Washington Post.

It's a fantastic Middle East correspondence, covered, Syria covered, Iraq covered, Gaza covered, a bunch of things. It's so absurd the dossier they've produced against Otomi. One of the things they go after is she took part in student protests at university in England against tuition fees. And like, a, that's a bad thing. b That means she can't cover Israel's bombing of Gaza.

Like, it's so absurd, the stuff that they pull out with me, of course, I've had stuff going about 20, 30 years that they've thrown at me. And it's a real problem where people get intimidated into not saying, not speaking what they want to speak about. And you know, we live in a world where the right is obsessed about cancel culture and free speech. When, let's be very clear, the greatest victims of quote unquote cancel culture in this country have always been Palestinian activists. Both on campus, in the media, in politics.

I mean, let's just be clear, Tommy, we have a Congress filled with white supremacists. We have a guy, I think, Andy Ogles, from Tennessee this week, who was caught on tape saying, Kill them. All right, none of these guys get any attention. No votes of censure Who is the only member of Congress who's been censured since October, the 7th?

The one Palestinian woman. So let's just be very clear who the victims of quote, unquote, cancel culture and suppression and intimidation are. It tends to be people who speak out on behalf of Palestinians. And that's the case with reporters who aren't even taking positions, they're just reporting what they're seeing.

And what they're seeing, of course, is not favorable to the Israeli narrative, because what they're seeing is mass starvation. What they're seeing are mass killings. What they're seeing are kids being pulled out from the rubble, and of course, that doesn't help the Israeli narratives. You have firms like, What is it?

What's it called? SKDK? I don't know the name of the firm. Anita Dunn, top advisor to Biden, used to work at a bunch of Biden people, used to work there. Let me ask you this, Tommy, do you believe, as someone who's ex-administration, do you believe it would be helpful for our democracy?

We talked about the system and people being disillusioned with the system. If we could have clearer barriers between the private sector and the public sector, between people working in.

I mean, I left government and started a speech writing firm with Jon Favreau before we started selling underwear ads for a living. So I'm probably complicit here. I did read that.

And I was like, I think that's almost terminally dorky. But I don't really find a ton of bias in this dossier here. But I do think, look, this issue, in particular, is one where people think if they speak out, they'll get slapped down. And I think it leads to caution and inaction, and a lack of courage, both in media circles but also among government staffers. Because I know that I could never, ever be confirmed for some sort of State Department job ever again, based on what I've said about Netanyahu alone. And there's a lot of people that are just not going to make that decision. Tommy, Forget State Department.

Recently.

He asked, Like a poem about Zionism, two states. I can't remember what it was. It was something about Israel. And the judge was like, I'm a judge. In America, nobody cares about my views on that issue.

Why are you asking me that? That's the point we've reached now. Where you have those kind of theatrics in the Senate, you have Elise Stefanik in the House, accusing every college president of being an anti-semite. Meanwhile, she pushes great replacement theory. I mean, the use and abuse of anti-semitism to shut down critics of Israel is also part of the problem here. Which is why a lot of reporters rightly don't want to be called anti-semitic, don't want to be teamed bigots.

So that also leads to kind of chilling atmosphere around free speech on this issue. And, of course, we should speak out against anti-semitism wherever we see it. And there is a lot of it around, sadly, right now, including in the media. But that doesn't mean you can just not have reporters saying what they need to say about what's happening in the Middle East. That, for me, is a fundamental problem.

And it's a real free speech. We have Republicans trying to pass laws banning American businesses from being able to boycott Israel. You don't have to support a boycott of Israel, but the idea that an American business owner can't make that decision.

I think we all should be calling out and highlighting. I think the thing that people can't let happen is the conflation of anti-semitism with criticism of Israeli government policies. You are not anti-American. If you think that Trump's Muslim ban is bad, you are criticizing a platform or a policy put forward by a leader. Those are very different things.

And I think when defenders of Israel call criticism of Israel anti-semitic, they are actually putting Jews at risk because they are conflating the two. And they're making people feel like you can take out all your anger about the Israeli government and what it's doing in Gaza. On some guy who lives down the street from you, who wears a yarmulke, and that is very, very dangerous. Let's not forget also some of the most.

Mehdi complicating.

By the way, this is why being in the House of Representatives sucks. You don't get to vote on clean bills. You have to get these things kind of squished together for political value. What do you think? The right move is here? You're a principled person.

You want to support Ukraine, you're also concerned about what's happening in Gaza. What the hell do you do if you're a member of the House?

In this moment, we can't have $14 billion of extra aid. We already give every year $3 to $4 billion of military and economic aid to Israel. To a country that is accused, let's remind our listeners of a plausible genocide by the International Court of Justice. That is what is at stake right now, and I think for me, it's a no-brainer.

I understand the importance of funding aid to Ukraine. I'm not someone who is soft on Putin, but I think right now we need our best minds in government to find a way to fund Ukraine. Without funding. Netanyahu's war in Gaza, which, as I say, the top court in the world says, could be a genocide. I think history will judge us very harshly if we continue voting for aid, if our elected representatives continue voting for aid. To a government that is accused of war crimes, whose ministers are talking openly about ethnic cleansing, I think that's a real problem.

And if it was just the occupation, which is bad enough, like it was pre-October 7th, maybe we could have some debate about, well, the pros and cons of Ukraine aid versus Israel. I think in the middle of this right now, where we're not even ensuring a ceasefire or using any kind of leverage, I think it's a real problem. And I think, as I say, I think in years to come, this will be like the Iraq war. Where now everyone's like, of course, everyone wants to say they opposed Iraq. You'll never find anyone who says they defended Iraq apart from John Bolton, but everyone else is like, we never supported Iraq.

And I think that's what Gaza is going to look like in 5, 10, 15 years from now. So I appreciate what Bernie Sanders and Peter Welch and Jeff Merkley did. As difficult as it is. And I'm sure in our labyrinthine process that we have in Senate and House, we can find another way. We have to find another way to get the right aid to Ukraine. The reality is, the American public, if you poll them, how supportive are they of either?

That's the reality. American voters will look at this stuff and they are kind of, what about us, what about the money at home? And I'm not saying that's right or wrong, but I mean, that is the.

So that did make me think maybe they would be more open to aid than I.

And don't forget, that's u.

S Law says that's what the Leahy Law says, that you can't just give aid willy-nilly to foreign militaries who are accused of committing war crimes. Yeah, and sometimes people talk about.

Remember, they passed a resolution in the Senate on the War Powers Act. And that is the reality right now that if this was any other, ironically, we're not singling out Israel. If Israel was any other country and we were in a different place, we would say, Wow, what the hell are we doing here? Why are we supporting this?

And that's what we want. We just want some consistency on human.

When he died, Putin tried to poison Navalny several times before throwing him in jail for 30 years on trumped up charges. So we should all assume that this was just a state-sanctioned murder of Alexei Navalny. Now that everyone listening knows that context, I want you to hear a clip from President Trump at a Fox News town hall last night. President, the crowd's going crazy here. But during this campaign, a huge amount of your time has been spent in court, in the courtroom in New York, and so forth.

Now, in this New York civil fraud case, this judge, Arthur Engeron, ruled against you for almost half a billion dollars, plus the interest that runs every day. When I first read it, it was like $87,000 a day. How will you put up that kind of money because you have a bond to put up, even if you appeal?

He'll play any role in going. Also, this whole Navalny comparison is so absurd. Anytime something happens abroad, Newt Gingrich jumps up and says, This is what's happening to Trump. It's like, No, it's not. If only Merrick Garland worked for Vladimir Putin, if only he had an attorney general who refused to do what needed to be done in the timeframe that he had.

Trump is the luckiest man in the world. He incited an insurrection. Then the next guy came in and said, let's look forward, not back. The next guy appointed attorney general who said, Let's not go after Donald Trump too, obviously.

Now we're in an election year and none of the trials might be concluded or even start before people get to vote. This idea that he's like Navalny is absurd. He's actually the luckiest accused criminal I've ever come across. Teflon Trump continues to dodge prosecution.

Navalny was almost certainly killed, The Russian defense is that he died. What was it? Sudden death syndrome doesn't exist for adults.

As far as I'm aware, it's 47, so it's absurd, by the way. On a serious note, Tommy, there are all Republicans now who are claiming that Trump is going to get assassinated. The deep state wants to kill him.

You remember, and we can laugh, but these are the people who thought, including Trump, that Scalia had been assassinated. If you remember in 2016, when that seat, or 2015, whatever it was, when that seat became available, these people are obsessed with this stuff. This is not Russia. Obviously, we actually involved in any of the trials has run away from any involvement with any prosecutions of Trump. And again, to go back to the Russia issue, I was never a big kind of to quote, unquote Russia Gate as the right person.

I was never somebody who thought the biggest problem with Donald Trump's presidency was that he was an agent of Russia. But I always did wonder, how come the guy who slams everyone on earth calls everyone an insult and a nickname never says anything about Putin? How come he never, ever like, Find me one statement where he insults belittled?

He even mocked Kim Jong-un as little rocket man before he fell in love with him. Putin Nothing, nada, not from before presidency, not during presidency, not since, and even now, when Navalny refuses to say anything critical of Putin. So for me, that's always been.

And he said, he sat there and they said to him about. You know, you didn't bring up all the killings under Putin when you did your interview with him? And he said, Well, you know, every leader has to kill people. And it's like, that is now the mindset on the right, like this is not your Ronald Reagan's Republican party, this is the body that's just says....

And remember, Trump said that to Bill O'Reilly, like, you think we're not killers? And in one sense, as a lefty, I would say I'm glad people are bringing up the fact that we've killed a lot of innocent people. But the foreign dictators assassinate people. Because Merrick Garland's coming after our guy, I mean.

But he did have time to film some propaganda videos about the subway being nice.

Like, don't throw the guy softballs. In the middle of a war. You're known for doing really tough interviews. People often retweet the videos of them and wonder, why the hell did this person agree to go on Meti's show? What's your philosophy on interviewing bad actors?

We turn down interview requests from the West every day. Like even Putin's own spokesman disowned Tucker Carlson's nonsense. So, of course, people want to interview him, it's how you interview him. It's not in a kind of friendly, chatty, sycophantic way.

And we've seen Trump's, we've seen Tucker's interview with Trump was very sycophantic, and with Putin. And look, if I was interviewing Vladimir Putin, and by the way, Putin has now told other interviewers, I was very disappointed with this interview. Imagine Vladimir Putin mocking you and saying you were too soft on me, right? That's just, I mean, take that to your epitaph.

For me, what I find fascinating about Vladimir Putin is he's taken some interesting stances in the past. And like, if I sat down with Vladimir Putin, if he ever let me do an interview, which he probably wouldn't, you know, I would want to talk about what he's done to Ukraine in the context of years of pontificating about national sovereignty and borders, right? Putin was the guy in 2003 who stood up against George W. Bush and Tony Blair and said, You cannot invade Iraq. that's an illegal invasion.

It's going to be a disastrous occupation and you're violating national sovereignty. Hello, Ukraine, 2014 and 2022. I feel like you can have actually a quite interesting back and forth. Pushing him on the inconsistencies of his own foreign policy, and, of course, he's a gaslighter like Trump. You're not going to go too far with such people.

But I think exposing contradictions and inconsistencies is always an important thing for interviewers to do.

So Republicans went into this election season hoping to run hard on border security and the idea of the so-called Biden crime family. Lately, it seems like both of those issues are kind of blown up in their faces. So last week, the Justice Department indicted an FBI informant named Alexander Smirnov, who is a confidential source at the center of the Republican. Allegations that President Biden benefited from Hunter Biden's business dealings in Ukraine. This is the guy who allegedly said that burisma, this Ukrainian natural gas company, had added Hunter to its board to curry favor with Joe Biden. And that there had been some sort of bribe or a shakedown or something by the Bidens to get a prosecutor fired, turns out, Mehdi, it's all fake, and there's evidence that Smirnov might be a Russian intelligence asset.

In a new court filing on Tuesday, Justice Department prosecutors alleged that Smirnov had quote recent and extensive contact with Russian intelligence officials who were involved in passing him information about Hunter Biden. So today, President Biden's brother James is appearing before the House Oversight Committee. And Hunter Biden is set to testify as part of the impeachment inquiry next week. So Mehdi, the whole paragraph I just read you about this Smirnov guy and what a name. It's all giving me flashbacks to 2016, 2017, the Steele dossier, the Russian interference, you know, the story. What do you think Democrats do here? There seems like some credible evidence of Russian involvement. But I just, I don't want to sound like I'm wearing a Tinfoil hat again.

Saying this is ridiculous, this guy was not a credible informant or witness. And don't forget, the entire Republican impeachment strategy against Joe Biden depended on this guy. Like Ted Cruz, I believe I saw someone tweet that Ted Cruz did dozens of his podcast episodes. Just on this guy's allegations, James Comer called him a credible witness. Chuck Grassley, when he's not out looking for pigeons, was citing this guy, right?

They were all there, like bigging up. Smirnoff Remember? The FBI didn't want to give the form with this guy's evidence on it because they said we don't think he's valid. Republicans insisted give it to us, give it to us, and then built their entire impeachment case around this guy who the FBI said. Hey, this guy's not credible. He's now being charged. I mean, the indictment, by the way. If Pod Save America listeners have some time tonight, sit down with a copy of the indictment. Because I'll tell you what I've become a fan of reading DOJ indictments.

They are very well written, of course you are, whether they're written by David Weiss or whether they're written by Jack Smith. There's some good stuff in there. I mean, going back to the Mar-a-Lago bathroom photo. Like, I've become a fan of DOJ indictments, like, put that on my reading list.

This one has a whole section, Tommy, where they talk about Mr. Smirnoff, meaning when Russian official, one who Smirnoff describes as the son of some government minister who apparently is in charge of assassinations abroad. Come on, where do you get color and detail like that, even in the best of novels? So Smirnoff, the Republicans guy, is talking to a Russian official who's in charge of assassinations abroad. I guess they have a different team for assassinations at home.

But this is who he is. And the idea that the entire Biden impeachment campaign could have been a Russian OP is hilarious. But, yes, will be treated by a lot of MAGA folks as, Oh, that's just another conspiracy, that's Democrats blaming Russia. But what's interesting is, in the indictment, they make it very clear.

This isn't just about Russian officials, it's about demonstrable evidence of falsehoods. Like he said, Hunter Biden was in Ukraine when Hunter Biden never went to Ukraine. He made certain specific time and date allegations, which weren't true.

Of course, we've never found any evidence of $5 million going to Joe Biden. And I do want to add one thing, Tommy, I am no defender of Hunter Biden or James Biden. I do believe they did trade off their name, I do believe they did get jobs and contracts because they were related to Joe Biden.

That's a different argument. Were Biden family members behaving in an unseemly, morally corrupt, I don't know, financially corrupt way? Perhaps probably. That is not the same thing as saying the president of the United States took a bribe, which is a big allegation, which is an impeachable allegation.

There has been zero evidence of that from the very beginning. And the Republicans needed this dodgy dude called Smirnoff to try and make it. And look, they don't care. Fox are not even covering the stuff. Sean Hannity made it the centerpiece of his programming.

They'll never do a fact check, which is why I refuse to call them Fox News. It's not a news channel, it's a propaganda.

It gets good in the details. What are you doing tonight?

This is like the consolation prize, right? If the Biden impeachment didn't work out, who can we impeach next? who else? What's our list? Let's go down.

It's basically like the Republicans think that they're impeaching him because they don't agree with the Biden immigration policy, basically. The Mayorkas impeachment passed the House by one vote. It took them two tries, but it finally passed. The presumption was it was dead in the Senate.

We're now learning that a bunch of conservative senators like Rick Scott J.

D. Vance, Ted Cruz, et cetera. They want Mitch McConnell to force a full impeachment trial. They might have been meeting with the parliamentarian to figure out a way to do it. So there's sort of two schools of thought, maybe on how a Democrat should handle. This one is dismiss impeachment via procedural means. Just kind of like, get it off the table.

The other is call the Republicans bluff, have a trial, make the case about how absurd all of this is. Do you have a take on what is smarter?

He's very good on a lot of issues. He was coming out recently. And praising my Republican friends in the Senate, I'm always like, I never hear Republican senators talk about their Democratic friends. Funny that, but look, this is a dumb thing to do by the House.

Dumb is the word I think Kevin Cramer, a Republican senator, used recently, saying it's dumb. Why we can't entertain this? But yes, Cruz, Mike Lee, the usual suspects are pushing it. People like Ted Cruz and Mike Lee shouldn't even be in the Senate. They should have been expelled for their role in inciting an insurrection. The fact that people like Hawley and Cruz are even still senators, I know we've all moved on.

I'm still mad about the fact that there was never a full ethics committee investigation of Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz's role in trying to overturn American democracy. So the idea that we should take lectures from them about impeachment is absurd.

No, I would try and get rid of it. I do not believe in this Democratic Party argument that, hey, let's talk about immigration and talk about how we did this bipartisan bill. And they turned it down. And actually, we're playing 3D chess. No, sorry, you look at the polling.

Do you see the polls? After that bipartisan bill failed, they said they blame Biden more than Trump for that failure. People don't follow this stuff closely. When they think of immigration, they think Republicans tough, Democrats weak, Republicans win, Democrats lose.

The idea that you should want to be talking about the border going into the presidential election, and the idea that that helps anyone other than the Republicans.

There was some polling that came out right away that showed the majority of voters blame President Biden for what happened. Which, as you note, shows that they're just not paying attention and they just have negative feelings about Biden, so they're blaming him for anything. So I do think, you know, there will need to be some paid media efforts to get that message in front of voters so they are better educated on the issue. I do not think an impeachment hearing is going to do it. I also think the Democrats just need to highlight how extreme Trump would be on immigration in the second term.

That, for me, is very important. Do you see the post today? Deportations with the military?

This is not a sequel to a movie which is the same as the first movie, it is very different. What is coming down the line? It is full-blown fascism, and I'm not just saying this in a hyperbolic way as a critic.

This is the stuff they're saying, what Stephen Miller is saying, what Mike Davis is saying, what Donald Trump is saying, what Steve Bannon is saying. And I lay out what's coming up. Including massive detention camps to sweep up people well inside the interior of this country from day one. The use of the Insurrection Act to deploy the military. So a friend of mine said recently, Well, you know, we marched against Trump, we'll do it again, and I said, Yeah, this time you might get shot at.

And that's again not hyperbole. We know from Esper, his former defense secretary, that Trump said, Why can't we shoot them in the legs? The George Floyd protest? And he said, You can't do that, Mr. President.

Next time around, Defense Secretary Kash Patel will not say, you can't do that, Mr. President, he'll say, let's do it. So this is what's coming down the line, and actually, when you talk to people and explain what's coming actually, you do get some sense of.

There are persuadables, and I think the Democrats need to be doing that. Full bore right now. 24-7 of what is coming from a Trump second term. And not this whole my Republican friends in the Senate, it's the fascist enablers who are.

Story Yeah, so he did a Fox Town hall last night. It was with Laura Ingram, where he was his usual thoughtful coach himself, talking about his legal prowess. Many other things. I was loved by billionaires. Let's take a listen to a little supercut we did.

I watched his campaign. They come out with faucets where no water comes out. You know, if you go and buy a home and they know what I mean. The showers. You stand under a shower and there's no water coming, and you're saying you end up standing there five times longer. If you have mail-in voting, you automatically have fraud, okay?

It's insane. You would get up and walk away from the guy on the subway on Tucker Carlson's subway, who talked about shower pressure incessantly. By the way, in that clip, Tommy. He yet again admits to crimes because he says mail-in voting is fraud. That makes him a fraudster because he couldn't buy mail in Florida in 2020 in the GOP primary. So once again, he can't help himself but just admit to all sorts of wrongdoing, even on his own terms.

If it's fraud.

It's nice of Trump to make it easy for us. So yes, clearly they will keep doing this. Mehdi, thank you so much for doing the show today. It's so great to talk with you as always. And everyone should buy your book. Win every argument because then you can just beat everyone in your family over holidays or whatever debate you need to do.

Damn, right?

Reed Sherlin is our executive producer. The show is mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick. Jordan Cantor is our sound engineer, with audio support from Kyle Seglin and Charlotte Landis, writing support by Hallie Kiefer. Madeline Herringer is our head of programming.

Matt Degroat is our head of production, Andy Taft is our executive assistant, thanks to our digital team. Elijah Cohn, Haley Jones, Mia Kelman, David Toles, Kiril Pelaviv and Molly Lobel.

In a year as divisive as 2024, there's a lot to disagree about, but something we can all get behind is Jon Stewart's return to the daily show. The Late Night Legend takes to the host chair to help us sort through news, politics and entertainment with hilarious and satirical takes. You need to survive this election season. I watched the first one, it's great.

It's great to see Jon back there, you know, really? He just like, got right back into it. Yeah, like, we're going back in time, wiser, you know?

More, you know, more lines, hotter. His face is a map of the world, right, frankly.

The Daily Show Ears Edition podcast offers daily episodes fine-tuned for your ears. Along with the biggest headlines, exclusive extended interviews, and more. Listen to the Daily Show Ears Edition wherever you get your podcasts.