Rachel Maddow Talks Trump, Biden, and the Speaker-less House

Welcome to Pod Save America. I'm Jon Favreau, I'm Jon Lovett, I'm Tommy Vitor and joining us in studio as a special guest. Host. The host of the Rachel Maddow show and bestselling author whose new book is called Prequel An American Fight Against Fascism, Rachel Maddow.

Hi you guys, it's nice to see you.

Great to see you.

Last time I was here, I was on crutches, Jon remembered.

Yeah.

Yeah, that was my last book tour. I did the whole thing on crutches.

Right, it was October of 2019..

Before it all began.

Before it all began, before everything got interesting. Yeah, all right, we're going to talk about your book a bit later.

Why? What do you mean? We lost him tragically? No, we just we turned up, we thought I thought he'd been in my pocket.

Some guy his name is from Pennsylvania, Dan Muser. There you go, Tommy.

Muser Maser.

He went down, Yeah, anyway. None of these people are well known to anyone outside their districts who isn't a political junkie. Including the leading contender, majority whip Tom Emmer of Minnesota, whose face I couldn't pick out of a lineup if my life depended on it. All I know is that. There was rumored to be some bad blood between Donald Trump and Emmer after he voted to certify the 2020 election, though, here's what Trump said when he was asked about Emmer on Monday.

Do you endorse Tom Emmer for Speaker? He hasn't historically been your biggest fan, but he is the most likely candidate right now. Well, I think he's my biggest fan now. Because he called me yesterday and he told me, I'm so I don't know about that. I said, there's only one person that can do it all the way.

Funny thing about that is, Tom Emmer tweeted that clip of Trump's non endorsement of Tom Emmer and said, Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you for putting my name in your mouth, even that way.

In a way that was not too mean. So do you think there's any reason to believe that the internal dynamics that have Republicans without a speaker will change? With any of these candidates? And can you name more than two of the candidates?

More than two of the eight.

Of the eight.

Well, Tom Emmer, thank you.

There you go, Okay, go on.

Pete Sessions Pete Sessions is actually a recognizable figure from previous eras of Republican scandal. That's right.

You passed, you got it, you got two, I did.

It was more than two.

It was more than two.

It was the one that you and I both half named. I was going to say, the Pennsylvania Mazer, Muzer, or something like that. Is it Muzer or Mazer?

M-e-u-s-e-r. He was a Home Care Magazine's Home Caring Award recipient in 2006..

I can give you guys one more, and that's all I know is Byron Donalds.

Byron Donalds Oh yeah, yes, Byron Donalds occasionally appears on The Fox.

That's right, yes, that's how I know him, he's on the TV.

Anyway, John, another question.

Oh, sorry, my serious question. Any reason to believe that these internal dynamics changed this week or next week?

I mean, there's nothing unless there's some great reveal about an incredible set of leadership qualities among one of these candidates. Who we can't name, who we couldn't pick out of a lineup, who we probably couldn't name. Even if we had their names in front of us, you know, I'm not sure we would get their names pronounced correctly. I don't think it's a personality or a personnel problem that the Republicans have. I think the problem that they have is that there's no good job in government in a party that doesn't want government. So the highest ranking job you can get is still the worst job ever, because anybody with a job in government is obviously suspect.

I feel like they've been hoisted by their own anti-majoritarian pattern. Yeah, there it is. Because it's like, now that a couple people can stop someone from being speaker, then every incentive is for the most extreme members of the caucus to continue doing that. Because, as you pointed out, most of them don't care about all those things you mentioned.

I think, I mean, for me, I see this as sort of it's the Venn diagram of hilarious and scary. Which has been a lot of our lives in politics for these past seven or eight years. But it is funny that they can't, just among themselves, come up with somebody to be the next person they fire. Even if it's just for a month, like it is, it's ridiculous. And at the same time, I just keep thinking about all of the legislatures around the world. That used to be a real thing. That became rubber stamps, or that got watered down or became Potemkin legislatures when those governments changed from democratic forms of government into strongman forms of government.

Yeah, no, it doesn't seem like that. And I mean, the only thing I can think about is the government's going to shut down in a couple of weeks. And there's at least 12 members Republican House members who are sitting in districts that Joe Biden won. And if this chaos is paired with a government shutdown and they start hearing from people at home that there's a government shutdown. Because these clowns couldn't get their act together and elect a speaker.

They seem equally likely and equally unlikely. The Democrats have done a good job, and Hakeem Jeffries has done a good job at making sure that Democratic fingerprints are off this mess. The Republicans, I think, were counting on a government shutdown, and maybe they're counting on this legislative shutdown now. As somehow being blamed by the average man on the street on the Democrats. Because Joe Biden is president. And so, therefore, anytime something goes wrong in government and there is a president of the Democratic Party, you can blame that president. You can blame his party, even if you yourself caused the problem.

Tommy Joe Biden hasn't said too much about this mess. Understandably, he's got a few other things on his plate. Do you think it's worth him getting involved in a bigger way if this keeps going? Or is this a not my circus, not my monkey sort of thing?

Yeah, I mean, I think political polarization is such that anything he does or says will probably have the opposite impact within the Republican party. Or will not be perceived as helpful, or will be twisted to be unhelpful in some way. So, I mean, Trump keeps jumping in and endorsing people, that hasn't seemed to help. He's their dear leader.

I worry, though, that it is the MAGA wing of the Repub, I mean, is there another wing? It's the MAGA-ist members of the party who did this to the Congress. And that seems to me very worrying. I mean, it was, you know, when it was the duma withering in Moscow, right? It was United Russia that was helping that to its end.

Well, yeah, I don't think Biden would help anything by getting involved right now. I do think if we get close. Because I also think that for most of the country, this is like inside baseball and they don't know what's going on right now.

I think most of them hate Washington and they see dysfunction in Washington, and they don't like it. And they don't really know who to point their finger at. Unfortunately.

So I think as we head towards a government shutdown, then I think that Biden could go out there and say just what I was saying earlier. Which is like, these clowns can't get their act together and because of their own petty grievances, their own ambition. People are going to be put out of work, people aren't going to get government benefits that they. There's going to be women and children who don't have food assistance, there's going to be air travel delays. And it's all because these assholes couldn't figure out how to elect a speaker.

How does he make sure that that lesson is sort of heard in those terms, rather than what you're saying, Tommy? In terms of people hate Washington, they blame Washington, they don't differentiate between who it is. I mean, I was sort of arguing that the Democrats have done a pretty good job keeping Democratic fingerprints off this problem and making it a pure Republican problem. But it sounds like you think that people are going to blame everybody, even if only one side.

I just think there's a Pew survey that went around recently which showed like, the average voter just hates Washington and has no. The approval of the institution of Congress is like, 6, and it was really terrible.

Yeah, but also, I mean, we've seen, we've been through a round of this, and even if poll after poll shows that, we've made this argument well. And most people don't blame Joe Biden, and most people hold Republicans accountable. It still goes on the ledger of America, kind of a mess. Uncertain, the kind of sour mood that contributes to Joe Biden's low approval ratings, concerns about the economy, a world that is in crisis. That whether or not any, any individual issue, Joe Biden may have support or may have less weakness. On the whole, people having a sense that the country is moving in a wrong direction becomes blamed for him.

I think you could keep Democratic hands off the problem by having Joe Biden go out there and say, Look, this is a. We had a deal. I had a deal with Kevin McCarthy, a bipartisan spending deal that we both agreed to. We both compromised a little bit. He went back on his word, then they fired him, then there was complete chaos.

I mean, there's another Venn diagram, which is the Venn diagram that Republicans have to smash together to get to the 217 votes that they need. Right? That has to be an overlap of of of the people who want to govern or just want this problem off their plate. And the people who love this fight and love this master, I can smash those people together. And to get to 217, they couldn't do that with Jim Jordan. Even under incredible amounts of pressure, there were still, uh, you know, two dozen, roughly people that were willing, even in the face of all that pressure, to say no. I think that that's like a heartening sign, but it is a worry.

Yeah, and I think in general, I think in politics, trick plays do not work. Anything that, you know, like a discharge petition, never works, like the the and the, you know, the January Six shenanigans. Like, even if you subtract all the violence from that, like, I know, we'll pretend there's secret.

Yes, we, we didn't mint the coin, uh, but I will say someday we will. There are exceptions. Or the impeachment eagle, Uh, there isn't. Like Obamacare, you know? Ted Kennedy dies. We lose the supermajority in the Senate. And they did come up with a trick play, which is like, wait, if we pass the House bill. Even though it's got lots of typos which we'll be dealing with for a decade. We can do reconciliation and we can find a way through it once in a long while.

Well, with with legislation, it can never, every once in a while it can happen.

Speaking of President Biden, uh, his political challenges keep piling up. His polling isn't great, but even if you don't believe all the polls, he is an incumbent president who's asking an extremely grumpy electorate to stick with him. And now his plan to spend another a hundred billion dollars supporting foreign wars, one of which is currently dividing the Democratic Party. The Washington Post also reported that over the weekend, Biden quote continues to express frustration in private conversations about the state of his polling in battleground states. And no shit.

Oh my god.

Apparently all the reporting said like he hasn't made the final, final decision, but everything's prepared. They're going to New Hampshire, there's going to be, yeah, yeah.

They don't want to let it leak out in advance, cause they don't want to take away from the excitement, right?

Again, Dean Phillips, If you showed me a picture of Tom Emmer and Dean Phillips, I would not be able to tell you who's who. But they're both from Minnesota and maybe they'll kiss.

Wow.

Let's start with, let's start with, um, uh, Israel, Tommy. There've been quite a few stories about, uh. Arab American and Muslim American leaders saying they will not vote for Joe Biden in 2024 because of his support for Israel. How big of a problem do you think that is for the president? And is there anything he can do to fix it? Short of calling for a ceasefire or withholding aid to Israel, which he does not seem inclined to do at this point?

I mean, I I do think there's some real political risk here. I think that battleground states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, we won by some thin margins. I mean, Michigan was like 150,000 votes, but Pennsylvania was pretty close. If a bunch of, uh, Muslims or Arab American voters decide to stay home when in the past cycle they voted overwhelmingly for Joe Biden, I think that could really matter. I also think a lot of people are talking about this, like.

Was there any, um parallel situation like this in the Obama administration, in terms of Obama worrying about the same types of support in the same parts of the country?

I'm trying to think, I mean, there was less, you know? Maybe in 2014 there was a pretty intense, uh, war in Gaza, but I don't remember it being having the same political overtones.

Probably because it was after the the reelect, but yeah, the reelect was all. There wasn't a lot. Well, I guess there was, uh, Benghazi was right around the reelect, um, but mostly it was a campaign waged about the size and role of government and the economy. Right? And so you didn't have, except for those crucial last couple of months, uh, after Benghazi. Right before the election, you didn't really have an election that was fought on foreign policy issues.

I was thinking about President Obama's statement that he put out on Israel and Gaza today. And the measured, the measured tone, the length of it, the measured tone, the sequencing of it and everything. Obviously, it all very, very carefully calibrated to convey exactly what he wanted to convey. And I was just wondering if that if there was anything to read there. That is either an attempt to nudge President Biden one direction or the other, or even just to nudge his messaging around this issue. In a way that's more seen as more responsive to more communities.

I mean, I, you know, I think he wanted to weigh in, I think he wrote this himself from everything we understand. I think he, like, cares deeply about this, sort of wants to guide the conversation a little bit. He probably watches the discourse online being particularly toxic, and it bothers him and he's trying to bring people together.

I took it, I read it, and I thought it was very thoughtful. And what I took it to be was someone who views himself as like a person who understands how to narrate some of the most difficult issues that we face as a country. And trying to just lay out an articulation of what a democratic position that is both supportive of Israel and concerned about the humanitarian crisis in Gaza would sound like. As a reflection of what the Biden administration policy is right like, kind of an articulation of what a democratic vision for a pro-Israel but humanitarian American foreign policy would look like.

Yeah, there's also sort of two strains of his thinking that I noticed in that statement. One which is like, he's never been a big fan of Bibi. And been or his policies, right? And also there was shades of his 2002 speech against the Iraq war and saying, You know, obviously in that speech he talked about going after terrorists and going after Al-Qaeda. But and he's not opposed to all wars, but he's opposed to dumb wars. And you really got to think about before you go in, you send troops into battle and the consequences.

One thing that I was just thinking, reading that today, is going back to the decision-making in the Obama administration about Syria. And that was one of these things where I just felt like the punditry in the moment was so wrong, like the year of punditry we had around. Decision-making on Syria was just inane. It was just bad, bad. Takes left, right and center.

And I think, interestingly, when you look at Afghanistan and the Iraq wars, obviously the original sin of the Iraq war was invading in the first place. Right? Never should have happened. But in terms of how both ended, both required some sort of political resolution to end them correctly or with finality. In Afghanistan, obviously, that didn't work out. Similar challenges in Iraq led to an unstable government and a security situation that quickly deteriorated when our U.S. troops left.

Wars are easy to start and hard to end, and usually they don't end with military might alone.

And for the U.S. to have generals, per Today's news, advising the IDF on what not to do and how not to do it. Right now, this is a really precarious time in terms of what's I mean this time next week, who knows where we're going to be in this war?

What did you guys think of the post story, which was mainly about the Biden campaign potentially expanding its $25 million advertising campaign? Anyone have any thoughts on it?

So I could argue it both ways. Anyone want to pick a side, good idea, bad idea.

What's the bad idea argument?

Bad idea would be like spending $25 million a year before anyone votes is burning cash. No one's paying attention. Similar efforts that were run by this super PAC in the story Future Forward haven't paid any dividends. Ultimately, the winning message is probably going to be some sort of contrast with Trump. So don't spend your hard dollars the most challenging to raise money that gets you the best rates on advertisements down the stretch today.

Yeah, I guess they started running that sort of economics ad and we talked about at the time, wondering, So what is the value of doing that right now? That's not the kind of. Is there something that they're seeing in focus groups or in polling that basically says, long before we get to the fall, when there's a real contrast. There's a lot of work we have to do to kind of strengthen the general sense of what Joe Biden has done in the economy.

I think part of what they're doing is testing. Not just different ads and different messages, but different ways of breaking through to precisely the people that you're talking about right now. So I think the benefit to it, the other side, Well, I guess you had the benefit to it. Oh no, you had. Why? It was a bad idea.

I had a bad idea, but I don't really believe that. I mean, I think that it sounds like they're just. It's a relatively small ad buy early on to sharpen your message for your much bigger ad buy down the road.

Yeah, and they're collecting all kinds of data that I don't think was even available to us in 2012 or even in 2016. To the Clinton campaign. About exactly how different demographic groups, different audiences, are responding to different kinds of ads. So that I think it's like more of a testing phase. I think the bigger debate here that you see in that story is, how do you convince people? Or should the purpose of the ads be to convince people that actually Joe Biden has accomplished a lot? That the economy is better than they think? Or is that just telling people what they don't actually feel?

I mean, it sort of feels like the answer is yes, like they need to deal with sharpening their message. It is going to come down to contrast with the Republican nominee. And they need to change the prevailing perception of Joe Biden. And I don't think that the prevailing perception of Joe Biden is impenetrable. By advertising. Just because, I mean, what spaces are people going to to get their information now?

I feel like I believe two opposite things, one is that-.

It's a sign of intelligence. Yeah, sure.

Thank you for saying that. But I believe it is always a mistake if you're trying to convince people that their lived experience is some way wrong. And we should just take at face value all of this polling that says people don't believe in the economy right now. They have a lot of frustrations, they're very worried, they're very anxious.

I think that in part, talking about jobs, just making it like, what do people mean when they mean the economy? They mean lots of different things. And you can personalize it, or you can think in sort of fake macro terms. You can talk about it in terms of what your cousin's personal circumstances are, or whatever. But being able to talk about the one metric of jobs seems to me to be something where they can create a narrative. That ought to stick because it's so overwhelming in terms of the jobs numbers, and the contrast is there, and the raw value, absolute numbers are there.

I also think you've got to show that you are fighting to improve people's lives and that you have a plan to do that. And we did that in 2011, Obama gave that job speech before Congress, and obviously unemployment was the big problem there, now it's inflation, unemployment's not an issue.

What you were describing about him, saying, It's not that we can't get things done. Look at all these bipartisan things I've gotten done. It's just this MAGA wing of the Republican Party that they're the ones who have now shut down the legislature. And then all these other. I just feel like it's almost inarguably the correct message, and it is inarguably his constant message. It really is all he does.

And it's just hard, because the more he has all of these challenges that he hadn't expected, all these foreign policy challenges and everything else. He doesn't get to do that message or deliver that message as much. When you have to be president and you have to go out to the podium and to the Rose Garden and talk, you can't be as political. So I think some of this is Joe Biden gets back on the campaign trail, the ad campaign cranks up, more people are paying attention to Biden versus Trump. Then he has the opportunity to deliver that message like he has been for the last four years. But right now, I think not enough people are hearing it, and he doesn't get to say it as often.

I'm wondering also, and this is petty, so you will forgive me in advance. But I have always felt like there is a little bit of a boy version of a beauty contest. That happens in presidential general elections, which is the person who seems physically stronger tends to win, which is gross, but it's often the case. And so I felt like that's why the define Joe Biden as old and doddering. And all these things has been such a focus on. The right is that they know, like with Lizard brain, that that's really the most important thing they can do. But we have been in this circumstance for the last, I mean, you could say for the last eight years or the last seven years, but really, for the last few months. In which Trump physically seems like he's falling apart, and in which he makes a lot of false statement, not just false statements. But like, he gets things wrong and he slurs his words, and he doesn't seem well, and he seems unhealthy.

Obama was president three times last week, I think.

And Jeb Bush was president, and Victor Orban is the head of Turkey and all this stuff and just not being able to pronounce things and everything. None of that is very important unless we're going to define the contest between these two men as an arm wrestling contest, as some sort of test of stamina or physical strength. Which I feel like the right has really been staking out as their preferred ground. And so I don't know what happens there, with Trump himself starting to....

Well, I think the left's doing a good job clipping those and sharing them, like, way better than we used to.

Yeah, but I think the message behind when we share those has to be. This is a clown and an unserious person versus Joe Biden, who is a serious person who's trying very hard. I think we win that fight. If it's you say Joe Biden's old, but Donald Trump's also old, or you say Joe Biden's flubbing words, but Donald Trump's also flubbing words. Because then it is that contest of who can seem less old. Anyway, let's talk about Donald Trump, he's not exactly in the best political position either.

Are you concerned that you won't be covered by a pretty fine? No, not at all. We did nothing wrong.

This is all by yourself.

All of these indictments that you see, I was never indicted, practically never heard the word, it wasn't a word that registered.

There was no such thing as indictments before this.

And by the way, I wasn't indicted, prove I was. It's fake news, hoaxy, hoaxy.

That's all Biden wasn't. I'm not indicted, he was indicted.

No puppet, no puppet.

Yeah, that's where, that's where we're at right now, all right. So I've seen some people say that Powell and Cheesebrow's pleas are very bad for Trump. I've heard others say we don't yet know if their testimony will be all that damning.

You know, it remains to be seen in terms of what kind of witnesses they're going to be, because it's not only what you know and what prosecutors know, you know. And they can compel you to testify to, because you've done it, you've agreed to testify in exchange for lenience for yourself. It's not just that, it's also kind of how the trial's going, in terms of how a witness lands. I actually think that the most important thing about Powell and Cheesebrow pleading is that it means there's not going to be a trial in Fulton County in October.

It was so bad.

So I don't want 19 defendants in the same room. But the fact that Fannie Willis wanted it and has argued for it tells you something about her case. And she did not want Cheesebrow and Powell to go first, because that would mean previewing her case. For the rest of the defendants and them both. Pleading out means that there's not going to be some dry run where the defense counsels for all these defendants get to see what it is she's got.

I also think that I saw someone say that for her to offer a deal to both of them, that doesn't involve any jail time. You would think that they have some kind of valuable testimony, maybe not about Trump, but at least about.

But again, what does the jury think of them as witnesses? Yeah, that's true. What does the jury think of the seriousness of that part of the allegation? I just feel like it, just I don't think there's anything that we can say.

Either bad or neutral, probably. There was also a New York Times story and a 60 Minutes Australia piece about the Australian billionaire Mar-a-Lago member who Trump allegedly spilled secrets to about America's nuclear submarines. Apparently, they got their hands on some new recordings of Anthony Pratt talking about his conversations with Trump. Let's listen.

Yeah, and Trump said, you know, that Ukraine phone call, that was nothing compared to what?

I usually do.

He knows exactly what to say and what not to say so that he avoids jail. But gets so close to it that it looks to everyone like he's breaking the law. All of these guys are like the mafia Trump Rupert Rudy, you want to be a customer, not a competitor. Rudy is someone that I hope will be useful one day.

Pool in a bikini, so all the other guys could get a look at what they were missing.

Then Melania said back to him, I'll do that when you walk around with me in your bikini.

I like the music there.

Why does he think Rudy Giuliani is cool? That was the most troubling thing that guy has said.

I don't know if a Mar-a-Lago member is the best judge of class, taste, character.

The mafia thing that he said, he says, the thing there, like the mafia, you want to be a customer, not a competitor. Is that like a mob movie thing? That I don't know.

I've never heard that. I thought that was a great line right there, but I was like, I don't know.

Is this a mantra that people who are operating adjacent to the mafia tell themselves every morning? Customer not competitor, customer not competitor. I've never heard that before.

Maybe if they subtext it, they'll kill you, I guess.

Yes, pretty nice kangaroo. It'd be a shame if something were to happen to it.

Jesus Christ. The headline news out of this report was that Trump gave this guy, accidentally or wittingly, I guess, a bunch of nuclear sub secrets about the number of warheads, et cetera. It is interesting, though, that this comes out in the middle of this ongoing impeachment effort that's trying to tell a story about the Biden crime family. And you have this Australian billionaire being like, Yeah, I bought into Mar-a-Lago. I paid Rudy a million dollars to come to my birthday party.

What he got for it was, well, let me tell you about how many nuclear submarines we have, and let me tell you about that Ukraine call. Come on, I did worse than that. It's not even like it's an exchange for you, pay this money and I'll give you these secrets.

Well, Trump also did events with him, toured his factory, would praise him at events and stuff, so it was just sort of like a back padding competition.

Yeah.

It's really small.

Yeah, I mean, it's just like bored, rich people. And one of them was president with access to the nuclear program.

It's also, it's also, it's also how small Trump is. I mean, like, he walks in, he treats being the president like he won a silver at Nagano. And he walks into the bar and he goes to this. Oh, this whole thing. It was cold and windy.

The submarine thing, which I didn't totally grok at first, so there's obviously we don't talk about submarines, right? So they're nuclear powered, nuclear armed submarines, talking about their stealth capabilities, talking about their weapons. But then once he told the cardboard magnate, billionaire guy, that guy told 45 other people.

Including journalists.

Including a half dozen journalists and multiple former heads of state and other foreign government officials. So what I mean? So what happens to the classified documents case? I mean, this, this stuff isn't implicated directly in the classified documents case. He is listed as a potential witness in that case. But the the promulgation of that kind of information to all those people like, Wow, what do we do about that?

Well, it makes you think that the evidence in the case is has got to be really strong if this stuff wasn't implicated.

Well, and also and also just that, hey, no matter what we confiscate, no matter what we do. The information inside of Donald Trump's head, which he is not protecting, is at risk of being released if we don't do something to punish him.

It's all for sale.

And the only way to actually make sure that he hasn't shared this information is by sending him to jail, right? The only way to, the only way to, the only way to.

Or just make sure he doesn't get to be president again.

Well, that, that's sure, for sure, yeah, but that we can't do that in the courtroom.

Because if we don't, we don't stop that. No jail.

There's a Men in Black in one of those.

Yeah, and he'll have all the secrets, he'll be able to do whatever he wants. He's got nothing to lose, nothing to lose in the second term.

I don't know, I mean, I don't think there is a solution to it, right? I mean, if he goes to jail, he's not going to go to jail forever. He'll then get out so he can make phone calls from jail.

What if someone did that? Fucked up, accidentally left a gold bar in Bob Menendez's car?

Good point.

We saw that, we saw your segment on on on Menendez and your show tonight. What did you think? And we were all yelling at the TV. We were like, Yeah, what's wrong with you, Democrats?

They took him when you took him out of the chairmanship of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, why'd you do that? Because of his federal felony indictments.

Right?

Okay, and so then when the superseding indictment came out and it turned out he was accused of by the U.S Justice Department as being a foreign agent. Did it occur to you at that point that maybe it was time for another step? How is it that he is still on the committee?

I think it's wild.

And it was just like an arrangement of convenience that he didn't receive the last classified briefing on what's going on with the war. It wasn't some sort of formal thing where they were like, No, Bob Menendez, no more classified briefings to you. It was just like, Oh, he didn't, yeah, he didn't do that one. They just sidestepped that as an issue.

Where the country that was paying him off, and as far as I could tell, running him as a spy is directly implicated in what's happening. Currently, the Egyptians are one of the other borders of Gaza. I was like, I'll skip this briefing.

This is a problem. A lot of problems are hard, right? What do you do with the classified information in Donald Trump's head? Like, I really don't, I don't know that. There's an answer to that.

Right, that's why I don't understand, I don't quite understand. We were talking about why the Democrats wouldn't do it, like, are they worried that Bob Menendez will, like, change parties and start caucusing with the Republicans?

But if he's holding national security hostage for that kind of a threat, we ought to know about that. They can't just handle that by, like, backfiring.

But that's the fucking move, you go full Trump, Trump pardons you, you go full Trump. What else are you supposed to do?

You go full, Trump.

You do Blagojevich.

Blagojevich looked pretty smart when he was walking out of that jail pretty early.

Smart was the word.

Yeah, that day he was a smart guy.

Well, let's not get Bob Menendez any ideas here.

Hey, nobody.

I don't think he's a listener.

But also Democrats in the Senate leak to us like, explain yourselves, leak to Rachel, leak to me, call me.

I asked Federman this because he's been really forward-leaning on this. And I was like, what's with all your colleagues? Like, I don't speak for them, I can't speak for them.

But who does? I mean? This is just unconscionable. Like it's one, yes, you can talk about the Republicans and everything's wrong with them, that's fine.

Okay, before we get to break, just two quick housekeeping notes. Pod Save America will be live in Louisville, Kentucky. In Cleveland, Ohio, on October 28th and 29th. We will be joined by journalist Perry Bacon, Kentucky Congressman Morgan McGarvey, co-host Alyssa Mastromonaco, abortion rights advocate Kelly Copeland, congresswoman Amelia Sykes and more. Head to Cricket.com Slash Events to get your tickets now and see where else we're headed this year.

Yes, thank you. First of all, thanks for asking me about it.

Franking privilege.

The franking privilege I'm trying to make the franking privilege hot. So it's always been seen as a kind of obscure chapter in American history. I think for obvious reasons, because we had World War II and we won, and that's a very comfortable tale to tell. It's more uncomfortable to think about us Americans having been on that side. But it was more well-connected and more radical and more successful than I think previously understood.

You draw a lot of parallels, obviously in the book, there are sort of unsaid parallels between then and now. I wonder, like, what is different about the threat that we face today, what feels different? Not just in, like the...?

I think that there's basically like four things that you look for for a democracy that's at risk of becoming an authoritarian state. And lots of experts smarter than me have different lists, for me it's four. One is that you see not just targeting of minorities, but scapegoating of minorities. So you get baroque, evil conspiracy theories about how they're secretly to blame for all of our problems.

Just monitor voting.

Just monitor voting, monitor the vote count and monitor voting. That stuff is like, they just they didn't get far enough with it. In the 30s and 40s, they were trying to, but they didn't get that. And they're much further along with that messaging.

When you think about that scenario, how it played out in the past, and you think about today. With, you know, Elon Musk saying, Don't listen to these lying journalists, listen to these blue checks. That gave me money. You think about the withering of local news, gerrymandering of districts that would make it incredibly hard to vote out. Some of the individuals you're talking about, do you worry more? That, you know, repeating that kind of, you know, systems and good guys and women winning wouldn't maybe not happen.

Well, yeah, yeah, that's what, that's the part of it that I'm so worried about. I mean, to the extent that you've got people who are part of an anti-democratic project who are telling you don't believe election results. Don't think that the vote is the way we're going to fix these problems, don't think that democracy is the way our country should run.

Are there strengths that we have, or lessons for having gone through this in the 30s that we now draw on? That put us at an advantage? As opposed to? I mean, what you just described is, what's the difference between now and the 1930s? Oh, here are four ways in which things are a little bit worse.

Very good question, and nobody asks me that question in that way. I'm talking about this. I'm really glad you still got it, yes.

Go on, we didn't get a fucking very good.

I'm sorry there was a good question that was asked.

Sorry, somebody asked a question.

I would say I would. I would say two things. One is the Justice Department knows not to put 29 people on trial in the same courtroom. Like, that's good. There's two big sedition trials that I write about in the book, one in 1940..

Do you think that the pro-democracy forces in this country are doing a good enough job making the case about why democracy is a better system for most people in this country? Our audience, your audience, people who pay close attention to politics, we get all the arguments about democracy, we're passionate about it. For most people in the country who don't pay close attention to politics, who barely consume the news, who are worried about more things close to home, I wonder if we're making a good enough argument.

It's hard because you don't want to scaremonger. The thing that I try to convey is we'll really miss this when it's gone.

Oh, no, that's when you say, we're going to get dumped.

Most democracies don't last, and most countries that have lost democracy never get it back. And we are a standout example of a country that has held on to a robust democracy for a long time. But there's no reason to think that it is inevitable that we will. And to create that sense of, I think honest, precarity around us, being a democratic system. Just listen to what Trump says about voting, listen to what Trump says about elections.

And I think that the next step is to draw a line from that sort of system of government to the consequences it has for people in those countries and other countries. Because also, look what Vladimir Putin's doing with his country right now. Look at how many people he's sending to their deaths and how many people he's responsible for slaughtering. Because that's life in an authoritarian government, and, by the way, life in a democracy can be wonderful.

I mean, what does it mean to be in political opposition in the United States? Frustration and agonized podcast conversations, and occasionally having bad things happen in the legislature. In which you are torn between whether to make fun or be seriously concerned about the other people who can't get it together. I mean, that's what political opposition means in this country, but if you are Alexei Navalny in Russia, your lawyers just got arrested.

Well, Rachel, before we let you go, I'm going to open my laptop. That's how, you know, we're getting serious.

I'm getting fired.

Rachel in your new book prequel?

There we go.

Thank you very much.

You track the fight of those inside and outside the government. To repel a takeover by right-wing extremists who are enamored of fascism, anti-semitic conspiracy theories and an all-out assault on the left, I don't think it would have come as a surprise to you that there are parallels to what we see playing out in the far right today. Not that you draw an equivalence, but nevertheless. So, we're going to read an actual quote, and the question is, is this a quote recounted in your book, or is it from the unwritten book called a present?

You are correct.

Question one Here is the quote We all know for whom we're voting if we vote for blank for the Communists, the socialists, for the Mexican lovers. Was this about President Franklin Delano Roosevelt or President Joseph Robinette Biden?

I know that it was about Roosevelt, was it also said about Biden?

It has been, but this was about Roosevelt, correct?

The whom gave it away?

The whom no one's used, whom no one's used, whom. This was father Charles Coughlin and I know. He also included Russian lovers in his list, which had given it away.

It was about Jews and Jews in the 1930s.

And do you know who it was? Do you remember who it was? Is it, Pelly? This was Pelly? yeah.

Scott Pelly did that.

It was Scott Pelly. Wow, which Pelly was it? It was Scott Pelly, you know? In Australia, the 60 minutes clock goes the other way.

Yes.

Yes, it was, it was Trump in June of this year.

I was going to say it sounded like a Trump quote, yeah.

Next quote I have an idea. This is still a Christian country, but there's an objection to use the word Christian. They want to take it out of my mouth, the word Christ and Christian, and they can't do it. Is that about a manufactured war on Christians or a manufactured war on Christmas?

Yes, the answer is yes, but is that Smith or is that?

It's Mosley.

Oh, that's General George van Horn Mosley. He's one of my favorite bad guys in the book.

Why?

A lot of the different fascist groups wanted George van Horn Mosley to be the Fuhrer. He had been deputy chief of staff of the U.S. Army. He thought that and campaigned on the idea that all Jews in America should be forcibly sterilized. He was that guy.

What a story.

What a brain, anyway.

Get Trump that choice?

I was going to give him, yeah, pay him a little more.

Wasn't there some offer?

Yeah.

Five billion dollars or something.

Steal it twice the price. Last one, I would build a wall about the United States, so high and so secure. I say we should stop and stop now. The refugees who are seeping into this country. By the thousands to take the jobs, which rightly belong to the native and natural born citizens of the United States, here's a hint.

Senator Robert Rice Reynolds of North Carolina.

That is correct, yes. In 1941..

Yeah, he was a monster, yeah, but yeah, he wanted. His big idea was to build a wall to keep out Jewish refugees because they were going to take all our jobs and corrupt our Christianity.

Yeah.

So we've been up against worse, right? I mean, having an ultra-right movement ascendant in this country that is very anti-semitic, that is anti-democratic at its core. That is in love with foreign dictators. That is connected to very popular people, including the most powerful industrialist in the country, Henry Ford, and father Coughlin, who was the most powerful media figure? Maybe in American history? People like Charles Lindbergh, who was a consensus national hero. I mean, all these people are pulling in that direction while Hitler is steamrolling Europe.

Well, that is a very hopeful note to end on. Yes, thank you so much Rachel for joining the pod again. The book is prequel An American Fight against Fascism.

Great cover art.

It's great cover art and also go listen to Ultra also, it's just a fantastic podcast. Thanks for stopping by next time. Let's not make it four years until you come by again.

Love you guys, thank you very much. thank you, thank you.

Pod Save America is a crooked media production. Our producers are Olivia Martinez and David Toledo. Our associate producer is Farah Safari, writing support from Hallie Kiefer. Reed Cherlin is our executive producer.

Thanks for watching.