Speaker 1: Hi, I'm Molly John Fast and this is Fast Politics,
Speaker 1: where we discussed the top political headlines with some of
Speaker 1: today's best minds, and Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg says attempts
Speaker 1: to intimidate his office won't be tolerated. After Trump's calls
Speaker 1: for protests, we have an absolutely riven in show today.
Speaker 1: NBC's John Allen stops by to talk about the clown
Speaker 1: car of the GOP presidential primary. Then Pro Publica's Andy
Speaker 1: Kroll will detail the vast right wing conspiracy Leonard Leo overseas.
Speaker 1: But first we have the author of Too Much and
Speaker 1: Never Enough, The Mary Trump Shows. Mary Trump, Welcome to
Speaker 1: Fast Politics. Mary Trump, Hey, Molly, it's really good to
Speaker 1: be back. I wish it were under different circumstances as
Speaker 1: the saying, I have to tell you, I was like
Speaker 1: the only good thing when I saw the Trump tweet
Speaker 1: about how I was going to be arrested by the way,
Speaker 1: I mean, if we're going to get technical here, it's
Speaker 1: a misdemeanor. I don't even think they could. I mean,
Speaker 1: I don't know the nuances of this, but my assumption
Speaker 1: is the chances of going to jail and misdemeanor are zero.
Speaker 1: I think you're correct. I am no lawyer here, but
Speaker 1: when I saw that, I was like, I thought, Oh,
Speaker 1: we have to fucking deal with this guy again. And
Speaker 1: then I thought, oh, but we can talk to Mary
Speaker 1: so so we can deal with it together. It's like,
Speaker 1: I was like, there is one good family member. I mean,
Speaker 1: this is like, probably the only person less surprised by
Speaker 1: that tweet than him or you know, Milannia or Vanna
Speaker 1: wherever she is, was you, Yeah, I might have been
Speaker 1: less surprised, quite honestly. And I mean you saw it
Speaker 1: and you were like, exactly right. Yeah, there's literally nothing
Speaker 1: the bad could do anymore that should surprise and honestly
Speaker 1: even shocked. There was this period of time we're gonna
Speaker 1: have to start naming them like the place to See era.
Speaker 1: But there was this particular era in the life of
Speaker 1: Donald Trump where the reactions were always I'm not surprised,
Speaker 1: but shocked. We have no right to be shocked anymore.
Speaker 1: The only thing that shocking us right now is how
Speaker 1: long this is fucking taking. I really want to talk
Speaker 1: about that for a minute, because that is the thing
Speaker 1: that it has struck me the most over the last
Speaker 1: couple of months is this ability on the part of
Speaker 1: both the mainstream media and the conservative media, and also
Speaker 1: all of us to be surprised, you know, like, for example,
Speaker 1: Trump was asked a question, if you're indicted, will you
Speaker 1: run and he said yes, because of course, and people
Speaker 1: were shocked. He'll run, He'll raise money, and he'll win, right,
Speaker 1: I know that's the worst. No, He's definitely gonna win.
Speaker 1: The thing that was so shocking to me was I thought, well,
Speaker 1: you know, normal world stuff will make you think, well,
Speaker 1: if enough indictments come, perhaps Republicans will say, like, this
Speaker 1: is the moment. And I don't think there's any evidence
Speaker 1: to support that. There's zero evidence to support that in fact,
Speaker 1: and I think one of the reasons you see people
Speaker 1: like Descent is sitting on the sidelines is because they're
Speaker 1: waiting to see what the reaction is to the indictments.
Speaker 1: And I can tell them it will fire up the
Speaker 1: base even more and it will get other people to
Speaker 1: change their minds and decide to support him, because he's
Speaker 1: going to betray himself at such an aggrieved victim, and
Speaker 1: he's going to call on all of them to right
Speaker 1: the wrongs not just against him, but against them. It's
Speaker 1: going to do the same thing that he did in
Speaker 1: twenty sixteen, but on steroids. So the moment that I
Speaker 1: think was the moment where we saw eight thirty am
Speaker 1: Yesterday's on the eighteenth, sort of two hours after Trump
Speaker 1: had truced about how he was going to jail for
Speaker 1: because of political reasons, because of a which had Kevin McCarthy,
Speaker 1: the man who was made speaker basically by a combination
Speaker 1: of Chuckle Carlson and Donald Trump, said here we go again,
Speaker 1: an outrageous abuse of power by a radical da who
Speaker 1: lets violent criminals walk as he pursues political vengeance against
Speaker 1: President Trump. I mean, I feel like that was the moment.
Speaker 1: It was like the same as going tomorrow Longo to
Speaker 1: take pictures with Trump after January six Yeah, that's absolutely right.
Speaker 1: He has shown us with that statement that he's all in.
Speaker 1: He's also shown us, not that we needed more evidence
Speaker 1: of it than he's a complete idiot, because I'm guessing
Speaker 1: he's seen absolutely none of the Graduary evidence. Yeah, they
Speaker 1: are preempting any reasonable analysis of what has gone into this.
Speaker 1: We had to say potential indictment because it doesn't happen yet,
Speaker 1: right exactly, But it is amazing to me, because like,
Speaker 1: the thing is, it just seems to me so clear, right.
Speaker 1: And the funny thing about that tweet I wanted to
Speaker 1: just talk about the tweet from Kevin McCarthy for another minute,
Speaker 1: was the person who was most relieved to see that
Speaker 1: tweet was not Donald Trump, I think, but Donald Trump Junior,
Speaker 1: because he knows it as soon as this exercise is over,
Speaker 1: his great betraying stops. Oh yeah, that's actually I tried
Speaker 1: never to think about him, so that didn't occur to me.
Speaker 1: But you're absolutely right. It'll be kind of interesting to
Speaker 1: see if it shifts the stands of either neutrality or
Speaker 1: just seeing themselves that we've seen from what's her name
Speaker 1: Avanca and Jared. Yeah, if the entire party gets on
Speaker 1: board in the midst of what should be many, many, many,
Speaker 1: many indictments, I feel like with Avanca and Jared, there's more.
Speaker 1: I mean, supposedly they are rumors that there's trouble in
Speaker 1: paradise there and that maybe that is distracting them from
Speaker 1: their primary purpose, which is grifting off the gravy train
Speaker 1: that is Dad. And I say, this is a NEPO
Speaker 1: baby myself, though I'm a middle aged so I'm a
Speaker 1: nepo oldie. Your fortunes are invariably tied to your qualifier,
Speaker 1: you know, the one you get your nepotistic glow from.
Speaker 1: So I mean, the fortune of Donald Trump is very much,
Speaker 1: I think, on the agenda of the spawn. And for
Speaker 1: Donnie and Eric, they are entirely attached. I know, poor
Speaker 1: I forgot about Eric well, because why not. Their fortunes
Speaker 1: are entirely attached to Donald. Jared and Nevacca haven't. First
Speaker 1: of all, Jared is legitimately wealthy. His father's legitimately wealthy,
Speaker 1: and after he got out of jail, he's been legitimately
Speaker 1: about it, yes exactly, or you know, legitimate to the
Speaker 1: extent that people like that can be, right, And I
Speaker 1: think that well, clearly the calculation they've been making is
Speaker 1: that between Jared's daddy and MBS, they don't need Donald anymore, right,
Speaker 1: But you know, if he regains political relevance, and if
Speaker 1: they want political relevance, that will change their tune. It
Speaker 1: depends what kind of power is more important to them.
Speaker 1: I always am sort of struck by and again I
Speaker 1: know this is like my own stupid naivete and by
Speaker 1: the way, naivete is not the right word for what
Speaker 1: I'm about to describe. But there was an opportunity right
Speaker 1: after trump loss for some of these members of the
Speaker 1: family to run for office. I mean, the Republican Party
Speaker 1: has a very low bar, you know, especially in these
Speaker 1: very red states, and if you've just touched Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: you can be you know, and none of them took it,
Speaker 1: which I always sort of was shocked by. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: think the only well, I think Donnie just isn't capable
Speaker 1: of getting to a point where he can pull himself
Speaker 1: together enough to do something I don't. I mean, I'm
Speaker 1: not trying. I mean it's I have the disease of alcoholism.
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm sober a long time. But I get it, man.
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm not saying that anyone has anything, but
Speaker 1: I'm just saying I understand the inability to pull oneself together.
Speaker 1: I relate to that. Yeah, as do I honestly for
Speaker 1: for different reasons. But you know, I think a lot
Speaker 1: of us suffer from that, especially post Donald postcoment. Right exactly.
Speaker 1: But I think again with the Bunco, it was more
Speaker 1: that ended so badly that there was no way to
Speaker 1: know at first how easily the Republican Party would be
Speaker 1: swayed to fall in line, and how egregiously responsible the
Speaker 1: new powers that be at the DOJ would be in
Speaker 1: calling anybody to account. I don't know that it would
Speaker 1: have been clear at the time that Trump would have
Speaker 1: gotten away with it, which we now now he will. Yep,
Speaker 1: we do, and I think it is pretty interesting to
Speaker 1: hang up. So I want to talk to you about Well,
Speaker 1: let's just game out this week a little bit. It's Sunday.
Speaker 1: This podcast comes out on Monday, actually comes out on
Speaker 1: Sunday night for those of you who are very excited.
Speaker 1: So you know Trump has said Tuesday, We've heard Monday,
Speaker 1: we've heard Wednesday, we heard last Friday, so certainly something
Speaker 1: is coming. There are other indictments, again though none of
Speaker 1: these are from the DOJ, so they have a lot
Speaker 1: less power than a DOOJ indictment or they because they
Speaker 1: are come from these lawmakers who have been elected, they
Speaker 1: have a certain partisan tinge even if you might not
Speaker 1: believe that, but it does undermine I think a little
Speaker 1: bit about what's going on. I mean, what do you
Speaker 1: think I think? I mean, they're protests planned, there's more tweeting.
Speaker 1: I mean, where do you think this goes you know,
Speaker 1: your uncle, unfortunately for you. Uh yeah, I think his
Speaker 1: reaction falls into two categories. Well, whatever the case is,
Speaker 1: he'll do what he's already been doing. He's he's already
Speaker 1: setting up the challenge. He's attempting to undermine the validity
Speaker 1: of the process and the charges, etc. And the only
Speaker 1: thing we don't know is if it is he going
Speaker 1: to cooperate. One thing about Donald is when push comes
Speaker 1: to show, he does seem to have this pragmatic side.
Speaker 1: You know, he didn't dig in his heels and stay
Speaker 1: at the Oval office. Were you a little shot by that?
Speaker 1: It was a little shocked by that. No, I wasn't
Speaker 1: because he's a baby, and you know that would have
Speaker 1: taken some guts. Actually, So what does he do. He
Speaker 1: leaves with all of his many thousands of stolen documents,
Speaker 1: and he just doesn't go to the inauguration, right, that's right? Yeah, Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's that's how he fought the good fight. Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 1: So I think it's really unlikely that he doesn't show
Speaker 1: because for whatever reason. So I don't think it's a
Speaker 1: about even listening to anybody, although I'm sure he doesn't
Speaker 1: some level have to be persuaded. He does have a
Speaker 1: remarkable instinct for self preservation. So I want to talk
Speaker 1: about John Edwards because I think that as an important
Speaker 1: data point. John Edwards, Democrat, very handsome, extremely nice head
Speaker 1: of hair, accused of funneling nearly a million dollars and
Speaker 1: don't have contributions to support his pregnant mistress. Again, not
Speaker 1: what campaign money is supposed to be. Engage those of
Speaker 1: you who are Republicans who are listening to this, because
Speaker 1: I got if you're right, Yeah, he is accused, he
Speaker 1: is indicted, and he is ultimately he's ultimately it's dismissed.
Speaker 1: There definitely is a sense that people do not want
Speaker 1: to indict former candidates. We discuss that's stupid. Is that
Speaker 1: in nuanced enough? I mean Elon Musk said this is
Speaker 1: going to make him president against well, okay, not because
Speaker 1: of the indictment though, because the process is so broken,
Speaker 1: Because if indeed this is the first indictment against him,
Speaker 1: that makes all of the others, which are much much
Speaker 1: much more serious, harder or tainted somehow. So it isn't
Speaker 1: because he's getting indicted. It's because he's had oh my god,
Speaker 1: how many years, so many years that I feel like
Speaker 1: I'm ninety eight now to evade, change the subject, create
Speaker 1: a new narrative, get other people believing laws, etc. And
Speaker 1: you also have people on the right side of things,
Speaker 1: which is to say, the left, who we're gonna be like, yeah,
Speaker 1: so because it's just taking forever. It also has a
Speaker 1: lot to do with framing. It's always this is cases.
Speaker 1: I see it always put in terms of Stormy Daniels
Speaker 1: and hush money, right, but it's not. It's it's elections
Speaker 1: from which clearly not as as serious as inciting an
Speaker 1: armed insurrection against your own government two elections in a row,
Speaker 1: but it's still pretty freaking serious. And it's our unwillingness
Speaker 1: just face these things head on that continues to enable
Speaker 1: people like Donald Trump to gain power. And it starts with,
Speaker 1: you know, the fact that Richard Nixon wasn't indicted. Yeah, no,
Speaker 1: I think that's right. I think it is interesting though,
Speaker 1: when we're talking about this, to think about how the
Speaker 1: Republican Party, so we saw Kevin McCarthy, we're gonna see
Speaker 1: other I want to like finish up with this Don Junior,
Speaker 1: because it's like you can see what's happening in his
Speaker 1: head So after Don Junior tweeted that like this tweet
Speaker 1: about how it's thrilled he was that Kevin McCarthy decided
Speaker 1: to defend his dad, Don Junior wrote another tweet, feeling
Speaker 1: a little bit now he's decided the tides have turned
Speaker 1: and he's pretty psyched any things, people are going to
Speaker 1: continue to support his dad, And he says, pay attention
Speaker 1: to which Republicans spoke out against this corrupt bs immediately
Speaker 1: and who sat on their hands and waited which way
Speaker 1: the wind was blowing. So, I mean, you do definitely
Speaker 1: see like the Trump addas apparatus has kicked into gear.
Speaker 1: You got Pizza Jack, you got Don Junior. They are
Speaker 1: ready to support daddy and bully whoever they can into
Speaker 1: supporting him. And again, I just don't see how this
Speaker 1: apparatus does not deliver Donald Trump the GOP nomination. It does,
Speaker 1: That's what it was designed for. And again that's actually fine.
Speaker 1: That's how it's supposed to work, right, that's their job.
Speaker 1: The problem, again, always comes back to the unwillingness of
Speaker 1: the people who actually had the power to do something
Speaker 1: about it refusing to do something about it. You know,
Speaker 1: I mean, we've talked about this before Jack Smith. It
Speaker 1: took two years for this man to be appointed special counsel.
Speaker 1: That should have happened two years ago. Fanny Willis, I'm
Speaker 1: not going to second guess her, but last I checked,
Speaker 1: imminent doesn't mean it'll be a really long time and
Speaker 1: I'll probably be dead before anything happens. So not that
Speaker 1: she's unwilling, but that if you are so concerned about
Speaker 1: that phrase, if I hear it one more time, I'm
Speaker 1: gonna jump off a cliff. Go for the king. You
Speaker 1: miss not miss right. If you don't go for him
Speaker 1: at all, you know you're totally gonna miss right. That's
Speaker 1: what the apparatus has had so much time, so much leeway,
Speaker 1: they've gotten away with so much. They've changed so many narratives,
Speaker 1: they've changed so many minds that if DeSantis or anybody
Speaker 1: of his ilk did decide to run, they will be
Speaker 1: roadkill and they will be tainted forever for running as
Speaker 1: a Republicans. Right. It's just such an interesting I mean,
Speaker 1: are you worried about violence in New York? I mean,
Speaker 1: it sounds like there's certainly some chance of that. I'm
Speaker 1: not worried about violence in New York City. It is
Speaker 1: so anti Donald that, um, you know, the number of
Speaker 1: people to show up will be outnumbered. They should, yeah, exactly,
Speaker 1: But the problem is that it could happen anywhere. You know,
Speaker 1: we could we could be looking at stochastic violence because
Speaker 1: of how Donald triggers people. And that's the concern that
Speaker 1: we said, you know, after the FBI search of Marlago,
Speaker 1: that guy in scott tried to go at an FBI
Speaker 1: office and he ended up dead, and other people could
Speaker 1: have been killed. So I have a feeling one of
Speaker 1: the reasons that it's taken longer is because all of
Speaker 1: these venues have to put in place very very serious
Speaker 1: security organizations because they are desperately worried that Donald is
Speaker 1: going to incite people to commit violence, which I'm guessing
Speaker 1: John Edwards did not do. But he did have that
Speaker 1: beautiful hair. He did have very beautiful I can see
Speaker 1: the hair. I'm sorry that you have to deal with
Speaker 1: this again. I mean, I'm sorry that we have to
Speaker 1: deal with this again, but I am sorry. Like, at least,
Speaker 1: I don't like Donald Trump, and I don't like how
Speaker 1: this went down, but it doesn't like my own fucked
Speaker 1: up family stuff is not somehow tied to this this
Speaker 1: is true. It would be really weird if it were right.
Speaker 1: But I mean, I feel like there's a certain kind
Speaker 1: of you know, I can just deal with my parents
Speaker 1: in a compartmentalized box, which is not in the American
Speaker 1: political system. Game is out for me. Where do you
Speaker 1: think this goes? Specifically in terms of New York, well,
Speaker 1: and just in terms of like the you know, he
Speaker 1: wins the nomination. What worries me is that he is
Speaker 1: in some regards stronger in twenty twenty four than he
Speaker 1: was in twenty sixteen or twenty twenty simply. And this
Speaker 1: is a great irony because in some ways the Biden
Speaker 1: administration has made things better, you know, So there's that
Speaker 1: unlike twenty sixteen, Donald will have all of the Republican
Speaker 1: arms supporting it, right, so you know, they'll all get
Speaker 1: in line no matter what they say about him. I
Speaker 1: don't know that the never Donald group has grown significantly
Speaker 1: in the interim. On the other hand, I think his
Speaker 1: running actually undercut some of their arguments against Biden. Although
Speaker 1: actually they only have one argument against Biden, and it's
Speaker 1: that he's old, right, It's too old. Yeah, I can't
Speaker 1: live my life if I think that Donald will win
Speaker 1: the general election. Right, I have to be optimistic, but
Speaker 1: I think we'd need to be very, very worried. Yeah, no,
Speaker 1: I think that's right. Happy Sunday everyone, Happy Monday everyone,
Speaker 1: or Sunday night. Right, the worst is yet to cut.
Speaker 1: That's right, That's right, because really knows. Yeah. Oh, thank you, Mary.
Speaker 1: It's great to be. John Allen is a political reporter
Speaker 1: at NBC and the author of Lucky How Joe Biden
Speaker 1: Barely won the presidency. Welcome back to Bass Politics, my
Speaker 1: friend and yours, Allen, Molly, John Fast. We're going to
Speaker 1: do old radio here. You've been to some rallies, John,
Speaker 1: You've seen some shit. Tell me what you've seen. I
Speaker 1: went to see Ron de Santisi's first two events in
Speaker 1: Iowa a week ago, and then Donald Trump's first rally
Speaker 1: in Iowa of the twenty twenty four campaign a few
Speaker 1: days later, also in Iowa. Where were you in Davenport
Speaker 1: and Des Moines for the two to Santas events and
Speaker 1: then back in Davenport for the Trump event if you know,
Speaker 1: For folks who don't know, Davenport is on the Mississippi River,
Speaker 1: one of the four quad cities that straddle the Mississippi
Speaker 1: between Iowa and Illinois. All right, that's more than I
Speaker 1: want to know about Davenport. We gotta We're no, I'm
Speaker 1: just kidding. We're not a geography podcast. I first want
Speaker 1: to talk about Ron Santas because I feel like everyone
Speaker 1: is very excited about him. I mean, I've read reporting
Speaker 1: that says he's kind of a goof talk to me.
Speaker 1: You gave you know, actually what would be a stump
Speaker 1: speech to about seven hundred people in each location that
Speaker 1: he spoke at. He was introduced by Governor Kim Reynolds,
Speaker 1: who sat on stage with him and did some Q
Speaker 1: and A with him. He signed books for people, you know.
Speaker 1: I think what I would say is that if there
Speaker 1: were not a Donald Trump in this race, and it's
Speaker 1: like an open Republican primary, and you were around to
Speaker 1: Santus and you went into Iowa and fifteen hundred people
Speaker 1: came to see you the first day between two events,
Speaker 1: you'd have to feel like you were in pretty good shape.
Speaker 1: But there is a Donald Trump in this race, and
Speaker 1: Donald Trump remains the dominant factory is the thing that
Speaker 1: the person that people talk the most about. I think
Speaker 1: Iowa voters are open to an alternative. But that alternative,
Speaker 1: whether it's Rondo Santus or somebody else, is going to
Speaker 1: have to clear the bar of Iowa voters thinking that
Speaker 1: they're electable. Right, do you think that Donald Trump would
Speaker 1: honor not being the nominee? Hilarious question. I mean, I
Speaker 1: don't want to predict future results based on past performance. Yeah. Six,
Speaker 1: And there you have it, ladies and gentlemen. This is
Speaker 1: the thing I don't understand about the current calculus is
Speaker 1: that if Donald Trump were a normal candidate who said,
Speaker 1: all right, it's enough. You know, I've lost three times,
Speaker 1: I'll let the party recover, and you guys, can you
Speaker 1: chart a new course? But there is no evidence to
Speaker 1: support the idea that he would do that. No, quite
Speaker 1: the opposite. And you know, the Republican Party is somewhat
Speaker 1: hostage to that. If the belief is that Donald Trump
Speaker 1: is going to tell his folks to stay home, or
Speaker 1: he's going to take other action, you know, casting down
Speaker 1: on the integrity of Republican primis or run is a
Speaker 1: third party? Right? Well, I think he's less likely to
Speaker 1: run as a third party candidate for a variety of reasons,
Speaker 1: including the difficulty of getting on the ballot as a
Speaker 1: third party candidate. I mean, there's a whole host of reasons.
Speaker 1: There are states that have sore loser laws, you know,
Speaker 1: that make that really difficult. So I think that there's
Speaker 1: plenty of reason to think he wouldn't actually run as
Speaker 1: a third party candidate. But that doesn't mean that he
Speaker 1: wouldn't sink the Republican nominee out of spite. I don't
Speaker 1: think that's something that's predictable right now. I think he would,
Speaker 1: you know, sort of gauge what was in his best
Speaker 1: interest at the time. Wouldn't it be in his best interests?
Speaker 1: No matter like, say he gets indicted, which is certainly possible,
Speaker 1: say he gets indicted, wouldn't it still be in his
Speaker 1: best interests to continue on this road of running for president?
Speaker 1: Because at least, you know, if he's not running for president,
Speaker 1: he's just a normal guy, whereas if he's a candidate,
Speaker 1: he then has the added protection of being a candidate.
Speaker 1: There's that. And also, you know, I talked to voters
Speaker 1: who said that they thought indictment would help him politically. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think that too. So I mean, and you know,
Speaker 1: there's no reason that he can't run if he's indicted,
Speaker 1: no reason he couldn't run. Even if you were convicted
Speaker 1: of something, I don't expect him to go away from
Speaker 1: the campaign trail, right, Okay, So talk to me about
Speaker 1: what does Santis was like. The thing that we see
Speaker 1: in a lot of reporting is that he's Jeb He's
Speaker 1: not Clinton, Bill not Hillary. I mean, is that true?
Speaker 1: Or I mean, what did you say? Did he kiss babies? Well?
Speaker 1: He did. I mean he did some of that sort
Speaker 1: of basic retail politicking but felt a little stage. But
Speaker 1: I guess what I would say is, you know, if
Speaker 1: you're watching the Santis up close for the first time,
Speaker 1: he's a pretty polished public speaker, but he's not engrossing.
Speaker 1: He's not Donald Trump, he's not Bill Clinton, who's got
Speaker 1: you know, the audience in the palm of his hand.
Speaker 1: I think, you know, for his campaign, they would probably
Speaker 1: like to be something akin to George W. Bush in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty, where the party just decides it's him and
Speaker 1: he's got, you know, the sort of combination of natural
Speaker 1: capabilities and manufactured star power versus Jeff Bush who just
Speaker 1: got a lot of money and then swandered it because
Speaker 1: he wasn't very good as a candidate. You know, he
Speaker 1: wasn't good on the campaign trail. My guess is that
Speaker 1: Ron de Santis will fall somewhere between the two bushes,
Speaker 1: not between two ferns. Mind you, that's somebody else's show.
Speaker 1: I want to talk to you about W for a second,
Speaker 1: because everything old is new again, umba. And again, no
Speaker 1: fan of W. W was a folksy guy. George W.
Speaker 1: Bush could come over to your house and hang out
Speaker 1: and you probably have a good time with them. Yeah,
Speaker 1: have a beer or whatever. Yeah. I mean again, I'm
Speaker 1: no fan of W. In fact, if anyone's not a
Speaker 1: fan of w's me. But I do think that there
Speaker 1: was a sense with WA, and a lot of that
Speaker 1: was an affectation. But he did fake folksy very very well.
Speaker 1: I mean, obviously he's not you know, does it come
Speaker 1: from folksy? Certainly comes from Pappy and uh, you know,
Speaker 1: and extreme wealth and privilege. But he seemed like a
Speaker 1: regular guy and you know, and consistently right even you know,
Speaker 1: other politicians have met with them. Mean, it's easy to
Speaker 1: get along with get a really good relationship with Nancy Pelosi.
Speaker 1: I don't think they just liked each other. As far
Speaker 1: as the Santas goes. I mean, there are all these
Speaker 1: stories that you know, almost anyone you talk to, we'll
Speaker 1: tell you some story of Ryan de Santa's behaving awkwardly
Speaker 1: in public, meaning you know, going to an event and
Speaker 1: sort of sitting in a corner putting fingers. Yeah, there
Speaker 1: was a report just this week about him eating chocolate
Speaker 1: pudding with three fingers on an airplane. Yeah, on an airplane,
Speaker 1: which would put Amy klovichars eating salad with a Combs
Speaker 1: story to shame. What kind of pudding was it? Tapioca pudding.
Speaker 1: I don't know if you know this, but presidential hopeful
Speaker 1: Mariann Williamson, serious presidential candidate marian Williamson, please insert irony
Speaker 1: here also had a terrible Boss piece come out this week,
Speaker 1: and people were saying, well, they're just trying to bring
Speaker 1: her down because she's a woman, which again, that does happen.
Speaker 1: It's more unusual to have these stories about men. It's
Speaker 1: more unusual to have these stories about men. You know,
Speaker 1: I don't remember a story about a man eating pudding
Speaker 1: with so I guess that's that's sort of unprecedented. These
Speaker 1: tend to be written more about women. There is sort
Speaker 1: of an angle of misogyny toward the concept that women
Speaker 1: are tough on their staffs. I think that the bar
Speaker 1: is different, But that doesn't mean the abuse of men
Speaker 1: bosses should get a free pass because there's more scrutiny
Speaker 1: on women, and at the same time, also abusive men
Speaker 1: bosses should not get a pass. And a third thing
Speaker 1: is we should understand that the culture of the work
Speaker 1: world and the adult work world is that if you're
Speaker 1: not doing your job, sometimes somebody should tell you that directly.
Speaker 1: And also sometimes people have difficulty with that. So all
Speaker 1: of that fan don't need putting with your fingers on
Speaker 1: an airplane if you're going to run for president, right,
Speaker 1: that's the overall thing, which is no matter all the
Speaker 1: other rules. Don't need putting with your fingers on an
Speaker 1: airplane past the age of four even then, I mean,
Speaker 1: if you're planning I'm running for president. So talk to
Speaker 1: me about you saw DeSantis. He speaks very well, he's
Speaker 1: quite smart. He's a lawyer. He went to hard already
Speaker 1: went to Yale, YadA, YadA, YadA. So you got a
Speaker 1: real sense of him. Tell me about the Trump rally
Speaker 1: that you want to So the Trump rally, I want
Speaker 1: it was in a venue that's a little smaller than
Speaker 1: Trump usually does. It was inside in a theater that
Speaker 1: you know, holds somewhere north of two thousand people. This
Speaker 1: was Trump, you know, doing Trump for two hours. I've
Speaker 1: seen it before. There's a little fresher. He's got new
Speaker 1: material stand up, including you know, including some serious policy,
Speaker 1: uh you know, sort of policy rollouts, baby bonuses, there's
Speaker 1: baby bonuses. He wants to break up the Department of
Speaker 1: Education into what fascism and light fascism, well into states
Speaker 1: running education. Oh wow, that'll be great, all right, son.
Speaker 1: But my point is that there's there's actually some substance
Speaker 1: to what he's talking about, some forward looking substance, whether
Speaker 1: you agree with it or not. And that's a little
Speaker 1: bit different. And you know, his crowds are exceptually into
Speaker 1: what he's doing. You got huge standing ovations, repeatedly, people
Speaker 1: chanting Adam, what are they chanting? Chanting pro Trump slogans,
Speaker 1: so like lock her up? No, no, no, no, no, no,
Speaker 1: just oh well that's something. Yeah. No, I mean there
Speaker 1: was no locker up, build a wall and stuff like that.
Speaker 1: I can't remember. Build the wall was specific one of them.
Speaker 1: There was definitely USA chants stuff like that. So that
Speaker 1: what I was gonna say is the one noticeable difference
Speaker 1: was that when he went after rhyme to Santas by
Speaker 1: name or by nickname, the sanctimonious, the fact if the
Speaker 1: crowd was relatively silent, they didn't like it. Oh, or
Speaker 1: they certainly didn't love it. They weren't eating it up. Wow. Yeah,
Speaker 1: has he tried tiny D yet? I have not heard
Speaker 1: him roll that out. I think that is the thing
Speaker 1: that ends up killing him, tiny D. I want to
Speaker 1: stay employed. Molly. Um, that's interesting. So who had bigger crowds?
Speaker 1: Trump had bigger crowds. He had one crowd and it
Speaker 1: was bigger than the two crowds that the Sanatas head
Speaker 1: who had more enthusiastic crowds Trump, So that's pretty interesting.
Speaker 1: I think a lot of the people at the Santas rally,
Speaker 1: and I spoke to a lot of him, were sort
Speaker 1: of open to the Santas. Certainly the people who were
Speaker 1: already in his camp showed up, but like there were
Speaker 1: a bunch of people there that were I guess more
Speaker 1: than curious but less than committed. They want to hear
Speaker 1: what he had to say, and some of it they like,
Speaker 1: and even those really like what he's say saying may
Speaker 1: still vote for Trump. Right. I mean that I think
Speaker 1: is the ultimate problem. I also saw this poll laing
Speaker 1: and I actually wrote about this this week. Ideologically, a
Speaker 1: lot of these Republicans would rather win, I mean, would
Speaker 1: rather have someone they agree with than win. Yeah. I
Speaker 1: saw that polling. And if you go for somebody you
Speaker 1: agree with over somebody who will win, typically will find
Speaker 1: that you no longer like that person you agree with
Speaker 1: because they've lost an election. Yeah, but that hasn't happened
Speaker 1: with Trump, right, I mean he's lost three elections. Oh,
Speaker 1: you're saying the midterms. Yeah, yeah, I mean the direct
Speaker 1: correlation from the president or the recent former president to
Speaker 1: midterm results is fraught. Did he two things that hurt Republicans? Absolutely?
Speaker 1: Did he lose in twenty twenty, Absolutely, one hundred percent,
Speaker 1: But not everybody who is a Republican voter believes that
Speaker 1: he lost fairly Well. That is the other thing I
Speaker 1: want to talk to you about, because I think that's
Speaker 1: really important. There is a not insignificant part of the
Speaker 1: Republican Party that believes these sort of I think the
Speaker 1: biggest example of it is carry Lake with her I
Speaker 1: actually won the governorship. Do you think it serves Republicans
Speaker 1: And if so, how well? I think it's going to
Speaker 1: be very hard for her to serve as governor of
Speaker 1: Arizona and vice president can currently She'll find a way.
Speaker 1: I don't think that it will serve Republicans, certainly in
Speaker 1: the long term. I don't think it'll serve them in
Speaker 1: the short term. You know, I think election denialism was
Speaker 1: one of the things that was on the ballot in
Speaker 1: the mid terms, and generally speaking it was rejected. There
Speaker 1: were certainly a few places where it wasn't. But like
Speaker 1: I have to think that that's generally a bad thing
Speaker 1: for the Republican Party. And if the Republicans are successful,
Speaker 1: and let's remember that it's not all the Republicans that
Speaker 1: are pushing this, and in fact, most Republicans aren't, But
Speaker 1: if Republicans were to be successful in pushing election denialism,
Speaker 1: it would be a very bad thing for the country
Speaker 1: and the world. Yes, let me clarify why I say that,
Speaker 1: Because anybody pushing election denialism for legitimate election and gaining power,
Speaker 1: whether Republican, Democrat, or anything else, would be bad for
Speaker 1: the country and bad for the world. I want to
Speaker 1: ask you about this, this Fox polling, because this is
Speaker 1: pretty interesting. So there is this Fox polling that came
Speaker 1: out after the Dominion lawsuit, which says that people have
Speaker 1: lost some faith in Fox. Do you think that's bullshit?
Speaker 1: That they've seen some stuff about the Dominion stuff. And again,
Speaker 1: I mean, who knows where they're seeing it, right, because
Speaker 1: they're certainly not seeing it on Fox. But I mean,
Speaker 1: what do you what's your hot take on that? I mean,
Speaker 1: does that ultimately hurt the brand? I mean I talked
Speaker 1: to Republican voters at the Trump rally, and you know,
Speaker 1: for the most part, they hadn't heard of the dominion
Speaker 1: lawsuit at all, much less what Tucker Carlton and other
Speaker 1: Fox as were saying in text messages. These people are
Speaker 1: still diehard Foxers. Well, I mean, I think they're more
Speaker 1: Trump than Fox. So if there's a split there, I
Speaker 1: think that Trump retains most of the Trump folks, you know,
Speaker 1: And I asked people about that too, and that's that's
Speaker 1: kind of the response I got. So yeah, I mean,
Speaker 1: I don't think that Dominion lawsuit and what the Fox
Speaker 1: folks are saying behind the scenes is going to have
Speaker 1: much of an impact, in part because Fox News isn't
Speaker 1: showing right right, right, right, so they're not going to
Speaker 1: see it. Though I do think when the trial happens,
Speaker 1: they're going to have a harder time hiding it. I
Speaker 1: think they'll probably have a harder time. But again, if
Speaker 1: you get your news from one source and that source
Speaker 1: isn't covering something, then you're not going to know about it. Agreed. Agreed.
Speaker 1: Now I want to ask you, I mean, it does
Speaker 1: sound like the top line from what you're saying, and
Speaker 1: I'm just extrapolating here is basically it's Trump's party and
Speaker 1: if he continues to want it, he can have it.
Speaker 1: I would give him the advantage right now for winning
Speaker 1: the Republican nomination. There are more people in the Republican
Speaker 1: Party who are for Trump than who are for anybody else,
Speaker 1: and that makes him the dominant figure. So again, and
Speaker 1: we've been saying this for a while, like he's less
Speaker 1: powerful than he probably has been at any point. I
Speaker 1: don't think that's true though, because February was a good
Speaker 1: month for him. Maybe he's getting a little stronger, but
Speaker 1: from his apax has lost power within the Republican Party.
Speaker 1: And yet he is still by far the most powerful
Speaker 1: republic Yeah, much more than match. Donald Trump, even out
Speaker 1: of office, has more certainly has more power in the
Speaker 1: Republican Party than Mitch mccamall does. Yeah, unbelievable. I want
Speaker 1: to ask you, what are you watching now? What are
Speaker 1: you covering? What's happening now? I would think of you
Speaker 1: as sort of a person who knows what's going on.
Speaker 1: I mean, I think that's race by Desantists to get
Speaker 1: to where Trump is on Ukraine, which is to say,
Speaker 1: you know, moving away from the US support for Ukraine.
Speaker 1: Is fascinating to watch because there's a big split in
Speaker 1: the Republican Party between you know, the sort of populist,
Speaker 1: nationalist some would say, isolationist wing represented by Trump and
Speaker 1: his group, and then the sort of old school establishment
Speaker 1: defensehawk stet and just kind of watching that develop is
Speaker 1: going to be interesting. I know most Americans don't vote
Speaker 1: on foreign policy, but I think sometimes foreign policy can
Speaker 1: be a proxy for how you see a leader. But
Speaker 1: don't you think the calculus and de Santists made was
Speaker 1: that he couldn't win a presidential primary without Tucker, and
Speaker 1: so he had to do what he thought Tucker would want.
Speaker 1: I mean, there's no way the lawyer from Gitmo doesn't
Speaker 1: believe in this kind of nation building stuff. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: mean I agree that he feels like he has to
Speaker 1: move toward Tucker Carlson, but only because Tucker Carlson is
Speaker 1: where a lot of the bases, which is where Donald
Speaker 1: Trump is. I mean, they're all kind of following each other, right,
Speaker 1: It's a chicken or the egg situation. But to the
Speaker 1: expect that Ron Sanderson, you know, sort of offers a
Speaker 1: watered down version of Donald Trump. Like, there's a question
Speaker 1: about whether that works. I mean, we just saw in
Speaker 1: the last Democratic primary how difficult it was for candidates
Speaker 1: between the poles of Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden, you know,
Speaker 1: the people in the middle of them till I sort
Speaker 1: of emerge, right, Like the watered down version of either
Speaker 1: one of them didn't really work that well. One last question,
Speaker 1: because we're out of time. Do you think the Biden
Speaker 1: announces soon? You think he's the nominee? You think Mary
Speaker 1: and Williamson takes him out. I think Mary and Williamson
Speaker 1: will not be the Democratic nominee. Why do you hate women? No,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, I'm just kidding. I'm just kidding, just one, Molly.
Speaker 1: So maryon Williamson will not be the nominee. Is that
Speaker 1: what you're saying? Mary? And Williamson will not be the nominee.
Speaker 1: Joe Biden, as he likes to say, good Lord Willing
Speaker 1: and the creek don't rise, whatever that means, all other
Speaker 1: things being equal, Joe Biden will be the nominee. Funny,
Speaker 1: Thank you, John Allen, Take care. Andy Krall is an
Speaker 1: investigative reporter for pro Pablica and author of the new
Speaker 1: book A Death on w Street, The Murder of Seth
Speaker 1: Rich and the Age of Conspiracy. Welcome Too Fast Politics, Andy,
Speaker 1: Great to be here. Thanks for having me this. Leonard Leo.
Speaker 1: He's not a good guy, is he. He is one
Speaker 1: of the most influential people that I think most people
Speaker 1: have not heard of. I'm shocked at the number of
Speaker 1: folks out there who don't know the name utter Leo.
Speaker 1: But when I tell them even a tiny bit about
Speaker 1: the things he's done, their eyes go big and they
Speaker 1: sort of gasp, and they sit back in their chair
Speaker 1: and they say, oh, my god, how have I not
Speaker 1: heard about this person? And then I say, well, that's
Speaker 1: what I'm here for. My friend, So explain to us
Speaker 1: how you got involved in this. I mean, I'm sitting
Speaker 1: in my office staring at the computer, wondering how in
Speaker 1: the year or old Lord twenty twenty three, we are
Speaker 1: looking at a conservative supermajority on the Supreme Court that
Speaker 1: seems poised to roll back advancements, a major precedent, a
Speaker 1: whole range of fixtures of modern life in America, and
Speaker 1: wondering how this happened. They're wondering how we got here,
Speaker 1: How in this time did not just a Supreme Court
Speaker 1: of the United States, but also so many courts around
Speaker 1: the country become these real bastions for conservatives, become the
Speaker 1: venues where attorney generals or private individuals, advocacy groups, whatever
Speaker 1: can go and try to challenge a firmative action, try
Speaker 1: to challenge abortion, I try to challenge birth control. I mean,
Speaker 1: you name it. And every time I started digging into
Speaker 1: these questions, they started pointing me back to the work
Speaker 1: of Leonard Leo. I mean it was kind of shocking
Speaker 1: in a sense of like, I didn't think that so
Speaker 1: many of these questions would be answered by looking to
Speaker 1: this one guy. But again that's why I said, you know,
Speaker 1: I think He's one of the most overlooked but one
Speaker 1: of the most influential figures of the last twenty or
Speaker 1: thirty years in this country. And that is what set
Speaker 1: us down the path to looking at them. That is
Speaker 1: what got us interested in this group, the TENEO Network.
Speaker 1: That's the focus on our most recent story. So explain
Speaker 1: to our listeners what this group is. The TENEO Network
Speaker 1: is a private and confidential, to use their words, network
Speaker 1: of up and coming conservatives who work in basically every
Speaker 1: business sector, industry, walk of life that you can imagine.
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm not talking just about the light blue
Speaker 1: blazer khaki tassel loafer set in politics in Washington, d C.
Speaker 1: But I'm talking about people who work in finance, people
Speaker 1: who work in energy, people who work at entertainment and
Speaker 1: media academia across the board. Here, I mean, the way
Speaker 1: to think about the TENEO Network is jo going back
Speaker 1: to our friend Leonard Leo. Leonard Leo worked for a
Speaker 1: long time at an organization called the Federalist Society. The
Speaker 1: Federalist Society began as a campus club for conservative law
Speaker 1: students who felt ostracized, who felt left out, who thought
Speaker 1: that everyone on their campus was crazy liberals and they
Speaker 1: needed a place to hang out. So the Ben Shapiros
Speaker 1: of olden day is the Vetch Shapiros of olden days.
Speaker 1: The Charlie Kirks, Yes, two people who actually are members
Speaker 1: of the Teneo Network, but we'll get to that. So
Speaker 1: the Federal Society, over a span of thirty years, starts
Speaker 1: as a campus club, but actually becomes this pipeline for
Speaker 1: conservative judges, conservative justices, legal minds on the right. I mean,
Speaker 1: it really is the place where all the big legal
Speaker 1: battles taking on things like Obamacare, taking on Row, taking
Speaker 1: on I mean, really any major Democratic or liberal policy
Speaker 1: out called the last few years get challenged. And you
Speaker 1: know where the place right now where five of the
Speaker 1: nine Supreme Court justices currently on the Court have been
Speaker 1: Federal Society members in their lifetime and are very close
Speaker 1: with the organization. So it's this really, this powerful force
Speaker 1: in American politics, in the legal world for conservatives. The
Speaker 1: Teneo Network wants to do for the rest of America
Speaker 1: what the Federal Society did for the law. That's the
Speaker 1: most pithy way to put it, and it is it
Speaker 1: is an audacious thing that they are trying to do.
Speaker 1: That's pretty chilling. Yeah, yeah, it is. It's it's it's audacious,
Speaker 1: but they believe that they can do it based on
Speaker 1: what they've been able to do with the courts, what
Speaker 1: they've been able to do in the legal world. And
Speaker 1: so where does this start, Yeah, it starts around two
Speaker 1: thousand and seven, two thousand and eight. One of the
Speaker 1: co founders of Teno is a fellow named Evan Bear,
Speaker 1: tech entrepreneur, you know, really quick to drop all the
Speaker 1: startup lingo close personal friend of he who shall not
Speaker 1: be named Peter Teal, Yes, yep, working at the time
Speaker 1: in two thousand and seventeen thousand and eight. For Peter Teal,
Speaker 1: they're having lunch at a Baja Fresh. Very important detail
Speaker 1: there right in DC. I love a chain, yeah can,
Speaker 1: and you've got to get the Burrio joined naming there.
Speaker 1: And also I feel like a Baja for us in Washington,
Speaker 1: do you see, because when you go to Washington, you
Speaker 1: want to eat the local food exactly, the regional delicacies exactly.
Speaker 1: You know, Peter Tilt and his underlying ov and Bearer
Speaker 1: complaining about conservatives and complaining about how liberals are so
Speaker 1: much more powerful than they are etcetera, etcetera. And they say, gosh,
Speaker 1: you know, the one good thing we have going for
Speaker 1: us is the Federalist Society or fed SoC as people
Speaker 1: call it. Right, what if we did something like that
Speaker 1: but for tech dudes like us, or for bankers, or
Speaker 1: for friends who work in the media. And so the
Speaker 1: idea germinates there. And also, I said, Peter Teal's name
Speaker 1: sort of president at the creation but actually one of
Speaker 1: the legal co founders of Tenayo was none other than
Speaker 1: Josh Holley. Why wouldn't even Yeah, that's just obscure. Well
Speaker 1: Cloft lawyer of private practice today a United States Senator
Speaker 1: from Missouri. So the idea begins there. Who has never
Speaker 1: lived in Missouri? But sure continue, I guess he lived
Speaker 1: in Missouri when he was a kid, But he doesn't
Speaker 1: have a house in Missouri right now. I mean, he's
Speaker 1: been a creature of Washington politics for quite a long time.
Speaker 1: But his sister has a country house in the Ozarks,
Speaker 1: so that counts as we all do, right exactly. So
Speaker 1: this group to NEO is sort of chubbing along from
Speaker 1: those humble origins, but it never quite lives up to
Speaker 1: it's lofty expectations. That it's going to be the Federalist
Speaker 1: Society for America for everything else until Leonard Leo comes along.
Speaker 1: And Leonard Leo in twenty seventeen twenty eighteen is spending
Speaker 1: a lot of his time advising then President Trump about
Speaker 1: how to put more judges on the Supreme Court, on
Speaker 1: the peel's courts, of the district courts. But also Leonard
Speaker 1: Leo is clearly thinking about the long game. He's thinking
Speaker 1: about the future. He sees this group to Neo and
Speaker 1: basically says, hey, I think I know how to take
Speaker 1: you guys to the next long I think I know
Speaker 1: how to actually make this thing work. He's got a
Speaker 1: decent tract record of doing just that, and you know,
Speaker 1: he becomes a much more of a driving force with
Speaker 1: this group, to the point that today he is the
Speaker 1: chairman of the board. He's helping the group rates money.
Speaker 1: He is really trying to take the things that he
Speaker 1: learned from the legal wars and apply them to the
Speaker 1: culture wars large and TENEO is the vehicle to do that.
Speaker 1: So it's a it's a really key part of understanding
Speaker 1: what this really key figure Leonard Leo is up to.
Speaker 1: Right now, give us tangible like, for example, the Federalist
Speaker 1: Society did things like it found young lawyers, it nurtured them,
Speaker 1: it created them, and then it pushed them to go
Speaker 1: for judge ships. It you know, it started with cocktail
Speaker 1: parties and it ended with you know, five Supreme Court justices.
Speaker 1: So what is the TENEO group's sort of answer to that?
Speaker 1: There are a bunch of answers to that, because they
Speaker 1: are trying to have so much influence across so many
Speaker 1: different parts of American society. So one of them is
Speaker 1: a pretty obvious on, which is getting their people elected
Speaker 1: to higher office. And so you know, there is a
Speaker 1: TENAIO member named Will Sharf. He calls Letter of his mentor.
Speaker 1: He has kicked around conservative activism for a number of years.
Speaker 1: He's a lawyer, and he's now running for attorney general
Speaker 1: in Missouri. And that, you know, Missouri Tree general has
Speaker 1: been a launching point for such people as Josh Holding, Senator.
Speaker 1: So this is no small thing. And as we've seen
Speaker 1: in recent years, these these attorney generals can actually have
Speaker 1: a pretty big impact from that perch in their states.
Speaker 1: So they can't you know, TENNAIO can sort of bring
Speaker 1: along elevate and then you know it's members. The group
Speaker 1: is a nonprofit, so the group isn't like a superpack.
Speaker 1: He can't spend money itself, right, But the idea that
Speaker 1: this is a nonprofit when it really does have a
Speaker 1: political motive is is pretty crazy because that's not what
Speaker 1: profits are supposed to be. Yeah, and you know, they
Speaker 1: were very very adamant when we were doing all of
Speaker 1: the fact checking and everything on the story. And then
Speaker 1: like they don't bake, don't TENAEO itself does not make donations.
Speaker 1: They don't have a pack. You know, they're about education
Speaker 1: blah blah blah, but they make donations and kind and
Speaker 1: their members make donations. Will Scharf has donations from Leonard Leo,
Speaker 1: from again TENEOE co founder Evan Baar, from other senior
Speaker 1: people in the group. So you know, it's not like
Speaker 1: Taneo is doling out cash, but it's it's a pretty
Speaker 1: similar thing because Will Scharf can go to his friends
Speaker 1: and say, hey, like support me from my campaign and
Speaker 1: they'll donate. So you know, it's the springboard for people
Speaker 1: to run for office, but they're not paying taxes. I
Speaker 1: think what is important here is that this is being
Speaker 1: set up the same way that like a charity to
Speaker 1: help homeless children, as they're at the same tax structure
Speaker 1: as that five O, one S three D profit. That
Speaker 1: is correct. So like you could give money to helping
Speaker 1: homeless children, or you could give money to something that
Speaker 1: is the Federalist Society for Everything else. Yeah, you could
Speaker 1: give money to an organization that says it's one of
Speaker 1: its goals is to quote unquote roll back or crush
Speaker 1: liberal dominance quote across American life. So should that be
Speaker 1: a non I mean, not to get all sticky in
Speaker 1: the irs here for a minute, but shouldn't that not
Speaker 1: be a nonprofit? I mean, it definitely seems to walk
Speaker 1: up close to the line when you're talking about crushing
Speaker 1: liberal dominance, when you're talking about elevating young conservatives. I mean,
Speaker 1: doesn't seem the same as helping homeless children. No, it does.
Speaker 1: It doesn't seem the same as the Red Cross or
Speaker 1: ye visiting nurses doctors without borders. But right exactly. Then again,
Speaker 1: that you know one thing, I'm glad you brought that up,
Speaker 1: that you because you know, one really important thing to
Speaker 1: understand about Leonard Leo is that he has really maximized
Speaker 1: they can the amount of money he can raise into
Speaker 1: nonprofit organizations, so the sort of the charities that we
Speaker 1: are just talking about, and then they're slightly more political siblings.
Speaker 1: These are also known as five odenc force. Leonard Leo
Speaker 1: has mastered the art of using these nonprofit organizations, using
Speaker 1: tax exempt organizations to move money around to support people
Speaker 1: who are going to be judges, to in some cases
Speaker 1: support political organizations like the Republican Attorneys General Association. This
Speaker 1: is a trademark technique of his that he again has
Speaker 1: done and really mastered for twenty years. At this point
Speaker 1: in TENEO is clearly another piece of the puzzle for
Speaker 1: him and the child. There's an irs that actually has
Speaker 1: the ability to take a hard look at nonprofits on
Speaker 1: the right, the left, wherever. You know this kind of
Speaker 1: stuff is going to continue, Yeah, I mean it certainly
Speaker 1: sounds like it. So we have a lot of listeners
Speaker 1: who listen to this program who are curious as what
Speaker 1: they can do. What the sort of way back from
Speaker 1: something like this is good question. I mean, I think
Speaker 1: the first thing to know is to know that this
Speaker 1: thing exists and to understand that the guy who helped
Speaker 1: architect the conservative Supreme Court is still very much in
Speaker 1: the game, and that he is looking to extend his
Speaker 1: influence well beyond the courts. You know, a key part
Speaker 1: of what TANEO is trying to do is trying to
Speaker 1: have influence in the local level and the state level.
Speaker 1: There's a bit of the piece that we reported about
Speaker 1: how TANEO is mapping out, as they put it, these
Speaker 1: different institutions in big cities. They're looking at Atlanta in
Speaker 1: a couple of places in Texas based out of recording,
Speaker 1: mapping out the key institutions and then trying to either
Speaker 1: get their own people into those institutions so that start
Speaker 1: to change them, or if there're people are already there
Speaker 1: to let everyone else know, Hey, like we have all
Speaker 1: a bunch of our friends are in the country clubs
Speaker 1: or the newspapers, rotary or whatever in these big cities.
Speaker 1: So if you're someone who cares about this stuff, it's
Speaker 1: a reminder that your local institutions are a big part
Speaker 1: of you know, how this country moves in one direction
Speaker 1: or another. And if you care about the direction of
Speaker 1: not just the country writ large, but you know your
Speaker 1: your own town, your city, your state, you know you've
Speaker 1: got to be involved in some of these things that
Speaker 1: maybe they seem parochial, maybe they seem awfully small ball
Speaker 1: compared to the United States Supreme Court, but they do
Speaker 1: matter and the people who you know, if you're a
Speaker 1: progressive person, then you don't agree with the Conservatives, you
Speaker 1: or the Conservatives are organizing at that local level. That's
Speaker 1: a key part of this story that we've published. So
Speaker 1: you probably want to be organized in your own participating
Speaker 1: and organized in your own cities as well, because the
Speaker 1: other side, if you will, is doing that very thing.
Speaker 1: I want to ask you sort of one last question,
Speaker 1: which is how does Peter Teal figure into all of this.
Speaker 1: Teal is clearly an intellectual godfather of this organization. He
Speaker 1: was there again, as we said, at the creation of it.
Speaker 1: You know, we didn't find, at least in the reporting
Speaker 1: for this story that he is on the board. He's
Speaker 1: not listening on the board. Well that's something. Yeah, he's not.
Speaker 1: You know, his presence didn't seem particularly overt, but I
Speaker 1: would not be surprised if he was, you know, a
Speaker 1: sort of an ally as what they call the sort
Speaker 1: of like non member supporters of the group. And clearly,
Speaker 1: you know a lot of the people that we write
Speaker 1: about in this group are acolytes of Teals. You know,
Speaker 1: this TENO network I found really fascinating because it's a
Speaker 1: glimpse of the conservative vangor. It's a glimpse at young
Speaker 1: conservatives who they are, where they are, what their worldview.
Speaker 1: And really it's this more sort of desantist style, kind
Speaker 1: of populist, powerful state, anti woke ideology. It's different from Trumpism,
Speaker 1: if there is such a thing as Trumpism, and it's
Speaker 1: certainly different from Reaganism, which is small government at all costs.
Speaker 1: And Teal is very much an intellectual leader and a
Speaker 1: funder in a lot of ways of that vanguard. Gd
Speaker 1: Vance is a ten NaIO member. Gd Evance, of course, yes,
Speaker 1: is in the videos that we obtained for this story.
Speaker 1: And I personally think J. D. Evans is someone I
Speaker 1: know your listeners are watching him, but watch him closely.
Speaker 1: I think he is as much a leader of this
Speaker 1: new conservative vanguard as a Josh Holly or a Desantist.
Speaker 1: And here's a stupid question. I'm always like, like, want
Speaker 1: to give these people a chance because I'm an idiot,
Speaker 1: but I'm just curious, like Vance was, I mean again,
Speaker 1: I want to think the Advance is less evil than
Speaker 1: the rest of them, despite all of his behavior to
Speaker 1: the contrary. All right, that's it. That wasn't a question.
Speaker 1: But he's not. I mean it sounds like he's not.
Speaker 1: He's undergone a really fascinating evolution. You know, he is
Speaker 1: not the jade evance of yester year. Yeah, of yester
Speaker 1: year of the VC world. I don't think he's even
Speaker 1: the jade evance of hill Billiology at this point. You know,
Speaker 1: he really is this sort of anti woke of strong
Speaker 1: government conservative kind of you know, there's a populous strain
Speaker 1: in there, but it's hard to see where it goes.
Speaker 1: And certainly very much anti woke. You know, him winning
Speaker 1: a Senate seat in Ohio, which though it has pushed
Speaker 1: to the right quite a bit, is still a decent
Speaker 1: bellweather for the country, I think very much puts him
Speaker 1: on the national map as much as any of these
Speaker 1: other folks who have stepped forward, whether it's de Santists
Speaker 1: or Haley, you name it. And you know, I think
Speaker 1: Vance is very much at the Van Guarden. I think
Speaker 1: it is not that sort of feel good populism hillibeliology
Speaker 1: of the past. It is stronger and and a bit
Speaker 1: darker than that. It's pretty dark. Yeah, thank you so much. Andy.
Speaker 1: I hope you will come back. I hope you'll have
Speaker 1: me back. I love this podcast and it's a pleasure
Speaker 1: to be on it. No, Molly jun Fast, Jesse Cannon.
Speaker 1: You know those like defend New Orleans, defend shirts. I'm
Speaker 1: going down to marrow Lago and I'm making some that
Speaker 1: say defend Marlago because we're gonna surround the place to
Speaker 1: keep President Trump from being arrested. I love this because
Speaker 1: it's so stupid. But also what if we use trappers
Speaker 1: to circule event the Patriot Moat? Everything have to be patriot,
Speaker 1: That's what it says on this four jam to be Patriot.
Speaker 1: Remember what we did that interview where Trump wid to
Speaker 1: fill the book, make a moat at the border wall
Speaker 1: and have alligators in it. What do you think it's
Speaker 1: going to be at this mote? Do you think like
Speaker 1: they're just going to fill it with some of the
Speaker 1: bis quick from the Omelet station. If it were me
Speaker 1: and I was in charge of a moat, I would
Speaker 1: put um piranhas in a moat because I feel like, oh, good, good, good, right,
Speaker 1: if you're going to have a moat. You might as
Speaker 1: well have a really vicious fish in your moat. I
Speaker 1: like this as a career pivot for you, vote interior desider.
Speaker 1: A lot of these Republicans want to take us back
Speaker 1: to the dark ages, and in most ways they're wrong.
Speaker 1: But I'm open to moats. Okay, what do we think
Speaker 1: you one day get one for your future country house.
Speaker 1: That's right. That's it for this episode of Fast Politics.
Speaker 1: Tune in every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday to your the
Speaker 1: best minds in politics makes sense of all this chaos.
Speaker 1: If you enjoyed what you've heard, please send it to
Speaker 1: a friend and keep the conversation going. And again, thanks
Speaker 1: for listening.