Speaker 1: Hi.
Speaker 2: I'm Mollie John Fast, and this is Fast Politics, where
Speaker 2: we discuss the top political headlines with some of today's
Speaker 2: best minds, and Republican Chris Stewart plans to resign his
Speaker 2: seat in Congress, shrinking Kevin McCarthy is majority. We have
Speaker 2: a great show today. Egen Carroll and ROBERTA. Kaplans dot
Speaker 2: by to talk about their victory against Donald Trump and
Speaker 2: what it means to finally hold him accountable. Then we'll
Speaker 2: talk to the Washington Post Jeff Stein about what actually
Speaker 2: is in this big debt ceialing deal. But first we
Speaker 2: have author of Lucky How Joe Biden barely won the presidency,
Speaker 2: NBC's John Allen. Welcome back to Fast Politics, fan favorite
Speaker 2: John Allen.
Speaker 1: Mollie, John Fast, How are you.
Speaker 3: I'm good.
Speaker 2: So let's talk about what's happening right now.
Speaker 4: Republicans in the Rules Committee.
Speaker 3: What's going to happen with the dead ceiling.
Speaker 1: The dead ceiling is going to be raised. It's not
Speaker 1: clear exactly who's going to vote for it, what the
Speaker 1: process will be. But one good rule for watching Congress
Speaker 1: is that if the Speaker of the House wants something
Speaker 1: to happen and a majority of the members, not the
Speaker 1: majority party, but a majority of the members want it
Speaker 1: to happen.
Speaker 2: It will happen, and I think also it looks like
Speaker 2: in the Senate that's also.
Speaker 1: True, no doubt about it. I mean, Mitch McConnell doesn't
Speaker 1: want to have fights over there. There will be enough
Speaker 1: votes to get it through the Senate. Look, there may
Speaker 1: be some job over the next like twenty four seventy
Speaker 1: two hours, but the truth is, it is very difficult
Speaker 1: for somebody who wants to block this from happening to
Speaker 1: actually block it from happening. The can delay, they can
Speaker 1: throw up roadblocks, they get angry about it, but at
Speaker 1: the end of the day, the vast majority of members
Speaker 1: of Congress want this thing done and off their plate,
Speaker 1: and they want to make sure that the Knight's Nation
Speaker 1: doesn't default. It's going to happen. I mean, anytime you
Speaker 1: got Kevin McCarthy and Joe Biden Agreen on something, you
Speaker 1: got you know, a broad swath of the American public
Speaker 1: behind it too.
Speaker 2: Let's talk about what is in this dead ceiling.
Speaker 1: What they're going to do is basically suspend it for
Speaker 1: two years, so it won't be a problem until after
Speaker 1: the next presidential election, so it won't be back in
Speaker 1: the same spot six months from hour, a year from now.
Speaker 1: They're going to basically put in place some spending caps
Speaker 1: for distractionary spending, which is the annual spending that Congress
Speaker 1: does on basically all the domestic programs you can think
Speaker 1: of a non military spending. They are going to rescind
Speaker 1: I think it's about twenty eight billion dollars of money
Speaker 1: that was put out as COVID relief, you know, in
Speaker 1: previous legislation. I think it's mix of what Biden thinks
Speaker 1: getting of his presidency and some of the leftover from
Speaker 1: the end of the Trump administration, and you know, a
Speaker 1: few other bells and whistles.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, this seems like a victory for Biden.
Speaker 2: I mean, he didn't have to make that many changes.
Speaker 3: You know.
Speaker 2: I Mean the one thing in this dead ceiling package
Speaker 2: that people don't like is the mandatory work requirements with SNAP.
Speaker 2: But those already existed, and the ages is pretty high
Speaker 2: and there are a lot of exceptions. I mean, doesn't
Speaker 2: it seem like a win for Biden?
Speaker 1: So right, they're going from fifty to fifty five for
Speaker 1: the age you would have to have work requirements for
Speaker 1: a couple of per snap. But here's the thing. If
Speaker 1: you were one of the people that all of a
Speaker 1: sudden as work requirements that didn't before, it really sucks
Speaker 1: for you. It's terrible. In terms of the actual population
Speaker 1: that's going to a fact, it's pretty small. To your point,
Speaker 1: their exceptions. The question of whether Biden won, absolutely Biden
Speaker 1: one because the alternative of the nation going into default
Speaker 1: and the economy potentially going into a tailspin on his
Speaker 1: watch was politically unthinkable not to mention obviously for the
Speaker 1: health of the economy and to help the country. So yes,
Speaker 1: it's a win for him if this gets done. It
Speaker 1: is also a win in theory for the country. Right,
Speaker 1: he did give up more than he said he was
Speaker 1: going to give up. He said he would never negotiate,
Speaker 1: or said he wouldn't negotiate on raising the dead ceiling,
Speaker 1: and he did do some negotiation. And there's some things
Speaker 1: that progressives are going to be unhappy with here recording
Speaker 1: those work requirements we talked about, But you know, at
Speaker 1: the end of the day, most of the Congress can
Speaker 1: be able to vote for it, and it prevents what
Speaker 1: could have been a catastrophic political situation providing So yeah,
Speaker 1: it's a w for him. I don't know if it's
Speaker 1: the kind of thing you know that people are a
Speaker 1: year and a half from now going to vote on.
Speaker 1: Say I'm going with Biden because the averted a debt
Speaker 1: limit crisis, but for the NOS.
Speaker 2: Well, I mean, you might not vote for it, but
Speaker 2: you certainly could theoretically vote against your economy being completely right,
Speaker 2: I mean, had we saw when this first debt ceiling
Speaker 2: drama happened in the Obama administration that our credit, our
Speaker 2: national credit was downgraded and that really tanked the market,
Speaker 2: so you could see how this could play out in
Speaker 2: a bad way for the Biden administration, Well.
Speaker 1: I could see how it would have they not come
Speaker 1: to a deal. Yeah, I mean absolutely, I think you know,
Speaker 1: potentially politically detaster. It's been on how long agoes I mean,
Speaker 1: if it's a day or two beyond the default point,
Speaker 1: it's probably not a big deal. But you know, if
Speaker 1: they've been in an impast for a long time, you
Speaker 1: could absolutely see you know, major major disruptions in the economy,
Speaker 1: and ultimately, when people are upset with what's happening in
Speaker 1: the world, they tend to vote against people in power.
Speaker 1: It is easier to throw a president out than to
Speaker 1: throw a Congress out, because the House of Representatives divides
Speaker 1: its districts up in ways that make it very difficult
Speaker 1: to lose general collections. Right right, there's only a handful
Speaker 1: of districts they're competitive, you know, which puts Biden. And
Speaker 1: also there's sort of a collective way into the Congress,
Speaker 1: even a collective partisan blameing. I here to say, oh,
Speaker 1: it's the Republican that this doesn't necessarily mean people take
Speaker 1: it out on their individual number. Whereas the President of
Speaker 1: the United States lives, lives and dies politically on you know,
Speaker 1: how the country is doing when he comes up for
Speaker 1: election the next time.
Speaker 2: Yeah, for sure. So let me ask you about what
Speaker 2: else we're going to see. Now, we're going to see
Speaker 2: this dead ceiling situation continue on, and then really Congress
Speaker 2: is going to leave.
Speaker 1: Right, you should not expect a whole lot to get
Speaker 1: done between now and the twenty twenty four election. I
Speaker 1: mean there will be some low hanging group Jesus Christ.
Speaker 2: Wait, I thought we were going to say this summer,
Speaker 2: not the twenty twenty four election.
Speaker 1: I mean, there's some that they that they probably will
Speaker 1: work on and maybe they'll get some deal on, you know,
Speaker 1: a new farm bill or something. But like with the
Speaker 1: Republican House at place, can be very difficult for her.
Speaker 1: Anything done legislatively but sort of an agenda item for him,
Speaker 1: you know, which is which is why I think you're
Speaker 1: going to hear the White House once this is sign sealed,
Speaker 1: delivered probably talk about, you know, a big accomplishment in
Speaker 1: getting it done. It is not an accomplishment in the
Speaker 1: way of life. You know, an infrastructure bill and you
Speaker 1: see like you know, construction site and bridges going off,
Speaker 1: things like that. But there aren't going to be a
Speaker 1: whole lot of probably you're not going to be a
Speaker 1: whole lot of wind sticks out over the next eighteen
Speaker 1: months for the White House or for anybody else for that.
Speaker 3: That's it.
Speaker 4: That's very dysfunctional.
Speaker 1: Welcome to the swamp.
Speaker 2: We are going to see these Supreme some Supreme Court
Speaker 2: decisions come down because June is Supreme Court season. That
Speaker 2: will very likely have reverberations in the twenty twenty four election.
Speaker 2: If history is any guide.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean estreating a guide. We saw a reverberation
Speaker 1: and Dons in the last election. Cycle, and that decision
Speaker 1: still reverberating now where you're seeing as states actually start
Speaker 1: to implement their new freedom to restrict abortion, and there
Speaker 1: is a race to put on the most extreme restrictions
Speaker 1: along Republicans, and in the case of Brondosaantis is in
Speaker 1: that group, and also in the group of Republican presidential
Speaker 1: with a six week abortion band that he likes to
Speaker 1: talk about in Iowa and doesn't like to talk about another.
Speaker 2: Let's talk about Iowa. Everyone of the Republican the not
Speaker 2: Trump lane, which is like the California highways, says them.
Speaker 2: At this point, everyone in the not Trump lane is
Speaker 2: in Iowa, and Trump is in Iowa too.
Speaker 1: It's not a way in that non Trump lane. It's
Speaker 1: more like an ocean, a non Trump ocean of candidates
Speaker 1: that is somehow growing. I don't know if that has
Speaker 1: to do with melting ice caps or some other phenomenon,
Speaker 1: but you know, we're looking at Mike Pen's probably getting
Speaker 1: in pretty soon. We're looking at Chris Christy probably getting
Speaker 1: in pretty soon, possibly christinued, maybe Glenn Young. I mean,
Speaker 1: there's a whole lot of people looking at getting into
Speaker 1: this race, all of which says that they're not convinced
Speaker 1: that Trump will win, and they're not convinced that the
Speaker 1: Santis will be the best alternative once voters have a
Speaker 1: chance to look at people. As far as Iowa goes,
Speaker 1: you're gonna have the Stantus there tomorroorrow and the following day.
Speaker 1: Trump's going to be there Tomorrow and the following day.
Speaker 1: Of course, it's a holiday week, so I'm bad on
Speaker 1: my days, but they're gonna be there Wednesday and Thursday.
Speaker 1: Trump's doing a Hannity Fox town Hall from Iowa from
Speaker 1: Des Moines on Thursday. By that point, the Santas will
Speaker 1: already be headed toward New Hampshire, where he's got a
Speaker 1: I think it's a four stop swing on Thursday, and
Speaker 1: then South Carolina on Friday. But Iowa is one hundred
Speaker 1: percent the center of the Republican political universe right now.
Speaker 3: But Democrats are not going to Iowa.
Speaker 1: That's because the president in search of renomination without Plum,
Speaker 1: deciding that he was going to exchange the calendar and
Speaker 1: make it help him as much as possible, which having
Speaker 1: watched politics we is not terribly shocking. I wen't want
Speaker 1: to go to Iowa, where he has never gotten off
Speaker 1: the ground. Politically, there are plenty of reasons not do
Speaker 1: Iowa as your first state, especially to part you know,
Speaker 1: with the diverse party. Iowa is not a particularly diverse state.
Speaker 1: But in the case of Joe Biden, moving Iowa out
Speaker 1: of first made it less likely that he would have
Speaker 1: a significant challenge to his renomination.
Speaker 2: We're going to start seeing this Republican primary field have
Speaker 2: debates coming up soon, right starting in.
Speaker 1: August August in Milwaukee there or be Donald Trump, because
Speaker 1: Donald Trump is not committed to going to the debate,
Speaker 1: which raises the possibility that, like you know, Desantus, goes
Speaker 1: out there with a bunch of other candidates and they
Speaker 1: beat up on him instead of beating up on the proprunner.
Speaker 3: Does that seem likely to you? It seems likely to make.
Speaker 1: It doesn't sound like Trump's in the mood to debate
Speaker 1: in August, so I mean he told her, he told
Speaker 1: the Republican Party didn't want to debate in August, and
Speaker 1: they went ahead and schedule then anyway, so he will
Speaker 1: or won't show up. Like my guest is, he will
Speaker 1: find a way to get themselves significant attention during that
Speaker 1: time period, whether it's on the stage or not.
Speaker 4: When will we see Republican primary voting early.
Speaker 1: Next year in Iowa. I don't believe the actual date
Speaker 1: that check, but I mean the first part of the
Speaker 1: year next year anywhere maybe get that worry.
Speaker 2: I mean, do you think there's a chance to stop
Speaker 2: Trump at this lay to date?
Speaker 1: It's very difficult to say that there's no chance that
Speaker 1: Trump will be stopped a given that we're so far away,
Speaker 1: given that he's facing a trial in Manhattan, possible trial
Speaker 1: in Georgia, possible trials in Washington, DC. Ateral level, I
Speaker 1: think it's way too early to say that this race
Speaker 1: is over. On the other hand, I do think that
Speaker 1: there was a theory of the case of an alternative
Speaker 1: to Trump that has kind of been blown apart. Theory
Speaker 1: of the case was most Republicans are done with Trump.
Speaker 1: They think enough of Trump, they want to turn the corner,
Speaker 1: and all somebody else has to do is consolidate the
Speaker 1: non Trump vote to win. And right now, Donald Trump
Speaker 1: has a majority of Republicans in pretty much every national poll,
Speaker 1: which means that you could collect all of the non
Speaker 1: Trump vote right now and still lose. I think some
Speaker 1: of those people are up for grabs. They weren't with
Speaker 1: them before they're with them now can be people that
Speaker 1: moved back to another candidate, But that theory that, you know,
Speaker 1: if there was just one running against him, it would
Speaker 1: definitely be that person that has fallen by the wayside.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and again we don't know what's going to happen,
Speaker 2: but it certainly feels like that this has gone exactly
Speaker 2: as Trump would have liked it too.
Speaker 1: Oh absolutely, And I think that, you know, the the
Speaker 1: other piece of that is now that he has a majority,
Speaker 1: what it means is anybody who's going to beat him
Speaker 1: has to take a bunch of his base. Yeah, that's
Speaker 1: been a challenge. Nobody's been able to do that so far.
Speaker 1: Doesn't mean somebody could do in the future. But I
Speaker 1: think the only way to speak to that base is
Speaker 1: to like defeat Trump in some visible, tangible way, whether
Speaker 1: that's in debates or in states or whatnot. You know,
Speaker 1: I think a lot of the Trump based looks at
Speaker 1: him as the toughest customer in the room, and the
Speaker 1: way to get to the hearts of the folks who
Speaker 1: care most about that is probably to show that you're
Speaker 1: a toper customer and Trump and that is no easy feat.
Speaker 2: I mean again, just to go back to history for
Speaker 2: a minute, Hillary Clinton won those debates.
Speaker 1: I mean, if you were scoring in like a traditional sense,
Speaker 1: hillary Clinton won the debates or won the shed of them,
Speaker 1: right collectively, certain high points for Trump within that set
Speaker 1: of three debates. On the other hand, what Trump did
Speaker 1: was he delivered the messages that he wanted to to
Speaker 1: the audiences that he wanted to deliver them. So again,
Speaker 1: if you're scoring in you know, sort of a traditional
Speaker 1: the points are like a fencing contest, and you know
Speaker 1: what the rules are for scoring, you'd say that Hillary
Speaker 1: Quinton won. But you know, Donald Trump brought a shotgun
Speaker 1: instead of an a p or instead of a foil
Speaker 1: to the offensing. So it's a little harder to judge
Speaker 1: in traditional terms.
Speaker 2: Right, there's a precedent for Donald Trump losing a debate
Speaker 2: and still winning a nomination or winning the contest.
Speaker 1: Yes, it's possible for him to win, even if it
Speaker 1: looks to anybody who's watched the step before that he lost. Also,
Speaker 1: just a real quick question, does anybody ever use that
Speaker 1: four letter word for a fencing sword meat meat for
Speaker 1: anything other than the New York.
Speaker 4: Times prosper puzzle noe.
Speaker 1: Yeah, So, I apologize for coining a charm on.
Speaker 4: Podcast John Allen, please come back whenever you ask.
Speaker 2: Egene Carroll is a journalist, author, and advice columnist.
Speaker 4: ROBERTA.
Speaker 2: Kaplan is a lawyer focused on commercial litigation and public interest.
Speaker 2: Welcome back, Egen, and welcome Robbie.
Speaker 4: Hello, Hello, Hello, really good to be here.
Speaker 2: Very excited to have you both here to talk about
Speaker 2: the case. Egen, you're like the only person who has
Speaker 2: managed to hold Trump accountable in any way.
Speaker 5: It's astonishing may that what you just said is true.
Speaker 5: And the reason it is true is because Robbie Kaplan,
Speaker 5: for four straight years has stood up to every single
Speaker 5: one of his wrangling moves, and she got us to trial.
Speaker 5: She got us in front of nine jurors. They heard
Speaker 5: our truth and we want It's an astonishing accomplishment, and
Speaker 5: we hope other people follow in our footsteps, right, Robbie,
Speaker 5: to do.
Speaker 2: Robbie, I wanted to ask you when Egene came to you,
Speaker 2: and again full disclosure came to you through George.
Speaker 4: I knew there.
Speaker 2: Have been other times when he's had lawsuits that haven't
Speaker 2: worked out for him, but where he's actually really been
Speaker 2: held accountable. How did you approach this case that led
Speaker 2: to your success.
Speaker 6: So when my son was little, one of the favorite
Speaker 6: books that he had that I like to read to
Speaker 6: him was called A Dog with a Bone. It had
Speaker 6: good rhymes, but I don't think that's the only reason
Speaker 6: I liked it. There is something about that in my nature.
Speaker 6: It's probably both bad and good. I can often be
Speaker 6: like a dog with a bone, and here in this case,
Speaker 6: I think it's fair to say that the entirety of
Speaker 6: our law firm, Kaplain Hacker and Think kind of stuck
Speaker 6: to it no matter what happened, no matter what the
Speaker 6: ways we were writing were, whether high or low, we
Speaker 6: just kept at it, and ultimately we got to where
Speaker 6: we are today with a trial and the jury verdict.
Speaker 5: In Egene's paper, Robbie Kaplan is relentless.
Speaker 4: Relentless.
Speaker 5: She's that way in her good humor, She's that way
Speaker 5: in her enjoyment of a good dinner. She's that way
Speaker 5: in court, that way. I saw her give wedding vows
Speaker 5: the other day. She married two very fortunate people, and
Speaker 5: she was relentless in making sure that she sent them
Speaker 5: off to have a very happy, happy marriage. I mean,
Speaker 5: the woman she doesn't stop.
Speaker 2: So you've had a lot of success, Robbie with the
Speaker 2: Defensive Marriage Act.
Speaker 6: Yes, it's to be the tenth year nid versa in
Speaker 6: January twenty sixth, United States v.
Speaker 4: Windsor.
Speaker 2: But we never got ROW codified in Congress. But we
Speaker 2: did get same sex marriage codified in Congress. Do you
Speaker 2: think that that was because of this? Do you think
Speaker 2: that was some connection because of what? Because of you
Speaker 2: winning in the Supreme Court?
Speaker 4: Yeah? I look, I think two things happened.
Speaker 6: One the Windsor case, and Edie Windsor, who sadly is
Speaker 6: no longer with us, was the perfect plainiff to bring
Speaker 6: that claim in a way that's very similar to Egene
Speaker 6: was the perfect plainiff against Donald Trump. And I can
Speaker 6: explain that, but they really were both perfectly situated to
Speaker 6: bring the claims that they brought. And I think through
Speaker 6: the litigation of Windsor to the American people really saw,
Speaker 6: which was our goal, that the marriage that Edie Windsor
Speaker 6: had to her spouse, the Aspire, was no different than
Speaker 6: any marriage anyone else ever had, and maybe in a
Speaker 6: lot of ways better, since by the time of her
Speaker 6: death was a quadric beleegic and Edie spent many years
Speaker 6: taking care of her. After we won Windsor, there was
Speaker 6: really a groundswell of litigation. I remember the first case
Speaker 6: was in Utah, of all places, where courts were saying
Speaker 6: that under the logic of Windsor, we have to allow
Speaker 6: same sex marriages to happen. And I think what happened
Speaker 6: there is just the sheer numbers. The sheer numbers of
Speaker 6: people getting married, gay people getting married, and the resulting
Speaker 6: public acceptance made it impossible, I think for things to
Speaker 6: get turned back. Now, one could argue, while I'm sure
Speaker 6: you're thinking this, why isn't the same thing true with abortion?
Speaker 6: It sures how should be even the poll numbers we're
Speaker 6: seeing today, But we are starting to see similar situations
Speaker 6: in terms of states and various local elections really going
Speaker 6: very strongly against the anti choice candidates. So maybe we're
Speaker 6: just at the beginning of the process. Sadly there.
Speaker 2: So the Trump deposition, I've heard you say this in interviews,
Speaker 2: but I need to ask you, Robbie, did you know
Speaker 2: you had.
Speaker 6: Him Well, yeah, we were feeling pretty good about what
Speaker 6: he was saying in the deposition.
Speaker 2: I remember I'm speaking about that moment when he mistakes
Speaker 2: Eugene for marlaw Yeah.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I was astounded by it. And when you read
Speaker 6: the transcript and if you watch the video, it was
Speaker 6: very clear that it wasn't a up by me in
Speaker 6: any way. I wasn't trying to trick him. He mentioned
Speaker 6: the photograph, which he said he saw at the time,
Speaker 6: and I said, well, let me show you a copy.
Speaker 6: I think I have one year to confirm, and that's
Speaker 6: when he pointed to Egene and said it was Marlowe.
Speaker 4: Yeah. We were pretty stunned. I literally, I think almost
Speaker 4: fell off my seat.
Speaker 6: Our job as lawyers was not to show any shock
Speaker 6: or surprise, and we certainly tried very hard not to
Speaker 6: show it. But I can tell you that when we
Speaker 6: took the next break, there was a lot of celebration
Speaker 6: in high fives going on among the lawyers on our team,
Speaker 6: for sure.
Speaker 4: And of course Molly.
Speaker 5: I think the main reason why Trump did not show
Speaker 5: up for the trial was that Robbie had the deposition
Speaker 5: and if he took the stand, it would have been pure,
Speaker 5: unadulterated murder. I don't know how he could have testified
Speaker 5: at all with Robbie giving him the questions. Mali, when
Speaker 5: you read that deposition. You'll see trap after trap that
Speaker 5: he fell into. It was an amazing seven hours or
Speaker 5: however many What happened.
Speaker 4: When about lunch at mari A Lago? What was going
Speaker 4: on there? That was the other case, So it actually
Speaker 4: had been there the week before.
Speaker 6: Right for another case that our firm has against Trump.
Speaker 6: It's based on a pyramid scheme, a multi level marketing
Speaker 6: scheme that we believe he fraudulently promoted to working class
Speaker 6: Americans at that lunch. Let me put it this way,
Speaker 6: he got very angry at his lawyers because they had
Speaker 6: graciously offered to provide us with launch at mar A
Speaker 6: Lago and he didn't know that, and he was not
Speaker 6: at all happy about it. I'm not going to get
Speaker 6: into any more detail than that, but he was not
Speaker 6: a happy camper when he realized that they had made
Speaker 6: that offer to us.
Speaker 2: Egene, I want to ask you when you saw that picture.
Speaker 2: I think of you at that period so much, because
Speaker 2: you know, that was the period when I was growing up,
Speaker 2: when my mother was, when you and my mother were close.
Speaker 2: When you saw that picture, did you remember when that
Speaker 2: was taken and some of the color around it.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 5: Joe Takopia, who He's an amazingly likable fellow. But she
Speaker 5: made it out like I had kept this photo and
Speaker 5: on an altar, and then I had worshiped this photo daily.
Speaker 5: What had happened is when I was writing the book
Speaker 5: where I just.
Speaker 4: Wait, wait, do you mean that wasn't true.
Speaker 5: I was looking because I wrote, remember that little book.
Speaker 4: Called what do we Need Men For?
Speaker 3: Men For?
Speaker 5: Yeah, I was looking for cheerleading pictures and I stumbled
Speaker 5: on it in an album and I thought, oh my god.
Speaker 5: Then I remembered that it was probably back taking at
Speaker 5: the time when I was writing for Saturday Night Live,
Speaker 5: because I'm with John Johnson, one of the great guys,
Speaker 5: you know, an anchorman on TV and your ex husband
Speaker 5: and my ex husband, a great guy, as Trump said,
Speaker 5: a great guy, bad labor, John Johnson, and so I
Speaker 5: was very pleased to find it.
Speaker 4: But I completely stumbled on it.
Speaker 5: Hadn't even remembered that I had it, didn't remember it
Speaker 5: being taken, and I did remember meeting mister and missus
Speaker 5: Trump at the time, but I didn't really I couldn't
Speaker 5: quite recall that there.
Speaker 4: Was a photo of it. So yeah, I was very
Speaker 4: happy to see it.
Speaker 2: I want to ask you both about the jury selection.
Speaker 2: It's such an interesting case because you did have a
Speaker 2: jur and later in reporting I saw Robbie that you
Speaker 2: guys tried to get him taken off the jury, right.
Speaker 4: I sure did, and we failed completely, But yes, can
Speaker 4: you talk.
Speaker 2: About that because that germ when I heard he was
Speaker 2: an avid Timpoole watcher. Timpoole is a far right podcaster,
Speaker 2: right right.
Speaker 4: Let me back up.
Speaker 6: So Judge Chaplin has a practice of doing jury selection
Speaker 6: in civil cases a little bit like speed dating.
Speaker 4: There's a whole bunch of people.
Speaker 6: In the room and he asked kind of like a
Speaker 6: lightning round of questions of each jur with all the
Speaker 6: other jurors there, and it goes very fast, and you
Speaker 6: know he's intending to be as efficient as possible in it.
Speaker 4: Understandable. So the guy in question, the juring question who
Speaker 4: to this day I have no idea what his name is.
Speaker 6: That he was asked where he got his news from,
Speaker 6: and both we and the court reporter and a bunch
Speaker 6: of other people thought we heard him say Temple, a
Speaker 6: podcast called Temple or something like that, right, And ironically,
Speaker 6: he was wearing a black jacket and black pants, and
Speaker 6: I thought.
Speaker 4: Well, maybe he's an Orthodox Jew. It didn't even occur.
Speaker 6: To me that there was anything going on, and we
Speaker 6: made the strikes that we made, and he was not
Speaker 6: one of the people that we struck then, so I
Speaker 6: think in the Daily Beasts there was an article written
Speaker 6: that said that actually the reporter there had heard it correctly.
Speaker 6: It turns out had heard him too, have been saying Timpoole,
Speaker 6: who is a He doesn't think he's extreme, but he's
Speaker 6: a pretty extremist kind of alt right type guy who
Speaker 6: has a very popular podcast on YouTube.
Speaker 4: So we immediately brought that up to the judge.
Speaker 6: Everyone agreed that the mistake was mutual in the sense
Speaker 6: that no one had heard that other than the Daily
Speaker 6: Beast guy, and the judge held a series of proceedings
Speaker 6: to decide what to do. The juror answered a number
Speaker 6: of questions, and I think Judge Kaplan correctly held that
Speaker 6: based on his answers, there was no basis for what's
Speaker 6: called up for cause challenge. That he had said he
Speaker 6: could consider the evidence fairly and he would consider it fairly,
Speaker 6: and we now know it turns out that's what he did.
Speaker 6: But we did make a motion based on the fact
Speaker 6: that he said that he listens to this podcast to
Speaker 6: exclude him because the podcast had not only it's not
Speaker 6: only pretty alt right, but it specifically said some things
Speaker 6: pretty negative about Egene.
Speaker 4: Carroll, which didn't make us very happy either.
Speaker 6: But we to this day, the guy said he didn't
Speaker 6: recall hearing any of those podcasts.
Speaker 4: And to this day, I believe that he did it,
Speaker 4: you know, Robbie.
Speaker 5: Judge Kaplan was also correct about one another, saying when emally,
Speaker 5: when he gave the jury instructions before they left to
Speaker 5: go make up their minds, he said it was around
Speaker 5: eleven thirty when he was giving instruction, right, Robbie, around
Speaker 5: eleven thirty in the morning. Yeah, And he said, now
Speaker 5: you're going to break for lunch, and if you come
Speaker 5: to a decision during lunch, you should send a note.
Speaker 5: I'm rolling my eyes. I'm thinking these jury members are
Speaker 5: such a mystery to us that there were no way,
Speaker 5: no way they're going to come to any sort of
Speaker 5: decision about anything during lunch. And then we went off
Speaker 5: to lunch, and then Robbie, what happened?
Speaker 4: Yeah, and then they came back like it took him.
Speaker 6: It was less than two and a half hours really
Speaker 6: with lunch breaks, but they came back in two and
Speaker 6: a half hours.
Speaker 4: Were you shocked at how quickly I could hardly stand up? Yeah,
Speaker 4: we were all shocked.
Speaker 6: I mean, there was a lot of fear on our part.
Speaker 6: I think I don't think anyone on our team thought
Speaker 6: that we lost, but we were very worried that they
Speaker 6: were going to you know, you can give a defamation
Speaker 6: plan of a dollar, like a symbolic dollar, right, and
Speaker 6: we were very worried that that was going to be
Speaker 6: the end result because we couldn't figure out how they'd
Speaker 6: had enough time to come up with damages. The one
Speaker 6: thing that was really clear, given the amount of time
Speaker 6: that they've spent, or the relatively small amount of time
Speaker 6: that they spent deliberating, is it must have been that
Speaker 6: when they came in they had all made up their minds.
Speaker 6: It doesn't sound like they spent all that much time
Speaker 6: arguing about the merits, right.
Speaker 5: It's amazing, amazing, Molly, I've never been through anything like that, Molly.
Speaker 6: My partner Sean Prowley, who did the trial with me,
Speaker 6: just walked into my office.
Speaker 4: You might if she joined us?
Speaker 3: Yeah?
Speaker 4: Please?
Speaker 2: I was wondering if either of you, Robbie Sean wanted
Speaker 2: to just talk a little bit about what it means
Speaker 2: to have opened the door to defamation and what that
Speaker 2: could mean for other plaintiffs.
Speaker 4: Let me begin and then everyone else should fill in.
Speaker 6: So when you think about what happened here, what Donald
Speaker 6: Trump did to each and Carroll, and she explained this
Speaker 6: beautifully while on the stand. Obviously he heard her terribly
Speaker 6: when he sexually assaulted her, and there's no question about that.
Speaker 6: But in terms of the harm, the lasting harm, or
Speaker 6: the harm that had the most dramatic impact, it was
Speaker 6: the defamation because by going out in June twenty seventeen
Speaker 6: and saying that she was a nutjob and it was
Speaker 6: a hoax and she was doing a part of a
Speaker 6: conspiracy with you, Molly and George Conway and a whole
Speaker 6: bunch of other people, that she just made it up,
Speaker 6: he destroyed her reputation. Egene spent her career as a
Speaker 6: journalist and an advice columnist, someone that readers turned to
Speaker 6: for the truth and for honest, candid advice, and so
Speaker 6: to say that that person it was a wet job
Speaker 6: was horribly damaging and Egene lost her job, and there
Speaker 6: were all kinds of kind of reverberations from that, and
Speaker 6: to this day, there's a significant percentage of the American
Speaker 6: population who thinks she is exactly what Donald Trump says
Speaker 6: she is right. So we knew our original case was
Speaker 6: only a defamation case, and we knew going in that
Speaker 6: the greatest damage was defamation. Now, ironically, of the various
Speaker 6: defamation claims, the greatest damage is the case that's still
Speaker 6: to be decided, or at least still to be decided
Speaker 6: on damages, which is the original case, which we call
Speaker 6: Carol One, because that relates to the statements that he
Speaker 6: made that summer of twenty seventeen, and that's where the
Speaker 6: greatest damage was done to Egene's reputation. The expert that
Speaker 6: we use who took the stand in Egene's trial, has
Speaker 6: calculated that they're the damage figures somewhere in the range
Speaker 6: between ten and twenty million dollars, and that's why we're
Speaker 6: so intent on bringing that case to a close. And
Speaker 6: that's the case where we sought we're now seeking punitive
Speaker 6: damages based on the CNN town hall and why that's
Speaker 6: relevant is punitive damages can only be assessed based on
Speaker 6: a ratio of the compensatory damages, right, So if the
Speaker 6: compensator damages are a million dollars, then constitutionally speaking, you
Speaker 6: can only get five or six million dollars in punitive damages.
Speaker 6: But if the compensatory damages, as they are in Carol two,
Speaker 6: are somewhere on the range of ten to twenty million dollars,
Speaker 6: then for punitive damages you're talking a lot of money.
Speaker 2: So, but can you explain just the nuances here? The
Speaker 2: second case is you went back to the first case.
Speaker 2: You didn't file another case.
Speaker 4: No, no, no, the first case. The first case is
Speaker 4: still pending.
Speaker 6: And the reason why it's behind because of very complicated
Speaker 6: issues involving federal law and whether or not when Trump
Speaker 6: said what he said in June twenty seventeen, he was
Speaker 6: saying to serve himself, He was saying it to serve himself,
Speaker 6: or he was saying in order to serve the interests
Speaker 6: of the American people. Judge Kaplan, not surprisingly given the context,
Speaker 6: concluded that he.
Speaker 4: Was saying it for his own personal reasons.
Speaker 6: We believe that discovery has now confirmed that the DC
Speaker 6: Court of Appeals, which got the case after the Second
Speaker 6: Circuit sent it there, concluded that that is the relevant
Speaker 6: question whether when he said it, he was too little attenuated.
Speaker 6: It's old fashioned language, too little attenuated to serve the
Speaker 6: American people.
Speaker 4: If that's true, then that case will go forward.
Speaker 6: But all that's left to do in that case is
Speaker 6: just damages because the fact that the statements, which are
Speaker 6: almost the same or defamatory, that's now a settled issue.
Speaker 4: As between Egen and Donald Trump.
Speaker 2: This is so interesting, Egene. Do you feel vindicated?
Speaker 4: Yes, I feel like I got my name back. I
Speaker 4: feel like he dragged me through the mud.
Speaker 5: He lied about me, he said terrible things about me,
Speaker 5: and the jury said that he was lying and that
Speaker 5: I was telling the truth. So yes, Molly, I do
Speaker 5: feel vindicated. But not just for me. This is really
Speaker 5: not just for me. This is for every woman who
Speaker 5: has had to put up with a man grabbing at
Speaker 5: her and then laughing and say he didn't.
Speaker 4: Do it, you know, And that's millions of women. So
Speaker 4: this was just not for me, but it was for what, uh,
Speaker 4: you know, for every woman in the nation.
Speaker 3: Thank you both so much.
Speaker 4: Thank you It pleasure. Hi.
Speaker 2: It's Mollie, and I am wildly excited that for the
Speaker 2: first time fast politics the show you're listening to right.
Speaker 4: Now is going to have merch for sale.
Speaker 2: Over at shop dot fastpoliticspod dot com.
Speaker 4: You can now buy shirts, hats.
Speaker 2: Hoodies, and toe bags with our incredible designs.
Speaker 4: We've heard your.
Speaker 2: Cries to spread the word about our podcast and get
Speaker 2: a tow bag with my adorable Leo the Rescue Puppy
Speaker 2: on it, and now you can grab this merchandise only
Speaker 2: at shop dot fastpoliticspod dot com.
Speaker 4: Thanks for your support.
Speaker 2: Jeff Stein is the White House economics reporter for the
Speaker 2: Washington Post. Welcome back to Fast Politics time.
Speaker 7: Thanks for having me.
Speaker 1: Mollie.
Speaker 2: I had to have you because you are one of
Speaker 2: the only people who has read what is in the debt.
Speaker 4: Ceiling deal, as we call it.
Speaker 2: Here, So talk to me about what's actually in there.
Speaker 7: What's actually in there is really anticlimactic. I feel like
Speaker 7: I have to say, We've been doing these stories for
Speaker 7: months and months about this epic, drag out battle between
Speaker 7: McCarthy and Biden, and it was going to maybe transform
Speaker 7: Americans society or destroy the economy or you know, cause
Speaker 7: this global financial crisis, and what we got is this
Speaker 7: like kind of amazing nothing burger. Really, in both directions,
Speaker 7: which maybe was more predictable in hindsight than we realized
Speaker 7: at the time. The bill, I think the most important
Speaker 7: thing from the Democrats perspective is it gets this headache
Speaker 7: off the White House's plate for two years. They don't
Speaker 7: have to think about the debt ceiling until after the
Speaker 7: twenty four presidential election. The Republicans got some I think,
Speaker 7: not really as many concessions as they were for certainly
Speaker 7: and not as long as many people expected, but.
Speaker 3: And not as many as they were bragging they were
Speaker 3: going to have.
Speaker 7: Yeah, so freezing domestic spending, which is an inflation adjusted cut,
Speaker 7: new work requirements on food stamps and federal welfare benefits, but.
Speaker 3: There's an age cap on that.
Speaker 7: Yes, the new work requirements will sunset for snap in
Speaker 7: twenty thirty. Some permitting changes that Republicans had been seeking.
Speaker 4: But that's a separate bill, right.
Speaker 7: No, No, that will be in there. I mean, but
Speaker 7: they were. They're really quite minimal, I mean, the kind
Speaker 7: of changes that Republicans really want. The White House fought
Speaker 7: to withdraw. And I'll just quickly say that I think
Speaker 7: the biggest Republican win here is of the eighty billion
Speaker 7: dollars that the White House approved last year for the
Speaker 7: Internal Revenue Services expansion. The Republicans got twenty billions, so
Speaker 7: really a quarter of that huge initiati from the Biden administration,
Speaker 7: that twenty billion will be rescinded. And you know, Republicans
Speaker 7: really do not like the idea of more aggressive tax enforcement.
Speaker 7: And this money was going to be used for proving
Speaker 7: taxpayer services call lines, and so this will continue to
Speaker 7: make it harder for the IRS to rebuild. So that's
Speaker 7: kind of the broad contours of the deal.
Speaker 2: Right, They're psyched because their donors might be less likely
Speaker 2: to get audited. Though actually the reporting has shown that
Speaker 2: the IRS tends to actually sort of stick into people
Speaker 2: who are poor.
Speaker 7: Right, well for now, right, But like that, the whole
Speaker 7: idea was like, let's change.
Speaker 2: That, right, which is which actually would be good. But
Speaker 2: I always think of you as as I read you
Speaker 2: all the time, and you know, you obviously are a
Speaker 2: straight reporter, but you tend to be a little more
Speaker 2: on the progressive side.
Speaker 3: Am I allowed to say that? Should I not say that?
Speaker 7: I'm allowed to just be silent and response mabe.
Speaker 4: Okay, great.
Speaker 2: I had expected that this would be a negotiation where
Speaker 2: the progressives might be slightly unhappy, but they would, you know,
Speaker 2: they would realize that, like the fourteenth amendument. As much
Speaker 2: as I would love to see the Fourteenth Amendment invoked,
Speaker 2: it would come down to some very scary, eleventh hour stuff.
Speaker 2: Relying on a very trumpy core or minting the enormously
Speaker 2: valuable coin, which again you know you're in unprecedented territory,
Speaker 2: might work, but could The stakes are very high to
Speaker 2: start doing unprecedented stuff. But I actually think this is
Speaker 2: not as much of a lose for progressives as a
Speaker 2: lot of us were expecting.
Speaker 7: I think a lot of this is expectations setting. I
Speaker 7: think if you had said six months ago that the
Speaker 7: White House would have to give up a quarter of
Speaker 7: its IRS expansion as a price to get Republicans not
Speaker 7: to blow up the economy and think what is right,
Speaker 7: been a little disappointed in that. But I will say
Speaker 7: I mean about a week and a half ago, I
Speaker 7: was writing a story, a seventeen hundred word story that
Speaker 7: I had written that was never published, which is just
Speaker 7: the most painful thing for a journalist. The real victim here.
Speaker 7: But the thing that they were looking at that I
Speaker 7: was writing about the prospect of was from the math
Speaker 7: I was doing, based on what I was hearing from
Speaker 7: negotiations was an eight to twelve percent cut to the
Speaker 7: part of the federal budget that's most important for anti
Speaker 7: poverty initiatives. And in the context of that as the
Speaker 7: barrel that we were looking down the end of the irs,
Speaker 7: changes are like from the progressive perspective, you know, like
Speaker 7: a little slap on the wrist. I think, if you're weighing,
Speaker 7: on the one hand, trying to make sure that the
Speaker 7: poorest people in this country have life saving services and
Speaker 7: you protect that, you prevent that from getting hit, and
Speaker 7: the price you have to pay is making it a
Speaker 7: little easier for rich people to cheat on their taxes.
Speaker 7: I think that's a trade that progresses make every day
Speaker 7: and twice on Sunday.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that was my sense, And I think that the
Speaker 2: MAGA crew had hoped they were going to be able
Speaker 2: to blow up the federal government.
Speaker 6: Well.
Speaker 7: I also think like from their perspective, it makes sense
Speaker 7: that you know, we've had this whole evolution from the
Speaker 7: twenty tens and the Tea Party and this sort of
Speaker 7: deep ideological ferment in the Republican Party about spending and
Speaker 7: a lot of us myself included, you know, saw the
Speaker 7: Trump era as kind of a retreat. Trump just said,
Speaker 7: you know, I don't really care about any of this
Speaker 7: Paul Ryan stuff. I will increase the debt by more
Speaker 7: than any president of American history, by over seven trillion dollars.
Speaker 7: And then Republicans came back in and said, we're going
Speaker 7: to go back, like just let's do rip Van Winkle
Speaker 7: and pretend like the last four years never happened and
Speaker 7: reincarnate our tea party selves. And I think one possible
Speaker 7: interpretation will have to see how that shakes up. But
Speaker 7: one possible reading of what's happened here is that the
Speaker 7: Trump effect on the party's ideological core actually was real,
Speaker 7: and McCarthy wanted to get a own on Biden, and
Speaker 7: maybe he did own him, you know, like Biden was like,
Speaker 7: I'm not going to negotiate, and clearly Biden did. But
Speaker 7: when it came to the substance of the agreement, the
Speaker 7: Republicans don't seem like that actually agitated about the like
Speaker 7: discretionary non defense numbers over ten years, which is to me,
Speaker 7: potentially like the Trump influence on the party so interesting.
Speaker 2: I mean, that is the weird thing about Trump right,
Speaker 2: And again, nobody is saying anything good about Trump here.
Speaker 2: The guy is trying to kill American democracy and working
Speaker 2: hard to do it. But it is interesting to me.
Speaker 2: You know, he does this populist rhetoric. So what he
Speaker 2: has said, you know, I mean again, is it true?
Speaker 2: You know, who knows, but he has been pretending to
Speaker 2: be pro social safety net.
Speaker 7: There's this interesting coalitional element here that Trump has has,
Speaker 7: as you know, as a mechanism for sort of overtaking
Speaker 7: the Republican Party kind of had to make peace with
Speaker 7: some of its major players, including sort of the Paul
Speaker 7: Ryan wing. And so in the Trump administration there were
Speaker 7: all these people who were fanatically devoted to cutting this
Speaker 7: part of the budget. And Trump, I think, despite all
Speaker 7: the anti democratic impulses and actions that you're accurately alluding to,
Speaker 7: Trump like kind of thought these guys were a little weird.
Speaker 7: Like he Trump is like a star billionaire playboy, Like
Speaker 7: he's not like devoted his life to lowering on specionary spending,
Speaker 7: like he wants to know what's popular. And this like
Speaker 7: almost like Greek tragedy element to some of these like
Speaker 7: advisors around him who talk about Trump in these like
Speaker 7: highly idealized terms, and they worship Trump and then they
Speaker 7: spend like years trying to cut spending and Trump is like,
Speaker 7: you guys are weird. Like I know you love me,
Speaker 7: but like I don't. Actually, I'm like, they're like, we
Speaker 7: give we must do this, and he's like, I'm going
Speaker 7: to like go to the golf course and like hit
Speaker 7: some long drives and like you guys can like scream
Speaker 7: about how mcmarthy sacrificed the budget and it's like he
Speaker 7: doesn't care.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean he did want to crash the economy.
Speaker 2: I mean he said, don't make a deal. The impulse
Speaker 2: of Trump is. I mean, I was surprised they weren't.
Speaker 2: And again, you know, this deal has not passed yet,
Speaker 2: and if it doesn't pass, we're all completely fucked.
Speaker 3: I mean, let's be honest.
Speaker 2: But I was surprised that there weren't more people on
Speaker 2: the trumpy right who are like, let's just blow up
Speaker 2: the economy so that Trump gets elected in twenty four.
Speaker 7: I think it is really surprised. I had the same
Speaker 7: reaction and it was not what I was anticipating. Like
Speaker 7: I thought, right now Trump would be like constantly like
Speaker 7: posting on his you know.
Speaker 4: Website constantly truthing on his truth social.
Speaker 7: It would be truthing about how McCarthy was like a
Speaker 7: rhino and the deal was terrible and everything. And I
Speaker 7: wonder if they have polling that it's like not good
Speaker 7: to like destroy the economy, like me, yeah, someone who
Speaker 7: said that.
Speaker 2: It must be because there's that's the only way any
Speaker 2: of this is happening. And the polling I saw a
Speaker 2: show that Biden would get blamed for destroying the economy,
Speaker 2: but it must be that both of them will get
Speaker 2: blamed and that that's why they're doing it.
Speaker 7: It is interesting because DeSantis is like out there saying
Speaker 7: that this is a bad deal and like trying to
Speaker 7: carve out a lane to the right of Trump on this.
Speaker 7: But like, do conservative voters really, like, are they really
Speaker 7: that worked up about like the baseline for like the
Speaker 7: CBO report? You know, it's just like I don't know, No,
Speaker 7: they don't.
Speaker 3: Get shit about cutting spending.
Speaker 2: I mean that's the thing that I mean, trump Ism
Speaker 2: has brought to bears that they don't care about the deficit.
Speaker 4: The deficit is bullshit.
Speaker 2: If it's a way to darve poor kids to keep
Speaker 2: them from having free breakfast, then they care about the deficit.
Speaker 2: But if it's going to deprive billionaires of tax cuts,
Speaker 2: then no way.
Speaker 7: Yeah, or or you know, ensure that that billionaires don't
Speaker 7: face higher tax enforces. I yes, yes, talk about a
Speaker 7: Jille Trump might like, you know, it's so sleazy.
Speaker 3: So let me ask you.
Speaker 2: Now, there's going to be a lot of complaining on
Speaker 2: the right.
Speaker 3: I mean, talk to me about Nancy Mace. She's very mad.
Speaker 7: Yeah, she's the South Carolina woman, right, yeah.
Speaker 2: I mean the people who are the maddest about this
Speaker 2: deal seem to be like the Chip Roy crew.
Speaker 3: Though he's going to vote it through rules.
Speaker 2: It sounds like the Tea Party crew, though some of
Speaker 2: them are on board.
Speaker 3: I mean that's the thing that's like baffling about this.
Speaker 2: And again perhaps we were too cynical, but like Jim
Speaker 2: Jordan supports it.
Speaker 7: I can't believe I'm saying this, but I think a
Speaker 7: lot of people really did kind of underestimate Kevin McCarthy's
Speaker 7: ability to get it Jill done. I was just talking
Speaker 7: with someone about do you remember when Nancy Pelosi called.
Speaker 1: Him a moron?
Speaker 3: Yeah, he is a moron.
Speaker 7: And then he printed the shirt the T shirts he
Speaker 7: sold t shirts on his website that said, like I'm
Speaker 7: a moron, We're owning this. I remember because Pelosi's staffed
Speaker 7: tweeded back like this is the first like Republican truth
Speaker 7: in advertising. But he like he seems to have like
Speaker 7: tamped down a lot of the rabble rousers in his caucus.
Speaker 7: And I think we should not discount the fact that
Speaker 7: if the dead ceiling deal got did not get done right,
Speaker 7: we would be looking at a ten to twenty percent
Speaker 7: to climb the stock market. That happened even before the
Speaker 7: debt ceiling was breached eleven And yeah, remember Republicans like
Speaker 7: here all the time from business leaders. They thems tend
Speaker 7: to be more affluent, and they're highly attuned to the
Speaker 7: stock market. And CEOs did not want to see the
Speaker 7: stock market drop by fifteen percent again, which I think
Speaker 7: is understandable. And so when we look at that at
Speaker 7: sort of the elements in play here, this is a
Speaker 7: big countervailing force all in the anti spending Republicans that
Speaker 7: that they if Jim Jordan can say to his you know,
Speaker 7: the right wing activist, we got a good deal that
Speaker 7: Bian didn't want to give us anything on, then he
Speaker 7: can you know, sort of vote for the deal and
Speaker 7: not have to, you know, have to handle large business
Speaker 7: interests yelling at him.
Speaker 2: Well, the thing I was struck by was that it
Speaker 2: seems like McCarthy and we were all criticizing him, but
Speaker 2: it seems as if McCarthy has brought the right flank
Speaker 2: in and it had somehow been able to control them
Speaker 2: by making giving them a seat at the table.
Speaker 7: I think that's right. I mean the fact that even
Speaker 7: the House Freeme Calucus members that we've spoken to in
Speaker 7: the last few days, they're not even like even the
Speaker 7: most right wing of them who are going to vote
Speaker 7: against this. And to be clear, we've known for months
Speaker 7: that he would lose thirty to thirty five votes right
Speaker 7: off the bat just by raising the debt ceiling. But
Speaker 7: there's a lot of voices and even they are not
Speaker 7: discussing deposing McCarthy, which is the threat that everyone thought
Speaker 7: that they were going to make. So they've really put
Speaker 7: down their weapons here. And the sort of the crucial
Speaker 7: question has always been not the thirty most right wing members,
Speaker 7: but like sort of the next sixty, like where do
Speaker 7: they go? And by all indications, they are actually quite
Speaker 7: comfortable with the deal. And I think it goes back
Speaker 7: to what we were just discussing, that, like, their voters
Speaker 7: are not that upset, and if they have to deal
Speaker 7: with business groups in their districts yelling at them to
Speaker 7: get this done, it's not ultimately that hard to vote,
Speaker 7: especially if Trump isn't like running on the sidelines, you know,
Speaker 7: jumping up and down.
Speaker 3: Trying to get them primary.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 2: But the other thing that's interesting is like Trump doesn't
Speaker 2: have and I think we've seen this. Trump does not
Speaker 2: have the power he used to have, even with the primary.
Speaker 2: Maybe in the Ruby Rads. If Trump tweeted about you
Speaker 2: like your life was a misery, you know, you would
Speaker 2: be like constant death threats for a month.
Speaker 3: His base is not the same amount of mad that
Speaker 3: they used to be.
Speaker 7: Yeah, that's interesting.
Speaker 3: I mean it's a low bar, but.
Speaker 7: I mean I don't know. The poll still suggests to
Speaker 7: me that he I know this is boring sort of
Speaker 7: pundit talk, but he's she's doing quite well.
Speaker 3: I think they can't beat him.
Speaker 7: But no, I think you're right that the air has
Speaker 7: gone out of the balloon.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: I think when people go to jail because of stuff
Speaker 2: you've told them to do, they are slightly more hesitant
Speaker 2: to do stuff you told them to do.
Speaker 7: Yeah, and maybe you know Congress has the same reaction
Speaker 7: with blowing up the world economy.
Speaker 4: Right, I mean, so tell me what the timetable is now.
Speaker 7: I think they're going to pass this thing on Wednesday,
Speaker 7: maybe Thursday, and then.
Speaker 3: It goes to the Senate.
Speaker 7: When I think Wednesday evening. I mean, these guys love
Speaker 7: nothing more than getting out of town as soon as possible,
Speaker 7: and frankly I fully support that.
Speaker 3: I mean, they were out this weekend.
Speaker 2: It's not like anybody stayed back in DC over the weekend.
Speaker 7: I guess Noally, they might have to do two consecutive
Speaker 7: days of work in June.
Speaker 2: They get so mad when you say that, even like
Speaker 2: the one you know, They're like, no, we do our
Speaker 2: district work.
Speaker 7: I'm like, Okay, I simultaneously think that they are quite lazy,
Speaker 7: but I also think that I would hate it. Seems
Speaker 7: really miserable, like it would. Yeah, you're like one of
Speaker 7: the gazillion people who has like effectively no power. Almost
Speaker 7: certainly you like have to like lie to everyone all
Speaker 7: the time about what you actually think.
Speaker 4: It's just like such a bad job.
Speaker 7: Yeah, it just seems awful, like you can't like work
Speaker 7: from home whenever you feel like it unless you're you know,
Speaker 7: I guess you can, Diane.
Speaker 3: It's time I got to get in trouble.
Speaker 2: The people I've talked to have said that if it
Speaker 2: makes it to the House, it will make it through
Speaker 2: the Center.
Speaker 4: Yeah, especially with Mitch on board. Yeah.
Speaker 7: Yeah, As I was saying, it just sort of feels
Speaker 7: like a very anticlimactic end to all this drama. But
Speaker 7: you know, I think that's good. The story I'm working
Speaker 7: on now is that Biden has sort of teased the
Speaker 7: idea that he will after this is over, invoked the
Speaker 7: fourteenth Amendment. This is kind of what you were referring
Speaker 7: to earlier. The White House had this fear that if
Speaker 7: they went the unilateral route during a crisis, then the
Speaker 7: debt issuance in violation of the debt ceiling would have
Speaker 7: been legally contested and still could have sparked a financial crisis.
Speaker 4: Certainly true.
Speaker 7: Yeah, Yeah, So what Biden is suggesting is maybe they will.
Speaker 7: What he said on Sunday, even though the remarks were
Speaker 7: kind of confusing, he sort of suggested that they can
Speaker 7: make that They're going to explore doing that even sort
Speaker 7: of absent to crisis, that maybe they can try to
Speaker 7: go forward with that when we're not on the brain.
Speaker 7: The problem with that approach is that courts might not
Speaker 7: take it up. There's no reason for a judicial the
Speaker 7: judicial branch to rule on something that's not a live issue.
Speaker 4: Theoretical. Yeah.
Speaker 7: Yeah, and so I will say, and I hope someone
Speaker 7: in timestamps system throws this back at me if I
Speaker 7: am still like spending my life covering this when he
Speaker 7: comes up again in two years, which you will, I
Speaker 7: will need to rethink some major.
Speaker 4: Congratulations.
Speaker 3: That's it, we're out of time.
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 7: That's perfect, all right, Thank you, guys.
Speaker 5: No mo.
Speaker 4: Jesse Cannon, Molly Jong Fast. Seems that Elon's up to
Speaker 4: no good because he thinks it's funny to own the libs.
Speaker 2: Really interesting, and by interesting, I mean quite stupid. Elon
Speaker 2: Musk took away blue check verification on Twitter. That opened
Speaker 2: the door to a lot of impersonation, including parody accounts.
Speaker 2: There is an AOC parody accoun that said it would
Speaker 2: like to date Elon. Elon then responded with the fire emoji.
Speaker 2: I would like to never have to talk about Twitter again.
Speaker 2: Our moment of fuckery comes from our terrifying CEO of Twitter,
Speaker 2: Elon Musk, engaging with parody accounts and making it impossible
Speaker 2: to tell who is real and who is fake. That's
Speaker 2: it for this episode of Fast Politics. Tune in every Monday, Wednesday,
Speaker 2: and Friday to hear the best minds in politics makes
Speaker 2: sense of all this chaos. If you enjoyed what you've heard,
Speaker 2: please send it to a friend and keep the conversation going.
Speaker 2: And again, thanks for listening.