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 Nancy Pelosi resigned from her leadership position.
Speaker 1: We have a thrilling show today. Politicos Rachel bad stops
Speaker 1: by to talk about the latest fallout from the mid
Speaker 1: terms and the change in Democratic and Republican leadership. Then
Speaker 1: Mom's Demand Actions Shannon Watts stops by to tell us
Speaker 1: about the effect gun activists have had on the elections.
Speaker 1: But first we have the amazing Mary Trump to talk
Speaker 1: about the realities of Donald Trump running for president again.
Speaker 1: Welcome to Fast Politics, my friend Mary Trump. While I'm
Speaker 1: so excited to be here, I love the new show
Speaker 1: and I've been wanting to come on since you started.
Speaker 1: It's so good. Everybody has to just become a regular
Speaker 1: listener to this phenomenal podcast. You know, we're a mutual
Speaker 1: admiration society here we are, which is true. And you,
Speaker 1: you know, you write so well, you podcast, you interview,
Speaker 1: you do everything. So let's talk about our collective PTSD.
Speaker 1: And I'm not even making light of this. I actually
Speaker 1: think we knew he was going to announce, and yet
Speaker 1: I found myself just like, oh God, like I mean,
Speaker 1: I can only imagine how it is for you. It's
Speaker 1: interesting that this time around, it's not that he's announcing,
Speaker 1: because that was inevitable, it's that he's been allowed to that,
Speaker 1: that he continues to be in this position to play
Speaker 1: the system. People said many of his supporters in the
Speaker 1: immediate aftermath of the midterm debacle for the Republicans that
Speaker 1: Donald was the biggest loser. It's like, explained to me,
Speaker 1: in what way he's he personally is losing here? I
Speaker 1: can't think of one, as your former co host will,
Speaker 1: since that everything Donald touches does except him apparently, well,
Speaker 1: use say more about that. It's just a reminder, and again,
Speaker 1: there are plenty of people in this country who have
Speaker 1: always known that there's really no justice, and to the
Speaker 1: extent that there is, the justice system is wildly unfair
Speaker 1: and biased in terms of white people and especially rich
Speaker 1: people who are also white. But it's it's something else
Speaker 1: entirely to see in real time and so publicly, one person,
Speaker 1: time after time after time be not just allowed but
Speaker 1: enabled to commit the most egregious crimes and not only
Speaker 1: suffer no consequences, but continue to fail up as Donald
Speaker 1: has been doing since he was a toppler. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: mean that is so striking to me, and I'm so
Speaker 1: glad you're talking about this because it really is just
Speaker 1: kind of unbelievable. It's not just the usual suspects that
Speaker 1: you would expect, you know, it's not just the people
Speaker 1: who have judges he appointed, for example. It does seem
Speaker 1: to be the entire system is inherently incapable of righting wrongs,
Speaker 1: of getting out of its own way. It was particularly demoralizing.
Speaker 1: I mean, the whole bullshit about you can't charge anybody
Speaker 1: before an election, even if he's not running in the election,
Speaker 1: as if not charging him weren't taking a political position potentially,
Speaker 1: But then to hear that the Justice Department is weighing
Speaker 1: whether or not anybody else too did the same things
Speaker 1: would be charged, Like, you guys haven't made these decisions yet.
Speaker 1: It's been forever already. There are so many people who
Speaker 1: have really had their lives ruined by Trump, you know,
Speaker 1: from the cops who were involved in the January six
Speaker 1: insurrection trying to protect the capital two people like Maria Ivanovitch.
Speaker 1: And it really is interesting that the person who has
Speaker 1: said all of this emotion continues to just be im
Speaker 1: palm beach and Molly, you're absolutely right to talk about
Speaker 1: it in terms of pt SDE that that is a
Speaker 1: very real thing that we haven't addressed enough, because part
Speaker 1: of that is COVID. How COVID exacerbated everything. And then
Speaker 1: to have the one person who is largely responsible for
Speaker 1: so much death, for the disruption of so many lives
Speaker 1: and careers to skate on by. It's a constant reminder.
Speaker 1: You know, you and I have had this conversation many times.
Speaker 1: You cannot recover from trauma while you're still actively being traumatized,
Speaker 1: and that seems to be where we we permanently live
Speaker 1: right now. Yeah, you know, it's funny because I talked
Speaker 1: to so many journalists, and you know, so many people
Speaker 1: will say like, oh, you should be so happy, it's
Speaker 1: going to be great for your numbers or for whatever.
Speaker 1: And like I'm telling you, everyone I talked to on Wednesday,
Speaker 1: we were all like so depressed because it's depressing and
Speaker 1: it's I think people used to say the same thing
Speaker 1: to stand Up Committee, and so this is gonna be
Speaker 1: so great for you. Well, if by great you mean
Speaker 1: constantly being reminded that the worst people among us are
Speaker 1: consistently allowed to succeed at the expense of everybody else's
Speaker 1: mental and physical health. Sure, that's great for me because
Speaker 1: I might get a couple of good jokes or I
Speaker 1: got I might get good numbers, and it's debilitated to
Speaker 1: some degree, and okay, great, our numbers might be better,
Speaker 1: we might get more listeners, there might be more interest, whatever,
Speaker 1: But at what cost? Yeah, I mean, I think that's
Speaker 1: what it is. So one of the things I want
Speaker 1: to ask you is, like, right now, we're in a
Speaker 1: place that you know, we're trying to figure out how
Speaker 1: to cover this guy and how to write about him,
Speaker 1: but not to elevate him and not to help him
Speaker 1: lie to the American people and not to you know,
Speaker 1: we don't want to publicize him, but we have to
Speaker 1: cover him, right because you can't ignore him because we
Speaker 1: live through two thousand fifteen, so you know him and
Speaker 1: you know the world that created him. More importantly, how
Speaker 1: do we do this? What do we do? But well,
Speaker 1: that is the distinction to the degree that it's possible
Speaker 1: not ignore him, but minimize him and keep an eye
Speaker 1: on the people who created him and are responsible for him,
Speaker 1: the Mitch McConnell's, the Rupert Murdochs, etcetera, etcetera. Because they're
Speaker 1: the ones who are the problem right first of all,
Speaker 1: and they're the ones who are going to decide whether
Speaker 1: or not they will once again tie their faith to
Speaker 1: Donald Trump by the way, they will because he's not
Speaker 1: going to give them. And also, how can they not, right,
Speaker 1: because they're all fighting for the same exactly, They can't
Speaker 1: because he won't let them. They can't because all they
Speaker 1: care about is their base. They can't and this is
Speaker 1: probably the most important part of it. They want exactly
Speaker 1: what Donald will give them. And that's being really clear here.
Speaker 1: If the Republicans had won to the that they were
Speaker 1: supposed to last week in the midterms, we wouldn't be
Speaker 1: having this conversation because he would be their number one guy.
Speaker 1: So and they'll come back into the fold because they
Speaker 1: want have a joyce and again that's that's their guy.
Speaker 1: I think the worst thing we could do is allow
Speaker 1: them to get away with pretending that Donald's the problem.
Speaker 1: That's a really interesting point. Can you say a little
Speaker 1: more about that. Let's say Donald does something bizarre and
Speaker 1: out of character and decides not to seek the spotlet Okay,
Speaker 1: that's not gonna happen. Yes, but you know they for
Speaker 1: the sake of argument that he decides not to run
Speaker 1: and decides to support whoever, you know is the nominee.
Speaker 1: That person, whether it's Descentis or Ted Cruz or Josh
Speaker 1: Holly running again for something is going to be exactly
Speaker 1: the same as Donald, just in a more informed way
Speaker 1: in terms of policy, and we'll just be smarter and
Speaker 1: less a egregious about the way they go about this.
Speaker 1: I definitely remember the conversation we had last year about
Speaker 1: you know, Ken Trump is um so called survive Donald,
Speaker 1: and the answer is absolutely yes, it has. That's the danger.
Speaker 1: I just want to continue on for a second because
Speaker 1: like in the mid terms, the trumpy candidate, it's at
Speaker 1: least in swing state it's right, like Carry, Like the
Speaker 1: people that kept me up at night lost, right Carrie,
Speaker 1: like Don Bulldock, right Mastriano, those people lost, but Jadie
Speaker 1: Vance won, I mean Blake Masters lost. But those people
Speaker 1: who ran on Trump is um there were some who won,
Speaker 1: but they only one in very red states. Well yes,
Speaker 1: but with the exception of Mastriano, it was close. I
Speaker 1: mean Carry Lake lost by a very small less than
Speaker 1: one percent of about Yeah. So part of that is
Speaker 1: is tribalism, but part of it is that that message
Speaker 1: appeals to enough people. Yes, on the one hand, it's
Speaker 1: a wonderful development that the American people took the threats
Speaker 1: to democracy seriously and did not put in place election
Speaker 1: deniers to be secretaries of State for example. On the
Speaker 1: other hand, though, we have the same problem we had
Speaker 1: in we needed a thorough repudiation of this Republican party
Speaker 1: and we did not get it right well. And it
Speaker 1: also feels like Republicans didn't learn any lesson. They didn't
Speaker 1: say like, Wow, we're really turning off these purple state voters,
Speaker 1: or like wow, we're really turning off women with our
Speaker 1: crazy anti choice stance. And instead they they are like,
Speaker 1: we gotta make it harder for people to vote, and
Speaker 1: we have to get women. I mean, I don't know
Speaker 1: if you saw this Jesse Waters thing where he said
Speaker 1: we need to get women married. Yes, I didn't realize
Speaker 1: that that's why I was a Democratic because I'm single.
Speaker 1: But what do I know. I'm just a stupid single woman.
Speaker 1: So yeah, exactly. So, because they don't feel that they
Speaker 1: need to they believe if they stay the course and
Speaker 1: continue to suppress votes and subvert votes, that it won't matter. Uh,
Speaker 1: they can be the permanent minority power. And we've seen this,
Speaker 1: think about all of the headwinds that we're facing the Democrats,
Speaker 1: and still they almost pulled it out. But that's only
Speaker 1: because the Republicans were so terrible. But they know that
Speaker 1: they can just continue to gerrymander, get judges in place
Speaker 1: to overturn results or what have you. So I think
Speaker 1: they've decided that instead of evolving and instead of playing
Speaker 1: to uh people's better instincts, that they're just going to
Speaker 1: keep cheating. And it's almost working because enough people either
Speaker 1: aren't paying enough attention or are perfectly happy going down
Speaker 1: that road with them, which is really kind of what
Speaker 1: I mean, just insane. What do you think now here
Speaker 1: we are in this like post post mid tarm world,
Speaker 1: we have, you know, all this time while Trump will announce,
Speaker 1: I mean, what is Trump's achilles heel? I'm sorry, I
Speaker 1: know you get asked this a lot, but no, I
Speaker 1: actually I don't because there hasn't really been that much
Speaker 1: reason to talk about him. And now, as you said,
Speaker 1: we kind of have to because he that's that's what
Speaker 1: he does. Um, his achilles heel, Well, it's him. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's just so terrible. But the fact you know that
Speaker 1: he continues to get away with all sorts of stuff aside,
Speaker 1: he really is a loser, right, It's just a terrible loser.
Speaker 1: And uh, it doesn't become an achilles heel though, until
Speaker 1: people in a position to do so point that out
Speaker 1: to him, which again is what like all the other
Speaker 1: seven thousand Republicans running in twenties sixt So it will
Speaker 1: be interesting to see if anything shifts on this side.
Speaker 1: I just don't think it would. I don't. I don't
Speaker 1: think you know, his achilles heel is going to be
Speaker 1: relevant because the people in a position to poke it
Speaker 1: with a sharp stick won't because it won't be to
Speaker 1: their benefit either. And I think that's the thing. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's one of these situations where it's like you ignore
Speaker 1: him at your peril, and yet you also you don't
Speaker 1: want to elevate him, and so we find ourselves in
Speaker 1: this weird situation. I do think like the one way
Speaker 1: you can cover Trump without elevating him is having you
Speaker 1: because you're so smart and thoughtful, and also you can
Speaker 1: and you have the psychological background so you can understand
Speaker 1: what it is we're doing here, right, I mean, yeah,
Speaker 1: I I appreciate that. Sometimes I wish I didn't have
Speaker 1: any of particular psychological understanding of these things, because it's
Speaker 1: it's really not fun looking inside of this. But you're right,
Speaker 1: we we ignore him at our apperil no matter what
Speaker 1: cost to us. I mean, the thing I always think
Speaker 1: about with Trump covering him is that we always, at
Speaker 1: least I and many of the people I interact with,
Speaker 1: so this is anecdotal, seemed to always like think, well,
Speaker 1: this will be the moment, right, Like I remember, and
Speaker 1: when he had gotten elected, someone's like, oh, the White
Speaker 1: House is really small, he's gonna hate it. He's gonna hell,
Speaker 1: I'm sure he'll resign. Someone else said, you know, and
Speaker 1: like even when Avanna died, I heard like Trump has
Speaker 1: a thing where he's afraid of death, and if Avanna dies,
Speaker 1: that will somehow make him not want to run. There's
Speaker 1: no there's never going to be a moment where he
Speaker 1: decides like he would have to like be removed from running.
Speaker 1: Like he's going to be one of those people who
Speaker 1: like who runs for president forever? Right, because there's no
Speaker 1: incentive not to the only way he would step out
Speaker 1: of this particular fray is if somebody agreed to make
Speaker 1: him ember of the world. So no, he's unfortunately not
Speaker 1: going anywhere. A terrible thing to say. So, like, can
Speaker 1: you imagine him as emperor? Why can't we make him
Speaker 1: like I mean, it's just like that. No, let's not
Speaker 1: do that. It's really bad. Please please, no, please, Well,
Speaker 1: we could just pretend and let him think that that's
Speaker 1: actually what's happening. Get him, you know, confused, and tell
Speaker 1: him that he's really emperor. That hard. Mary Trump so
Speaker 1: interesting and so important and also just I'm such a fan.
Speaker 1: Thank you for joining us. Thanks Molly, it was so
Speaker 1: good to be here with you. Rachel Bade is a
Speaker 1: reporter at Politico and author of Unchecked Welcome Too Fast Politics. Rachel,
Speaker 1: thanks for having me on, Molly. What a crazy week,
Speaker 1: I mean crazy crazy week. So you are one of
Speaker 1: the authors of playbook, but you're famous for were covering Congress.
Speaker 1: I always think of you as like the person who
Speaker 1: knows exactly what the hell is going down over there?
Speaker 1: What the hell is going down over there? Oh my gosh.
Speaker 1: I mean, first of all, let me just say, I
Speaker 1: am just returning from attorney leave this week, and we
Speaker 1: talk about a hell of a time to come back.
Speaker 1: Nothing like jumping into the fire. I mean, where do
Speaker 1: we even start. It's like, let me just give you
Speaker 1: an example of what happened Thursday morning. In the chaos
Speaker 1: of Thursday morning, So officially, Republicans took the House on
Speaker 1: Wednesday night, big moment for Kevin McCarthy, who has had
Speaker 1: an otherwise pretty bad weekly, Republicans trying to keep him
Speaker 1: from getting the gabble and then starting to get calls
Speaker 1: from a bunch of Democratic sources and Policy's leadership team
Speaker 1: saying Okay, she's going to announce her retirement the next morning,
Speaker 1: and so I'm trying to pin that down. And then
Speaker 1: we have Jim Jordan's giving a press conference about how
Speaker 1: they're going to investigate Joe Biden, potentially try to impeach him, etcetera.
Speaker 1: Exactly of course, and so it's just it's been quite
Speaker 1: a crazy week. I can't wait to unpack it all
Speaker 1: with you. So I want to first start with Wednesday night.
Speaker 1: The House was called to eighteen to ten, or the
Speaker 1: Democrats are to ten, though there still are like fourteen seats,
Speaker 1: but it looks like Republicans will get to they just
Speaker 1: have to get over to nineteen and they will have
Speaker 1: a majority. But we do we know how many seats
Speaker 1: majority it will be. We're not sure yet. But Republicans
Speaker 1: it seems like, you know, their expectation went from winning
Speaker 1: fifteen seats to winning ten seats to winning you know,
Speaker 1: eight more seats in terms of the majority that they
Speaker 1: will have, and now I think we're going to see
Speaker 1: the expectation from Republicans is that they'll have maybe a
Speaker 1: two or three seat majority, which really doesn't leave McCarthy
Speaker 1: much room to maneuver next year. Uh, and it's going
Speaker 1: to be really ugly for him with a lot of
Speaker 1: conservatives trying to control him and lording their votes over
Speaker 1: his head to try to manipulate him into doing what
Speaker 1: they want. So it's going to be really tight. So
Speaker 1: you have the Freedom Caucus, right, and then you have
Speaker 1: the Maga Caucus. That's right? Or are those two the same?
Speaker 1: They're pretty similar. It's interesting because the Freedom Caucus, you know,
Speaker 1: when Trump first started running in in a lot of
Speaker 1: them were critics of him. They didn't think he was
Speaker 1: a real conservative, and they had reason to think that, right,
Speaker 1: Trump was a former Democrat, but over the years they
Speaker 1: have definitely become his top fighters on the hill, Jim
Speaker 1: Jordan's Trump. One time I reported that he was joking
Speaker 1: to a bunch of Republicans that he was his like
Speaker 1: top warrior. Jordan's my warrior, And that's sort of what
Speaker 1: they've become since then. So yeah, they're pretty much the
Speaker 1: same caucus. They're going to be a problem for McCarthy,
Speaker 1: and in that caucus is probably the sort of most
Speaker 1: famous member of the House GOP and one of the
Speaker 1: largest fundraisers, Marjorie Taylor Green. That's right, and Marjorie Taylor Green.
Speaker 1: You know, it's it's interesting this week we saw something happen.
Speaker 1: This could be a benefit from McCarthy going forward, but
Speaker 1: a lot of us were watching her to see what
Speaker 1: she would say about McCarthy trying to get the Gattle
Speaker 1: trying to be speaker. Would she ever back him for
Speaker 1: speaker because she and him have had a contentious relationship
Speaker 1: in the past, and he's going to need every vote
Speaker 1: possible to to get the gabble. But this week it
Speaker 1: was the most crazy thing. She was out there stumping
Speaker 1: for McCarthy and trying to tell the rest of the
Speaker 1: Freedom Caucus, these Conservatives that this strategy that they're trying
Speaker 1: to employ to try to win concessions from McCarthy, it
Speaker 1: could backfire and that you know, Democrats might be able
Speaker 1: to elect their own speaker if Republicans are fracturing. Uh So,
Speaker 1: it was sort of an interesting thing there, But she
Speaker 1: would be a player to watch definitely in the next Congress.
Speaker 1: I don't want you to have to try to get
Speaker 1: too much in their head, But why do you think
Speaker 1: Marjorie Teller Green was doing that? Oh, that's actually quite
Speaker 1: an easy question. Um. You know, we have heard from
Speaker 1: McCarthy's camp that they have really worked over time over
Speaker 1: the past year or so to try to make friends
Speaker 1: with her. Obviously, Democrats kicked her off her committees when
Speaker 1: she said a bunch of controversial comments um in the past,
Speaker 1: and he promised her he put her back on a
Speaker 1: panel that she wanted. She wants to be on House Oversight,
Speaker 1: where there's going to be a lot of investigations of
Speaker 1: the Biden administration and the President. He has basically told
Speaker 1: her she's going to get that. He has brought her
Speaker 1: into his private leadership meetings that he has on a
Speaker 1: pretty much a weekly basis. Usually that is only reserved
Speaker 1: for very senior Republicans, but she's part of that now.
Speaker 1: So he's really brought her into the fold and that
Speaker 1: has really won her over. That's at least what the
Speaker 1: McCarthy allies have told me this week. And so by
Speaker 1: sort of bringing her in, you know, he's hoping to
Speaker 1: sort of minimize potential damage that she could do to
Speaker 1: him next year. I mean, when you think about all
Speaker 1: of the things she said, that's pretty wild. What does
Speaker 1: the rest of the GOP leadership look like? You think, Well,
Speaker 1: I think the first question is still going to be speaker.
Speaker 1: I mean, we don't know if McCarthy is going to
Speaker 1: be able to do it. There are members like Matt Gates,
Speaker 1: who I'm sure you're very familiar with, drump loving bomb thrower.
Speaker 1: There he's saying, point blank, I will never vote for
Speaker 1: McCarthy for speaker. There is nothing McCarthy can give me
Speaker 1: to make him vote for him for speaker. And Gates
Speaker 1: told me in the hallway the other day on the
Speaker 1: Hill that he thinks there are other members who are
Speaker 1: with him, and you have to realize that if there's
Speaker 1: a two to three seat margin in the House, McCarthy
Speaker 1: needs that to eight teen. He's not going to be
Speaker 1: able to lose many. So if he if he loses Gates,
Speaker 1: if there are other members like that who he cannot
Speaker 1: negotiate with, we could conceivably see the same situation happen
Speaker 1: as what happened in when McCarthy tried to become speaker
Speaker 1: and he couldn't get the votes and had to step aside,
Speaker 1: and Paul Ryan became speaker after that. So I think
Speaker 1: the top question is still the speakership, and if not
Speaker 1: Kevin McCarthy, who is it going to be. Otherwise, you know,
Speaker 1: we're going to see people like Steve Scalise, who obviously
Speaker 1: has been in the leadership for a really long time
Speaker 1: at least defonic. She's sort of this moderate Republican who
Speaker 1: is also a Trump ally, kind of a weird mixed there.
Speaker 1: We'll see her, and then people like Tom em Or
Speaker 1: who are running the NRCC. He's going to be the
Speaker 1: number three person in the House, the GOP whip. I
Speaker 1: want to just get back to this for a second, because,
Speaker 1: like a lot of the reporting I've read has said
Speaker 1: to the effect of like you, there's no one else
Speaker 1: but McCarthy. This is this thing they keep saying, this
Speaker 1: wrestling thing to beat the man, you've got to be
Speaker 1: the man or what. I don't even want to know.
Speaker 1: It's so stupid, but but you've heard them say it,
Speaker 1: like about McCarthy, and you've heard them say about McConnell.
Speaker 1: Is there another man that could be the man? I mean,
Speaker 1: whoever tries to step into this position is going to
Speaker 1: have the same problems that McCarthy has. We sort of
Speaker 1: explored this in the playbook this week, because you're right,
Speaker 1: McCarthy's best defense for himself is this argument that there's
Speaker 1: no one else who can do it. I'm the best
Speaker 1: person who can do it, and if you push me aside,
Speaker 1: you're going to be in chaos. But we sort of
Speaker 1: explored and talked to a bunch of Republicans on the
Speaker 1: Hill about who else could it be. Steve Scali says
Speaker 1: I just mentioned has been whipped for a really long time.
Speaker 1: He's got good relationships across the conference. He's got this
Speaker 1: sort of inspirational story surviving a gun shot wound a
Speaker 1: few years ago, so people really like him. Stephonic given
Speaker 1: that she's a moderate and from Maga Maga Ally or
Speaker 1: a Maga Darling has this sort of interesting bridge that
Speaker 1: would allow her to, in theory, bring be the sort
Speaker 1: of key negotiator between these two warring factions and the GOOP.
Speaker 1: So you know, you could see someone like her try
Speaker 1: to rise. There's a Republican named Jim Banks who is
Speaker 1: from Indiana. You'll hear his name a lot in the
Speaker 1: coming years. This guy is ambitious and he has been
Speaker 1: working hard to sort of raise his profile. He just
Speaker 1: lost his bid to become majority Whip. But I don't
Speaker 1: think we've seen the last of him. So I could
Speaker 1: see him trying to try to become Speaker someday if
Speaker 1: McCarthy couldn't do it. Point being, it's gonna be hard
Speaker 1: for anybody. But you know this whole thing about oh
Speaker 1: there's no one else. Sure, there's no Paul Ryan, but
Speaker 1: there's I mean, there's more than two hundred Republicans in
Speaker 1: the House, and so to say that there is no
Speaker 1: one else, I mean, it benefits McCarthy, But maybe there
Speaker 1: is In that piece you actually you have had one
Speaker 1: last member of Congress that could get it, which is
Speaker 1: Democratic nightmare fuel for sure. Jacket last Jim Jordan's. Yes,
Speaker 1: of course Jim Jordan's. He's going to be Biden's worst nightmare.
Speaker 1: I mean, there's a lot of conservatives who would think
Speaker 1: that the House needs a leader who is sort of
Speaker 1: in this fighting mode, and that is Jordan's. I mean,
Speaker 1: the guy walks around the Capitol without a jacket and
Speaker 1: with his shirt sleeves rolled up like he's about to
Speaker 1: throw a punch. I mean, this is just Jordan's right,
Speaker 1: and so a lot of conservatives want someone like that
Speaker 1: who's gonna be very antagonistic to the administration. The problem
Speaker 1: there is that Jordan's is extremely divisive in the House.
Speaker 1: I mean, he ousd it not just one speaker, but
Speaker 1: two speakers. He's the reason John Bayner is gone. He's
Speaker 1: the reason why Paul Ryan is gone. And so there's
Speaker 1: a lot of Republicans who respected those men who don't
Speaker 1: like Jordan's because they think, you know, number one, he's
Speaker 1: way too conservative. Number two, his tactics are unfair and dirty,
Speaker 1: and so he would have a really hard time getting
Speaker 1: the votes to be speaker. But of course you're going
Speaker 1: to see him. He's going to be a main character
Speaker 1: in the next Congress. You will be on TV often
Speaker 1: and he will be a big pain inside for Biden.
Speaker 1: Oh I'm sure. Okay, So talk to me about the
Speaker 1: Democratic side because it's so interesting. What's happening now? Oh yeah, Well,
Speaker 1: we're recording this right before a twelve ish Nancy Pelosi
Speaker 1: is going to make an announcement. Yes, so she's going
Speaker 1: to be going onto the House floor any minute. The
Speaker 1: expectation from most Democrats I talked to is that she
Speaker 1: is probably going to announce that she is stepping aside
Speaker 1: and will probably remain in the House because of the
Speaker 1: margin being so tight they really need her vote. So
Speaker 1: a lot of Democrats think she will stick around and
Speaker 1: say I'm going to help guide the next generation. But look,
Speaker 1: this is the perfect exit for Pelosi. I mean, if
Speaker 1: there was this Republican wave that would have materialized, like
Speaker 1: a lot of people were expecting, she would have been
Speaker 1: left leaving on this sort of negative note. Instead, Democrats
Speaker 1: did a on election day. They've passed a lot of
Speaker 1: bills in the past two years, and she can leave
Speaker 1: sort of fund this really proud note saying I really
Speaker 1: defended the House, and I defended a lot of these members,
Speaker 1: and so a lot of people think that this is
Speaker 1: going to be the day. I also think it's very
Speaker 1: quintessential Pelosi, and we put in playbook she's a meticulous
Speaker 1: planner and she likes to troll people and Republicans. Lift
Speaker 1: the House in the past twenty four hours or put
Speaker 1: the house Wednesday night and Jordan is doing his big
Speaker 1: press conference about investigating Biden Hunter Biden. But yes, continue, yes,
Speaker 1: but Pelosi is about to swoop in and make the
Speaker 1: entire day about herself and her historic legacy, and potentially
Speaker 1: the whole weekend too. So it just kind of another
Speaker 1: job at Kevin McCarthy on her way out. Oh that
Speaker 1: is so interesting. So I want to ask you another
Speaker 1: question about this. Pelosi leaves, what does you know? Does
Speaker 1: Clive Burn leave? Where does everybody else go? The expectation
Speaker 1: is that Hakim Jeffries, who is a Democrat from New York,
Speaker 1: that he's going to rise and likely be the next
Speaker 1: leader of the Democrats, so he would become the minority leader.
Speaker 1: There is a lot of demands in the caucus to
Speaker 1: have new blood at the top. Obviously, Polo Sist, Anny
Speaker 1: Hoyer and Jim Clyburn have been the top three leaders
Speaker 1: for about fifteen years, and there's a there's a thirst
Speaker 1: for new faces, new voices, et cetera. Clyburn has said
Speaker 1: that he wants to continue to be in leadership, but
Speaker 1: it sounds like he'd be okay with this sort of
Speaker 1: more of a bigger head role, like perhaps they make
Speaker 1: a new leadership position for him as assistant Minority leaders
Speaker 1: so he's more cert of advising Jeffries as opposed to
Speaker 1: being the one making the decisions. Katherine Clark, who is
Speaker 1: this Democrat from Massachusetts. She's really big on women's issues
Speaker 1: and on safety measures. She sort of became famous for that.
Speaker 1: She is going to probably run. Who else do you
Speaker 1: think besides Katherine and Kim for leadership? Some other people
Speaker 1: you should you should get to know Pete Aguilar. He
Speaker 1: is a Democrat from Texas, right no, no, no no, from California,
Speaker 1: actually California, that's right, yes, And he is currently serving
Speaker 1: on the January six Committee, so you'll recognize his face.
Speaker 1: He has been sort of in this mix with Hakim, Jefferies,
Speaker 1: and Catherine Clark. The three of them have become very
Speaker 1: close friends over the years, and my understanding is that
Speaker 1: all year they've sort of been laying the groundwork for
Speaker 1: all three of them to sort of as they slate
Speaker 1: together sent into leadership. So basically they're going to be
Speaker 1: working very closely together. They've done a lot of member
Speaker 1: dinners together and so they're sort of seen as this
Speaker 1: package together. So Aguilar is another one you should know,
Speaker 1: Joanna Goose, who is a Democrat from Colorado. He's a
Speaker 1: great on TV. He was an impeachment manager in the
Speaker 1: second trial, close ally of Jamie Raskin, who is obviously
Speaker 1: a progressive superstar, and he's also been in Pelosi's leadership
Speaker 1: team for a long time. He is probably going to
Speaker 1: be what he is going to be running for caucus chairs,
Speaker 1: So he will be another person you'll start to see
Speaker 1: if he gets this job. The big question again going
Speaker 1: back to Hoyer, will be as if Hoyer tries to
Speaker 1: stay in the mix, do people like Joan and Goose
Speaker 1: gets sort of kicked out, Like there's been some talk
Speaker 1: about that, like if these these older members try to
Speaker 1: stick around, you could have, you know a problem with
Speaker 1: like Catherine Clark or Aguilar or Joan and Goose. Like
Speaker 1: there's only so many leadership positions available right now, and
Speaker 1: everybody wants to be in leadership so we'll see who
Speaker 1: ends up staying. We'll probably know more. The leadership elections
Speaker 1: are at the end of November, right after Thanksgiving, but
Speaker 1: we should get a clear picture in the coming days
Speaker 1: about Hoyer and what he's going to do, and that
Speaker 1: will really solidify the leadership slate that we're likely to
Speaker 1: see next year. Can we go to the Senate for
Speaker 1: a minute now, sure? Absolutely so. There's a lot of
Speaker 1: drama in the GOP part of the Senate, more I
Speaker 1: think than the than the Democratic side. The Democrats added
Speaker 1: a seat so far right, I mean, they picked up
Speaker 1: one and now there's a runoff in December for Georgia.
Speaker 1: Talk to me about what's happening, because it feels like
Speaker 1: there have been Rick Scott, fresh off his uh, his
Speaker 1: disappointing run leading the Senate candidates, now wants Mitch McConnell's job. Yeah,
Speaker 1: the Senate. This this has been really interesting this week.
Speaker 1: I mean we basically called it like Festivus, just this
Speaker 1: sort of finger pointing and blood letting. So McConnell has
Speaker 1: not been challenged since he became leader more than a
Speaker 1: decade ago, so it was really rare to see someone
Speaker 1: like Rick Scott come in and challenge him, and nobody
Speaker 1: was under the sort of impression that Rick Scott, who
Speaker 1: is becoming a top enemy of Mitch McConnell, to actually win.
Speaker 1: But they just wanted to sort of, you know, make
Speaker 1: a point. And what you're seeing is Republicans very much
Speaker 1: trying to blame each other for their abysmal performance on
Speaker 1: election night. I mean, Rick Scott was out there saying
Speaker 1: that they were going to pick up you know, as
Speaker 1: many as like three, potentially four seats we could see,
Speaker 1: you know, fifty three fifty four margin for Senate Republicans
Speaker 1: that obviously didn't pan out. You can also sort of
Speaker 1: look back over the past few months, Rick Scott and McConnell.
Speaker 1: Mr McConnell had very different ideas for the best strategy
Speaker 1: for this election. Rick Scott was totally fine with Trump
Speaker 1: endorsed candidates taking the nominations in a lot of these states.
Speaker 1: He backed people like herschel Walker very early, where Mr
Speaker 1: McConnell he was trying to get Scott to wade into
Speaker 1: the primaries to keep MAGA candidates who he didn't believe
Speaker 1: could be elected out and try to get primary nominations
Speaker 1: for people he thought could actually be elected, but Rick
Speaker 1: Scott would listen to McConnell. And because of that, there
Speaker 1: were a lot of candidates who were very controversial and
Speaker 1: who ended up losing their elections. And so McConnell blames
Speaker 1: Rick Scott. Rick Scott blames McConnell because Rick Scott wanted
Speaker 1: McConnell to put out an agenda that Republicans could run
Speaker 1: on instead of just being anti Biden. But McConnell didn't
Speaker 1: want to do that. So there's a lot of finger
Speaker 1: pointing right now. And you know, I think this is
Speaker 1: going to continue for a while. Obviously McConnell became leader,
Speaker 1: he was elected pretty easily, but there were eleven Republicans
Speaker 1: who voted against him. So I mean, he's got some
Speaker 1: some work to do with his members, I suppose you
Speaker 1: could say going forward, I mean, will there be changeovers
Speaker 1: in other parts of leadership too? It's mostly going to
Speaker 1: be the same slate. But I think what you're going
Speaker 1: to see next year is these sort of Trump allies
Speaker 1: in the Senate, people not just like Rick Scott, but
Speaker 1: also Josh Holly, Ted Cruz, a lot of these members
Speaker 1: who are looking at and thinking they could potentially run
Speaker 1: for president. They're going to just be really emboldened now
Speaker 1: to come out against McConnell and try to make his
Speaker 1: his life a living hell. Another thing that sort of
Speaker 1: shocked me this week as we saw Lindsay Graham, who
Speaker 1: used to be a top ally of McConnell's, vote against
Speaker 1: him for leader. There's a lot of thankst happening in
Speaker 1: the Republican Party right now, a lot of relationships being
Speaker 1: broken because Republicans don't seem to want to blame Trump,
Speaker 1: and then some of them do, and they're just really
Speaker 1: at a crossroads and not sure which way to turn
Speaker 1: because they disagree on what the cause was for why
Speaker 1: they did so poorly on election Day. Thanks Rachel, Thank you, Molly.
Speaker 1: Happy to do it. Shannon Watts is the founder of
Speaker 1: Mom's Demand Action. Welcome to Fast Politics, Shannon Watts, thanks
Speaker 1: for having me on. What are you working on talk
Speaker 1: to us? I mean, we are working on celebrating our
Speaker 1: winds across the board. On election day, we just sort
Speaker 1: of put our heads down, rolled up our our red
Speaker 1: sleeves at Moms Tuman Action and did the work. You know,
Speaker 1: we made over six million outreaches two voters across the country.
Speaker 1: We signed up and showed up to get out the vote.
Speaker 1: We ran for office ourselves, over a hundred and twenty
Speaker 1: five of our own volunteers, one elected office, and we
Speaker 1: just really saw gun Since champions win the day. First,
Speaker 1: let's talk about some of those candidates, and then I
Speaker 1: want to talk about some of the elections who are
Speaker 1: involved in. Yeah, so you know, we had guns Since
Speaker 1: champions all across the country. From Lucy macbeth, who was
Speaker 1: our own Mom's Demand Action volunteer, she just won her
Speaker 1: third term in Congress. It was a seat held by
Speaker 1: Republicans for thirty years. Newt Ginridgulc. Oh, wow, that's pretty great.
Speaker 1: She's I think it's important for those who may have forgotten.
Speaker 1: She's an incredible candidate. And she lost a child to
Speaker 1: gun violence. Yes, Lucy's son Jordan Davis, a black seventeen
Speaker 1: year old shot and killed by a white, middle aged
Speaker 1: man at a gas station in Florida who said his
Speaker 1: music was too loud. Jesus. Yeah. So Lucy macbeth is
Speaker 1: a pretty fantastic candidate. And that is amazing that that's
Speaker 1: our third term because that has been a very Republican district.
Speaker 1: It was not anymore so tell us about some of
Speaker 1: the other candidates you have. Well, you know, I was
Speaker 1: in fifteen states in the last two weeks, including Oregon
Speaker 1: and Georgia twice, thrilled to see governor elected Tina co
Speaker 1: Tech win her election. She was the only gun since
Speaker 1: candidate in that race. Um, she was up against two
Speaker 1: n r A allies and was not necessarily predicted to win,
Speaker 1: and she did. And we saw that play out over
Speaker 1: and over again all across the country. We flipped legislatures
Speaker 1: in Minnesota, in Michigan, we've flipped the House in Pennsylvania.
Speaker 1: Even Republican senators who voted for the bipartisan Saber Communities
Speaker 1: Act this summer, the two senators were re elected. So look,
Speaker 1: gun safety used to be considered a third rail of
Speaker 1: American politics. Now not only are can that's running on it,
Speaker 1: they're winning. They used to run away from it, and
Speaker 1: it's a completely different story now. When I started doing
Speaker 1: this work ten years ago, a quarter of all Democrats
Speaker 1: and Congress had an A rating from the n r A.
Speaker 1: Today none do. And it's just a complete and utter
Speaker 1: seismic shift in American politics. That is very cool. So
Speaker 1: tell me where you're sort of what states you see
Speaker 1: the most change and you're the most optimistic about Well, look,
Speaker 1: since doing this work, I you know, there's obviously so
Speaker 1: many political waves in a decade, but I think they're
Speaker 1: really interesting places to look at. Virginia, when I started
Speaker 1: this work, it was a solidly read state. Our volunteers
Speaker 1: there worked so hard and flip both chambers of the
Speaker 1: General Assembly in twenty nineteen. Obviously, they've elected a Republican governor,
Speaker 1: but that governor is a lifetime n R A member
Speaker 1: who refuses to say where he stands on guns. He
Speaker 1: hasn't rolled back the progress we've made. I'm competent we
Speaker 1: will elect a Democratic governor in the next term. Colorado
Speaker 1: you to be considered purple. I would say it is
Speaker 1: now solidly blue. And a volunteer for Mom's main action.
Speaker 1: His name is Tom Sullivan. His son was shot and
Speaker 1: killed in the Aurora movie theater shooting in two thousand twelve.
Speaker 1: He was a state rep. He was just elected state
Speaker 1: senator and we have a very solid majority in that state. Now.
Speaker 1: I would never would have thought that we would flip
Speaker 1: Minnesota this year, let alone Michigan, and we can now
Speaker 1: go into these states and past good gun laws Arizona,
Speaker 1: possibly Pennsylvania. So it is really a different playing field
Speaker 1: than it was a decade ago. Yeah, that is amazing.
Speaker 1: Can you explain what using has changed to make it
Speaker 1: a third rail? Oh? I know what's changed in it,
Speaker 1: and that is a grassroots army that can go toe
Speaker 1: to toe with a gun mobby, a bunch of angry
Speaker 1: moms and red shirts who have a presence in every
Speaker 1: single state in this country. We show up and sit,
Speaker 1: you know, ten hours at a time and hearings to
Speaker 1: show our lawmakers were watching. We've passed hundred of good
Speaker 1: gun laws. We've stopped ninety of the n Ray's agenda
Speaker 1: every year for the last seven years, and state houses
Speaker 1: across the country. We have passed policies through city councils
Speaker 1: and through school boards. In fact, eight million families have
Speaker 1: now received our secure storage notifications through their students, telling
Speaker 1: them to keep their guns locked, unloaded, and separate from ammunition.
Speaker 1: And then we're electing our own volunteers and gun violence
Speaker 1: survivors to office. Right, that is a significant way to
Speaker 1: move the needle on this issue. And when you look
Speaker 1: at polling, this was a top three issue for voters
Speaker 1: this election. Cycle, we were able to explain that voters
Speaker 1: who are concerned about crime should understand that you can't
Speaker 1: be tough on crime if you're soft on guns. And
Speaker 1: that resonated. You know, at the end of the day,
Speaker 1: this is what the American people want, and Republicans are
Speaker 1: are learning that less in the hard way, and it's
Speaker 1: going to take several election cycles. Talk to me about
Speaker 1: like your legislative dreams. Now, now you've gotten some of
Speaker 1: these people in office. Democrats don't control the House, but
Speaker 1: it's going to be very tight. I mean, what is
Speaker 1: on your agenda. So at a federal level, we are
Speaker 1: still trying to pass things that are foundational to a
Speaker 1: gun safety system in this country. So, for example, a
Speaker 1: background check on every gun sale. Right now, federal law
Speaker 1: only requires them on licensed sales, not unlicensed, and so
Speaker 1: that is a gaping loophole that needs to be closed.
Speaker 1: At a federal level. Um, we do, as I mentioned now,
Speaker 1: have the bipartisans SA for Communities Act that passed over
Speaker 1: the summer. It will save thousands and thousands of lives
Speaker 1: and it addresses gun violence holistically, and that had fifteen
Speaker 1: Republicans sign on. I think that's a really good sign
Speaker 1: that we're slowly but surely getting all politicians, regardless of
Speaker 1: political party, on the right side of the issue. So
Speaker 1: we're gonna keep pushing there. There are other things that
Speaker 1: can happen, like an assault weapons ban or red flag law.
Speaker 1: There's lots that can be done at a federal level.
Speaker 1: At the state level, you know, we've gone state by
Speaker 1: state to pass background checks, to pass red flag laws,
Speaker 1: to close loopholes in the background check system, um to
Speaker 1: disarm domestic abusers, to require secure storage. Those are things
Speaker 1: that we can do in these states now that have
Speaker 1: a gun sense majority that we were just talking about.
Speaker 1: We also still have to show up and stop the
Speaker 1: n Ray's agenda in those states where we're playing defense,
Speaker 1: and that really comes with strength and numbers. But there's
Speaker 1: so much innovation going on. You know, in Rhode Island,
Speaker 1: we just rolled back open carry for recreational purposes. You
Speaker 1: can't just carry your air fifteen around in the city
Speaker 1: for fun. In Colorado, we rolled back preemption, which is
Speaker 1: a law that prevents cities and municipalities from passing policies
Speaker 1: that are different from state law. So that is a
Speaker 1: huge shift. We can do that in in some of
Speaker 1: the forty other states that have a preemption law, and
Speaker 1: in California we just passed a state law requiring secure
Speaker 1: storage notifications to be sent home to with every school kid.
Speaker 1: So there's so much that we can be doing in
Speaker 1: those states where we have a gun since majority that
Speaker 1: that we can extrapolate those best practices to the rest
Speaker 1: of the country. Many Democrats can be sort of squishy
Speaker 1: on things like choice. Like if you think about Henry Collier,
Speaker 1: it seems to me like on gun safety, that is
Speaker 1: not true that Democrats have really you know, supporting that.
Speaker 1: What is the sort of right thing on that? Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, as I mentioned, a quarter of all Democrats
Speaker 1: in Congress had an A rating from the n R
Speaker 1: a decade ago. Today none do. We're having more and
Speaker 1: more Republicans sign on to federal legislation, more than we've
Speaker 1: ever had before. These horrific shooting tragedies are certainly keeping
Speaker 1: a spotlight on the issue. We have activists of all
Speaker 1: ages making sure that their lawmakers pay attention to this issue.
Speaker 1: There's really no other issue that has an army of
Speaker 1: angry women that wake up every day right and hold
Speaker 1: the more shakers accountable. Yeah, but but but even abortion
Speaker 1: I think could benefit from a Mom's Demand action type organization.
Speaker 1: They don't have people showing up in city councils and
Speaker 1: state houses all the time who identify themselves as single
Speaker 1: issue voters. Now, we certainly saw that wave of voters
Speaker 1: this election cycle, and you know, I'm really frustrated by
Speaker 1: people who keep pointing to the youth vote, because really
Speaker 1: it's the female vote. It was young women who got
Speaker 1: Democrats over the line, and I hope they organize less
Speaker 1: organically and it looks more like a Mom's to me
Speaker 1: an action on the issue of abortion. But I do
Speaker 1: think having organized this indomitable group of millions, you know,
Speaker 1: we have ten million supporters, or twice as large as
Speaker 1: the n r A, it's a good model for taking
Speaker 1: on any special interest. And certainly there will be people
Speaker 1: holding not just Democrats accountable, but Republicans accountable if they
Speaker 1: don't do the right thing on the issue of gun safety. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's a really interesting point for Democrats. I mean, we
Speaker 1: talk a lot about Democrats organizing and being able to
Speaker 1: push things that are very popular like this. You know,
Speaker 1: most people don't want their kids to have the chance
Speaker 1: of I mean, school shootings are not popular and choice
Speaker 1: is very popular. You know, we had so many even
Speaker 1: this weekend we had to school shootings. I mean, do
Speaker 1: you think there's a place where there you could maybe
Speaker 1: get some sort of broader legislation past now that there's
Speaker 1: been so many, or it just is not relevant. I
Speaker 1: do believe every time there's a horrific shooting tragedy that
Speaker 1: makes the news, it galvanizes people, it gets them off
Speaker 1: the sidelines. Our organization exploded in growth after the Parkland
Speaker 1: shooting tragedy, and again this summer after Buffalo and Uvalde
Speaker 1: and Highland Park. But sadly, you know, mass shootings and
Speaker 1: school shootings are about one percent of the gun violence
Speaker 1: in this country. It's really the daily gun violence, mostly
Speaker 1: with handguns, that kills a hundred and ten people in
Speaker 1: wounds hundreds more. So we have to look at this
Speaker 1: issue holistically. Like I understand that people want to immediately
Speaker 1: ban assault weapons after a mass shooting, but you also
Speaker 1: have to unlock community violence intervention program funding. You also
Speaker 1: have to have background checks on all gun sales. We
Speaker 1: also have to make sure domestic abusers so have easy
Speaker 1: access to guns. Many mass shootings in this country are
Speaker 1: started by incidences of domestic violence. The bottom line here
Speaker 1: is that gun safety isn't just good policy anymore. It's
Speaker 1: now good politics. And I think politicians who stand with
Speaker 1: us realize they'll be rewarded. Those who stand in the
Speaker 1: way realize they'll be held accountable. Suburban women and mothers,
Speaker 1: you know, and and too often that is a dog
Speaker 1: whistle for white women. That's not the case. The suburbs
Speaker 1: are incredibly diverse. They're about as diverse as the rest
Speaker 1: of America. You know, those women and moms are sick
Speaker 1: and tired of their children not being safe and their
Speaker 1: communities being torn apart by gun violence. If you spend
Speaker 1: any time in state houses, what you realize very quickly
Speaker 1: is that about eight of our lawmakers are men, and
Speaker 1: they are not rocket scientists. And so when you've learned
Speaker 1: how to be an advocate and shape policy, it's just
Speaker 1: intuitive that you then want to take the next step
Speaker 1: into making policy and seeing these volunteers turn into lawmakers.
Speaker 1: I mean, we elected sixteen of our volunteers in Illinois,
Speaker 1: seven in Rhode Island. It's been amazing to watch the
Speaker 1: progress that our program has made. One of our volunteers, Nobili,
Speaker 1: said a Muslim Indian American woman in Illinois. She flipped
Speaker 1: a GOP held district and is now the youngest member
Speaker 1: of the Illinois General Assembly. So those stories are are
Speaker 1: what keep me motivated and I think have helped with
Speaker 1: this ground swell of support for the the issue of
Speaker 1: gun safety. What do you want from this White House?
Speaker 1: First of all, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have been
Speaker 1: incredible champions for gun safety. I would argue they've done
Speaker 1: more than any administration in history on this issue. That
Speaker 1: by Parsons Safe for Communities Act that Joe Biden and
Speaker 1: Kamala Harris championed and got signed into law will save
Speaker 1: thousands and thousands of lives, but frankly, it's a first
Speaker 1: step on a much longer journey. Joe Biden has also
Speaker 1: done a lot of good work on this issue through
Speaker 1: executive action. He could certainly do more, but look, based
Speaker 1: on these election results, I am optimistic that there will
Speaker 1: be more legislation on this issue that that will be
Speaker 1: life saving and serve as a template for the rest
Speaker 1: of the country. But also continue to make this issue,
Speaker 1: you know, not left or right issue, but a life
Speaker 1: or death issue, which it is, and that we will
Speaker 1: see more and more Republicans acknowledging the fact that this
Speaker 1: is what their constituents want. Just one last question. I mean,
Speaker 1: do you think there's some progress with raising the purchase
Speaker 1: age on some of these guns or on all of them,
Speaker 1: or you think that's gone. Look, we first of all,
Speaker 1: we support an assault weapons span, but regardless, you should
Speaker 1: be twenty one in those states where it's legal before
Speaker 1: you can buy one. Several states have passed those policies.
Speaker 1: Because of the Trump appointed judges, they're being challenged and
Speaker 1: because of Bruin, but we know that they're constitutionally sound.
Speaker 1: These laws that raise the age. And the other thing
Speaker 1: that the Bipartisan Saver Communities Act does is it puts
Speaker 1: in place more gating factors for someone under twenty one
Speaker 1: to buy a semi automatic rifle. And hopefully that will
Speaker 1: also demonstrate that this is something that states should do.
Speaker 1: And look, if you look at the data people who
Speaker 1: are between the ages of eighteen and twenty one, it's
Speaker 1: about quadruple the number of homicides committed by the age group.
Speaker 1: We know that people with undeveloped brains should not have
Speaker 1: easy access to guns. That's pretty intuitive. But the data
Speaker 1: shows it too. You can't rent a car until you're
Speaker 1: twenty five. There's a reason for that. The actuaries have
Speaker 1: demonstrated that needs to be the case. And the same
Speaker 1: can be said for for gun purchases. So we will
Speaker 1: continue to work on raising the age to have access
Speaker 1: to soult weapons. God, that's such that's such a good point.
Speaker 1: So you know there's no car rental lobby, right exactly,
Speaker 1: you know, that's just that's what it is. Thank you
Speaker 1: so much, as so great. I really appreciate having having you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, of course, thank you for having me on.
Speaker 1: Molly John Fast Jesse Cannon. I gotta tell you that
Speaker 1: this this issue, this one makes me very mad because
Speaker 1: I feel like there's a lot the administration could do
Speaker 1: that they're not doing. So sometimes in our moment of fuckory,
Speaker 1: we talk about stuff that's stupid, but this is not stupid.
Speaker 1: This is actually deadly serious. It's just very fucked up.
Speaker 1: Brittney Griner w n B A star and you know
Speaker 1: she's really a she was really a celebrity in the
Speaker 1: w n B A. She has found with two cannabis
Speaker 1: vape canisters in her luggage to okay, he has been
Speaker 1: sent to a Russian penal colony, which was, of course
Speaker 1: you may know it as the Gulag, so pretty famous,
Speaker 1: uses sleep deprivation and hourly checks in the denial of
Speaker 1: medical treatment to torture prisoners. There seven hundreds such prisons
Speaker 1: in Russia and they are a placed where prisoners are
Speaker 1: forced to work. So this is a real fucked up
Speaker 1: situation and it's really so deeply unfair. And I am
Speaker 1: just you know, I understand that this that we are
Speaker 1: a country that's a war, but I think that the
Speaker 1: Biden administration should do everything they can to bring Brittany
Speaker 1: Grinder home, and I hope they will. That's it for
Speaker 1: this episode of Fast Politics. Tune in every Monday, Wednesday
Speaker 1: and Friday to her the best minds in politics makes
Speaker 1: sense of all this chaos. If you enjoyed what you've heard,
Speaker 1: please send it to a friend and keep the conversation going.
Speaker 1: And again, thanks for listening.