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 it seems like the aliens won't
Speaker 1: be rescuing us from the Republican Party yet. We have
Speaker 1: a fantastic show. Today. Representative Katie Porter will make her
Speaker 1: case on why she is the candidate who should have
Speaker 1: your support in her run for the California Senate. Then
Speaker 1: we'll talk to coin desks Ben Schiller about the latest
Speaker 1: news in crypto. But first we have the host of
Speaker 1: the Time of Monsters, the Nation's GT here. Welcome to
Speaker 1: Fast Politics. GT Here. It's always good to be here.
Speaker 1: You're a fan favorite and I'm so delighted to have
Speaker 1: you here. I wanted to talk to you first about aliens.
Speaker 1: They're real and they're mad. He would be very ironic
Speaker 1: if the end of the human species came a vote,
Speaker 1: because the Republican has decided to make a big stink
Speaker 1: about Chinese weather balloon that went off track, and this
Speaker 1: led Biden and Justin Trudeau to lons of war against
Speaker 1: space aliens, and they retaliated by just bring the planet that.
Speaker 1: I have to admit that's something I'm hoping for. But
Speaker 1: that would be a funny turn of events. I see
Speaker 1: this as like a way it could go down. So
Speaker 1: I want to talk to you about the aliens and
Speaker 1: the space blends. No, I actually want to talk to
Speaker 1: you about what's really going on in life, which is
Speaker 1: and not even life politics, because we know that's really
Speaker 1: not life. Here we are, we are in this crazy
Speaker 1: period in American life, the run up to the twenty
Speaker 1: four election, which basically starts the day after the midterms
Speaker 1: are over. I don't know if you read Political Playbook
Speaker 1: this morning. I did. Republicans are embracing authoritarianism like you
Speaker 1: can't fucking believe. Discuss yeah, I know. I mean if
Speaker 1: you look at the true front runners are you know,
Speaker 1: Donald Trump, who's like calling for a firing squads against
Speaker 1: criminals and basically following the path of direct he in
Speaker 1: the Philippines, and Rhonda Santis, who's offering a kind of
Speaker 1: you know, while I'm the competent Trump put the fun
Speaker 1: and fascism, Yeah, really take books out of your libraries
Speaker 1: and smash teachers and make life very painful for LGBT people.
Speaker 1: I mean, like obviously, yeah, I mean the two front
Speaker 1: runners are both offering a form of authoritarianism. Yeah, so,
Speaker 1: I mean, and then it's clear that's where the party wants.
Speaker 1: And it's interesting why the party elite has settled on
Speaker 1: the Santis, like they really seem to think he's their
Speaker 1: answer to Trump. And it's because they understandand that their
Speaker 1: base wants some sort of strong man who's very cruel
Speaker 1: and punishes the enemies, and they think that the Santis
Speaker 1: can offer that and also be a little bit more
Speaker 1: stable or a little bit more pliable than Trump. Not
Speaker 1: a good situation, yeah, I mean, I just wrote a
Speaker 1: piece about this, that the Santis is really being covered
Speaker 1: as a normal Republican candidate when he's really not. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I know, there's all sorts of efforts to normalize him,
Speaker 1: and it's coming from both he has a lot of
Speaker 1: like what I would call the institution of Republicans and
Speaker 1: the mainstream people National Review, Fox News. But also, and
Speaker 1: I think it's very crucial, a lot of centrist people
Speaker 1: who aren't wouldn't say they're Republicans, but they want that
Speaker 1: kind of what they see as a return to normality.
Speaker 1: So they want a Republican party they think they can
Speaker 1: work with, and they are also really whitewashing descentists, and
Speaker 1: I see that. I think you can see that a
Speaker 1: lot of the coverage of descentists in the mainstream press.
Speaker 1: I'll just reference Pamela Paul We can talk about for
Speaker 1: a number of reasons, but he just had a before
Speaker 1: her latest terrible column in defense of J. K. Rowling,
Speaker 1: she had another terrible column. You know what liberals can
Speaker 1: learn from Rhonda Santis basically whitewashing his reputation. I think
Speaker 1: there's a you know, because people who have like a
Speaker 1: kind of really personal view of politics and see Trump
Speaker 1: has being bad because he's a vulgar criminal, all right,
Speaker 1: and not because he ignores democracy, not because of his policies. Yeah,
Speaker 1: they're all settling on you know, Ronda Santis, and as
Speaker 1: I said, that doesn't extends well outside of the mainstream establishment. Republicans'
Speaker 1: is a real effort. I mean, honestly, I'm not I
Speaker 1: could work. I don't know, I don't I don't know
Speaker 1: if de Santis has the juice. I think that if
Speaker 1: you're really into meat, why would you take like a
Speaker 1: veggie burger when you could get the real meat? You know,
Speaker 1: like Trump is out there, you know, calling for people
Speaker 1: to be executed by firing squad. Why would you? And
Speaker 1: you see this in the fact that like none of
Speaker 1: the so called challengers that Trump are willing to take
Speaker 1: him on like that. You ask like de Santis or
Speaker 1: Nicky Haley about Trump and they'll say, well, you know,
Speaker 1: like he was a great president and he's very badly
Speaker 1: treated and I don't want to fight another Republican. And
Speaker 1: then you have Trump going like meat fall Ron to
Speaker 1: all of my Italian American friends, nothing but respect. And
Speaker 1: I understand the offensiveness of this, but it is also
Speaker 1: very funny. Yeah, no, no, I mean the man is
Speaker 1: very good and what he does when it comes to nicknames.
Speaker 1: He is bad and evil when it comes to everything else. Sure, yeah,
Speaker 1: but but the nicknames, I mean like the power dynamic, right,
Speaker 1: like and think about it in school. Who has the power?
Speaker 1: It's the bully that can, like you know, impose nicknames
Speaker 1: on people. And who is like, you know, the second
Speaker 1: in command. It's the people who allow themselves to be
Speaker 1: nicknamed and bullied. And you know we see that like
Speaker 1: with Trump Ley not to the meat fall the Santas.
Speaker 1: But you know, like you know, yes, this is you know,
Speaker 1: rufically racist attacks on Mitch mcconnald's wife. McConnell is like, well,
Speaker 1: you know, I think we should be talking about the
Speaker 1: issues that matter to the American public, like and then
Speaker 1: going back to like Trump's attacks on Ted Cruise's wife,
Speaker 1: like the purpose of these attacks the show Who's boss
Speaker 1: and who cowers and lives in fear? And I have
Speaker 1: to say, you know, you're looking at the Replican primary
Speaker 1: so far, like you know, neither the Sentist nor Haley
Speaker 1: nor Pence, you know who like Trumps like basically inside
Speaker 1: of the Bob to kill, like none of them are
Speaker 1: willing to, like, you know, like say anything deeply critical
Speaker 1: of Trump. Yeah, exactly. And I mean I think that
Speaker 1: if we find ourselves in this insane position right where
Speaker 1: you have these Republicans who are completely terrified of Trump
Speaker 1: because they don't want me and tweets, I want to
Speaker 1: go back to this uh pla book issue that I
Speaker 1: read this morning newsletter, um, where they were, you know,
Speaker 1: quietly Democrats wonder if Joe Biden is too old. And
Speaker 1: someone sent this to me, Someone in the business sent
Speaker 1: me this and was like, oh my god, Democrats don't
Speaker 1: have a base. What are we? What are we? What
Speaker 1: are Democrats going to do? Oh my god, Oh my god,
Speaker 1: I'm god. And I thought about this for a minute.
Speaker 1: And look, one of Joe Biden's great genius things is
Speaker 1: that at every point people have been like, but you know, ultimately,
Speaker 1: and again at every point people have been like, but
Speaker 1: ultimately he won the mid terms, and he had like
Speaker 1: brilliant political instincts, right, he went against he said Republicans
Speaker 1: are against democracy, and he went and gave all these
Speaker 1: speeches and the mainstream media was like, man, who cares?
Speaker 1: And it was the winning issue for him. Yeah, No,
Speaker 1: that's right. Yeah, I mean, I mean, I can't think
Speaker 1: any of these things. Seriously, there's no one of any
Speaker 1: statue in the Democratic Party who's going to challenge Joe
Speaker 1: Biden in the primaries. You know, I've done a little
Speaker 1: bit of partying on this myself, and there's a lot
Speaker 1: of other people have done more reporting. And so who
Speaker 1: are these Democrats that don't want Joe Biden to run again?
Speaker 1: If no one is going to challenge him in the primaries.
Speaker 1: But beyond that, I mean, like he has been a
Speaker 1: very successful president and especially the mid years. I mean basically, like,
Speaker 1: you know, the best kind of midterms for the Democrats
Speaker 1: going back, depending on how you look at it, either
Speaker 1: to nineteen sixty two or really to like nineteen thirty four.
Speaker 1: So and beyond that, I mean, I think that they're real,
Speaker 1: you know, the whole age issue. I mean, like, you know,
Speaker 1: like you just look at that state of the Union
Speaker 1: and like he handled himself perfectly well and not only
Speaker 1: have himself well, like you know, like it feels me
Speaker 1: like after delivering an hour and a half speech, i'd say,
Speaker 1: you know, time for a nap, and he spent like
Speaker 1: another hour and a half just like hob nobbing with
Speaker 1: the senators and members of Congress. To me, just feels
Speaker 1: like a media thing more than anything else. I mean,
Speaker 1: I will say, like, yeah, I'm not sure if there's
Speaker 1: there's a groundswell of love for Biden as whatever, but
Speaker 1: what you described as a genius is the fact that
Speaker 1: he's very attuned to the party and he knows, you know,
Speaker 1: where the party is at any given moment. As such,
Speaker 1: he seems like a perfectly fine leader. Like I don't know,
Speaker 1: I find all this stuff very hard to take seriously. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1: This friend of mine was like, and Democrats have no
Speaker 1: band because there's a lot of I don't know if
Speaker 1: you know this about the Democratic Party, but it tends
Speaker 1: to be a party that enjoys wringing its hands. Yeah,
Speaker 1: the whole bench thing. I don't even know if that's
Speaker 1: like true. I can think of quite a few people,
Speaker 1: you know, starting with Whitmer, but a lot of the
Speaker 1: candidates that ran in against Biden and lost, but you know,
Speaker 1: did the very interesting things. You know, there's people I
Speaker 1: don't even like, like Pete Buda Judge, but who seemed
Speaker 1: to have like strong support among at least some faction
Speaker 1: of the party. And the other thing is things are
Speaker 1: so polarized that the thing with the Democrats is that
Speaker 1: they will coal us around whoever the party leader is,
Speaker 1: and the party leaders right now Biden, but whoever gets
Speaker 1: the nomination, people coal ess around because the alternative is
Speaker 1: like Trump or dissentist. So for both parties, I think
Speaker 1: what we see is that like, look at all the
Speaker 1: problems Trump had and all the flaws, and all the
Speaker 1: people have to kind of hold their nose. But at
Speaker 1: the end of the day, you know, when you're a
Speaker 1: jet care jet all the way, m m m m, Yes,
Speaker 1: when you're a jet you're a jet all the way.
Speaker 1: I also think that we find ourselves in a world
Speaker 1: where we have Nicky Haley just jumped into the race.
Speaker 1: Actually got a d M from someone today that was like,
Speaker 1: can you talk about Nicki Haley's candidacy. Okay, let's talk
Speaker 1: Nicki Haley's candidacy. I feel like it's the perfect it's
Speaker 1: like the perfect candidacy for UM two thousand and three. Yeah, no,
Speaker 1: I I think that's right. Yeah. And Neil Haley can
Speaker 1: run on some substantial things. She was a governor of
Speaker 1: you know, South Carolina, and actually as governor a little
Speaker 1: bit more moderate than what would expect from a Southern Democrat.
Speaker 1: But having said that, I mean, what if you have
Speaker 1: to look at what she's running on. She's running on
Speaker 1: I will be your person of color friend, she said,
Speaker 1: you know, like racism is in public in America, like
Speaker 1: look at me. And Republicans love that sort of candidate,
Speaker 1: but have ever like nominated them on a presidential level.
Speaker 1: Every primary season you see someone who runs on that
Speaker 1: is Herman Kane, Dr Vent Carson, you know again, who
Speaker 1: had like even more than very impressive biography, impressive the year,
Speaker 1: but I mean the whole point is like like the
Speaker 1: idea that we know we're not racist, and then these
Speaker 1: kind of specifically run on that, Yeah, it doesn't racism
Speaker 1: doesn't exist. Is that? Yeah? Yeah, you know, like that's
Speaker 1: an appealing message for a certain type of Republican But
Speaker 1: in each of these cases, these are kind of who
Speaker 1: often enjoy a bubble of support. All it took was
Speaker 1: Trump to start talking about Ben Carson might have life
Speaker 1: to somebody and was a very dangerous guy, and he
Speaker 1: pulled it. He pulled it very quickly. And I you know,
Speaker 1: like I'm just you know, speaking as a seek, I'm
Speaker 1: not looking forward to whatever ethnic nickname that Donald Trump
Speaker 1: comes up with, Nicky Healey. I can imagine several of them.
Speaker 1: So that's a niche she's trying to fail. I think
Speaker 1: it's a limited niche, and we've we've already seen that
Speaker 1: at to the extent. Yeah, I mean, she's a kind
Speaker 1: of Jeb Bush. You know that that faction of the party,
Speaker 1: which we've already seen is weak. I don't see a future.
Speaker 1: We would not be so worried about the Republican Party
Speaker 1: if it were the kind of Republican party that nominated
Speaker 1: Nicki Halett. That's right. The thing is, even if it
Speaker 1: nominated her, she'd be then come under all the pressures
Speaker 1: and we already see this like to actually get where
Speaker 1: she wants to be. Her first campaign event was with
Speaker 1: this preacher Haiggy, who's like, you know, like a really
Speaker 1: awful like anti Semite and Bigett who said like all
Speaker 1: the terrible things that that sort of fundamental licenseys. So,
Speaker 1: I mean, the whole pitch would be that she can
Speaker 1: appeal to more moderates when she gets the domination. But
Speaker 1: to get to the nomination, she's gonna already you know,
Speaker 1: she's already made all these compromises and she's not going
Speaker 1: to get the domination. So so so I think the
Speaker 1: whole thing is a fiasco from start to finish. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's a fiasco. And the other thing is that Trump
Speaker 1: has has ruined any normal There's like one and again
Speaker 1: normal needs to be in quotes because she's not particularly normal.
Speaker 1: But there's like one Republican presidential candidate who hasn't been
Speaker 1: completely sullied by the everything Trump touches dies law of physics,
Speaker 1: and that is Liz Chaining. Yeah that's right, that's right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: I know, who will not also get the nomination. If
Speaker 1: she runs right, there's no world and when she she
Speaker 1: couldn't even win her seat, you know, I mean, unless
Speaker 1: there's something where the Santis and Trump cancel each other out.
Speaker 1: But I just don't even see that. Trump is already
Speaker 1: called to meet ball Ron. Yeah, no, no, I I
Speaker 1: think that's right outside with NICKI I'll make a prediction
Speaker 1: she won't even get enough votes that Trump will feel
Speaker 1: the need to come up with a nickname for her.
Speaker 1: Oh that makes me slightly sad. Yeah, so she won't
Speaker 1: even get a nickname out of this. Yeah, that is
Speaker 1: the worst possible. If you can't even get nickname, then
Speaker 1: you have a lot of trouble. What else are you
Speaker 1: seeing in our political landscape? Right now? Biden is going
Speaker 1: to talk about the aliens today, Republicans continue to desperately
Speaker 1: try to make content for Fox News. Is there anything
Speaker 1: else on your landscape? Well? Yeah, I think we should
Speaker 1: mention like the situation in Ohio with the train rack
Speaker 1: and well, first of all, the sort of really terrible
Speaker 1: exploitation of this by Republicans who are doing two kinds
Speaker 1: of things, one of which is to make this into
Speaker 1: a white genocide narrative, saying like well, nobody's covering this,
Speaker 1: and they're covering stuff up because it's white, working class
Speaker 1: Trump supporters. I'll say the politics of this, which is
Speaker 1: I think that this has led there's a certain class
Speaker 1: of democratic pundits and commentators and online personalities who have
Speaker 1: decided to respond to this by simply saying, well, there's
Speaker 1: nothing to see here, you know, like this is unfair
Speaker 1: to pee Buddha judge and there's not much he could
Speaker 1: do anyways. And I obviously think that's the wrong approach.
Speaker 1: I mean, they're real issues with train safety, with deregulation,
Speaker 1: with the fact that you know, like this company is
Speaker 1: behaving terrible. I mean they offered, you know, like five
Speaker 1: thousand people, they offered twenty five dollars, which is five
Speaker 1: dollars per resident who are being evacuated. And there's much
Speaker 1: more that could be done and should be done. And
Speaker 1: I think the more proper approach we're seeing this from
Speaker 1: Shared Brown and but also from Eliane Omar, is to
Speaker 1: call for congressional investigations to look into this, because, I mean,
Speaker 1: on the one hand, one shouldn't engage in fearmongering. On
Speaker 1: the other hand, this is an environmental disaster already, like
Speaker 1: you know, the water is being affected in animal life
Speaker 1: is being affected. And I don't think that one should
Speaker 1: simply take the word of the company that causes disaster
Speaker 1: that all is Hunky Dorrian. Right, Yes, those are not
Speaker 1: the people to go to. Yes, yeah, trains like they're
Speaker 1: virtual monopoly, like you can't actually have competing train lines,
Speaker 1: and so therefore they have to be regulated. And there's
Speaker 1: a real issue. And I think Trump has a lot
Speaker 1: blame here, but not just Trump in terms of like
Speaker 1: how the training industrsement de regulate it is. So I
Speaker 1: honestly think that this is a political issue. And rather
Speaker 1: than you know, like having you know, you put your
Speaker 1: head in the sand and say nothing's going wrong, I
Speaker 1: think that's going to feed this sort of you know,
Speaker 1: very racist Republican exploitation of this. Yeah, I think the
Speaker 1: elian Omar approach, the shared Brown approach, is the right one. Right. No, No, Look,
Speaker 1: this is a major environmental catastrophe caused by stock by
Speaker 1: backs and a lack of people listening to unions very
Speaker 1: much things that liberals believe in. This should be something
Speaker 1: we are all talking about as much as possible. And
Speaker 1: the reality is Biden is a president of everyone, whether
Speaker 1: or not they voted for him, and that's an incredibly
Speaker 1: important data point. But thank you so much. The time
Speaker 1: has already gone by, and it went by quickly. Here
Speaker 1: Congresswoman Katie Border represents California's district and is a candidate
Speaker 1: for the Senate. Welcome too fast, politics, Katie Border. Thank you,
Speaker 1: nice to be back. Why are you the best woman
Speaker 1: for the job? So I think I'm the best person
Speaker 1: for the job, I want to say, um, although I
Speaker 1: do think it's really important that we continue to try
Speaker 1: to achieve a balance of men and women in politics.
Speaker 1: We know that organizations that have women in leadership about
Speaker 1: perform organizations that underrepresent women. So the Senate is no
Speaker 1: exception to that. But I think that, you know, what
Speaker 1: I can really bring to this race is, as a
Speaker 1: relative newcomer to politics, is a real sense of what
Speaker 1: we need to do in the next two to ten
Speaker 1: years to build that durable majority. I want Democrats to
Speaker 1: win this cycle, but I want them to win the
Speaker 1: cycle after that and the cycle after that, which means
Speaker 1: that we have a politics that really speaks to what
Speaker 1: voters are worried about in the future, whether that's climate
Speaker 1: or housing or leaning up government. So I want to
Speaker 1: ask you, you come from a purple state. It became redistricted,
Speaker 1: it became more rad you won by three points. You
Speaker 1: become sort of a really good example of a Democrat
Speaker 1: who can win in a difficult district, which is again
Speaker 1: unusual because of the way the Congress is made up.
Speaker 1: Why are you the right person to win a primary
Speaker 1: in a very blue state. Yeah, So I represent a
Speaker 1: purple district in Orange County, and with redistricting, have now
Speaker 1: represented about a third to a half of Orange County,
Speaker 1: which is very purple. But I think what I've learned
Speaker 1: from that is how to get voters to see that
Speaker 1: you're fighting for them in Washington, and that is something
Speaker 1: that I think all voters want across the ideological spectrum.
Speaker 1: So in Orange County, I focus on making sure that
Speaker 1: I am standing up to the bad guys in Washington.
Speaker 1: Sometimes that is Trump Republicans, make no mistake. But sometimes
Speaker 1: it's a corrupt e O who isn't delivering for his
Speaker 1: customers or his employees. Sometimes that's a government official who
Speaker 1: just won't pick up the tools that he has and
Speaker 1: do a better job for the American people. And so
Speaker 1: I think one of the things that can offer in
Speaker 1: this race is I know how to win in tough districts,
Speaker 1: and we have tough districts in California, and we have
Speaker 1: a lot of them, as you mentioned, Molly, across the
Speaker 1: United States. So I think California needs someone who can
Speaker 1: be a political leader helping us win and get rid
Speaker 1: of the California Republicans who are failing California. But also
Speaker 1: somebody think the country needs California to have a Senator
Speaker 1: that can go on the road and get out in
Speaker 1: every part in pocket of this country and be able
Speaker 1: to connect with voters. That's how we're going to hold
Speaker 1: this House and the Senate for generations to come. This
Speaker 1: is obviously, I mean, I think you've done a really
Speaker 1: good job in Congress and you've become a star there.
Speaker 1: I'm curious what is motivating you to go to the Senate. Well,
Speaker 1: you know, I think the Senate has long been perceived
Speaker 1: to be the kind of last line of defense for America,
Speaker 1: for our economy, for our rights, for our democracy, and
Speaker 1: I think that it's that's really at peril. And I
Speaker 1: think we in my time in the House, most of
Speaker 1: that time the first four years my first two terms,
Speaker 1: we had a Senate that failed to step up, who
Speaker 1: hid behind the filibuster UM, senators who often cited more
Speaker 1: often with Republicans than with Democrats, or were unwilling to
Speaker 1: kind of get in the fight and stand up to
Speaker 1: corporate power. And so I think that you know the
Speaker 1: class that I was elected with in folks who were
Speaker 1: who ran to kind of stand up to Trump and
Speaker 1: bring new energy to Congress, You're seeing lots of us
Speaker 1: look to take that same energy and help spread it
Speaker 1: throughout politics. So I have candidates colleagues who have gone
Speaker 1: into the administration, like Dev Holland, UM. I have candidates
Speaker 1: who have gone into becoming lieutenant governors UM. And I
Speaker 1: think you're seeing some of us run for the Senate.
Speaker 1: And I think that's good that we are bringing that
Speaker 1: at that energy and that perspective on what needs to
Speaker 1: change in Washington to every all that for kinds of
Speaker 1: institutions that make up our government. Elizabeth Warren was your
Speaker 1: law professor. You're very influenced by her. Anyone who's watched
Speaker 1: to do question and knows that what are other ways
Speaker 1: that you might be more progressive than people now? Yeah,
Speaker 1: And I think what I've learned from Elizabeth Warren Um
Speaker 1: watching her and working with her for years um as
Speaker 1: a law professor before I ran for Congress. UM. I
Speaker 1: guess that was it. Two things come to mind. One
Speaker 1: is that she is a teacher, and so am I.
Speaker 1: And her ability to talk about issues in a way
Speaker 1: that invites people into the conversation. She's been her career
Speaker 1: before she became a politician, making it easier for people
Speaker 1: to understand the law, making it easier for them to
Speaker 1: understand how the economy works and whether it's working for them.
Speaker 1: And I really try to do that. I try and
Speaker 1: my questioning and speeches I give, and my social media
Speaker 1: to give Americans information to teach them, because then they
Speaker 1: can pick up the tools of democracy and make their
Speaker 1: voices heard, whether that's voting or call in their senator
Speaker 1: or representative. I think the other thing that Elizabeth and
Speaker 1: I share is a real commitment to understanding the importance
Speaker 1: of a strong and stable, globally competitive economy. We have
Speaker 1: both seen in our personal lives as well as in
Speaker 1: our professional lives what happens when the economy fails. It's
Speaker 1: not just as President Trump obsessed about the stock market
Speaker 1: going down it's people who are out of work, it's
Speaker 1: kids who are going hungry, it's families that are losing
Speaker 1: their houses, it's it's a whole generation of folks who
Speaker 1: are being held back from having a secure retirement. And
Speaker 1: so I grew up in Iowa during the farm crisis,
Speaker 1: the watch families get more closed on around me. And
Speaker 1: then when I got to California, my entrance into public
Speaker 1: service was then Attorney General now Vice President Kamala Harris
Speaker 1: asking me to hold the bank's feet to the fire
Speaker 1: on stopping cheating people out of their homes, on actually
Speaker 1: making them follow the law and hold them to the
Speaker 1: terms of the deal that they had signed. And so
Speaker 1: in doing that, I got the chance to travel the
Speaker 1: state of California and talk to people and see firsthand,
Speaker 1: especially in a state where home ownership is such a
Speaker 1: challenge for people, how terrible the consequences are of allowing
Speaker 1: big corporations to cheat and to rig the economy in
Speaker 1: their favor. And so I'm a strong proponent of capitalism.
Speaker 1: But to have capitalism, you have to have competition and
Speaker 1: consumer protection, investor protection, consumer choice, price transparency. And when
Speaker 1: we don't have those things, we have to be willing
Speaker 1: to challenge corporations and change the rules to deliver that.
Speaker 1: So would you change the filibuster? Yes, absolutely, Look, the
Speaker 1: filibuster is not functioning to protect democracy. It's functioning to
Speaker 1: protect the rear end of senators who don't want to
Speaker 1: take a vote on tough issues, and so it's actually antidemocratic.
Speaker 1: The whole point of the filibuster, remember, besides it's deep
Speaker 1: and racist history, and for that I recommend people read
Speaker 1: Adam Gentilesen's book. But the whole of the filibuster in
Speaker 1: theory today is to protect the rights of the party
Speaker 1: in the minority. It's just a rule of procedure, no
Speaker 1: different than a rule that says you have to raise
Speaker 1: your hand before you can be recognized. But when that
Speaker 1: rule isn't working, and instead of protecting the minority, it's
Speaker 1: allowing the work of the Senate to come to a
Speaker 1: complete halt, I mean, depriving the American people of knowing
Speaker 1: where their senators stand on issues. Than it is failing
Speaker 1: our democracy, and we should get rid of it and
Speaker 1: substitute other ways to protect the party in the minority
Speaker 1: and make sure that they're able to be heard. We
Speaker 1: have tools to do that, in the House, and they
Speaker 1: work very very well. They're just not the filibuster, and
Speaker 1: the filibuster isn't working as a rule of procedure, and
Speaker 1: we shouldn't elevate it to anything more or less than
Speaker 1: what it is a rule, a rule that can be changed.
Speaker 1: I want to push you here. The California historically kind
Speaker 1: of elects the most left candidate in the primary. Talk
Speaker 1: to me about the lefty bona fide is you have. Well, Look,
Speaker 1: I started into politics, and from the get go I
Speaker 1: ran a little bit differently. I didn't take corporate pack money.
Speaker 1: I'm one of four members of the House of Representatives,
Speaker 1: four out of four thirty five who don't take federal
Speaker 1: lobbyist money. Despite those things, I was the second highest
Speaker 1: fundraiser in the House slash cycle, behind only Kevin McCarthy,
Speaker 1: who does take pac money. Of course, he takes every
Speaker 1: count of money. You can raise the resources you need
Speaker 1: to win the toughest, most expensive races in the country
Speaker 1: without being behold into big corporations. And I'm proof of that.
Speaker 1: And so I think that really matters to progressives. Um,
Speaker 1: we need people to believe that we're fighting for them,
Speaker 1: and I have shown that and I show that not
Speaker 1: just in my words, but in my actions and in
Speaker 1: my decisions and the consistency of votes. I've also been
Speaker 1: in leadership in the House Progressive Caucus. I was elected
Speaker 1: by by colleagues to have the number two role, the
Speaker 1: deputy chair representative from Illegia Pol last Congress, and in
Speaker 1: that role, I work closely with Caromela on trying to
Speaker 1: build progressive power, but also get a lot of our
Speaker 1: colleagues to see that the issues that progressives the Progressive
Speaker 1: Caucus was fighting for, issues like affordable childcare and investments
Speaker 1: in housing, actually have the support of the vast majority
Speaker 1: of Americans, and also to highlight for people you can
Speaker 1: be a strong progressive and win tough races, and I
Speaker 1: that's exactly what I've done three times here in Range County.
Speaker 1: And so I think when I'm in the Senate race,
Speaker 1: I think I have the ability to both know how
Speaker 1: to talk to independence and persuadable Republicans, whatever portion of
Speaker 1: Republicans that is, and get them on board. And I've
Speaker 1: had to do that to win every time. And at
Speaker 1: the same time, I ran in two seventeen, when I
Speaker 1: first launched my campaign on things like Medicare for All
Speaker 1: and the Green New Deal. I ran as an unabashed
Speaker 1: progressive and I have stayed that way. And I think
Speaker 1: that consistency of values is something that should give people
Speaker 1: comp and instant as I'm campaigning, when they asked me
Speaker 1: a question and I give them an answer, they can
Speaker 1: they can count on that. So I have to ask
Speaker 1: you about the staffing thing. You know, there's been accusations
Speaker 1: that you were not a nice boss. Have you been
Speaker 1: able to sort of quell this? Yeah, I am a
Speaker 1: terrific staff and there's no way that you can do
Speaker 1: this job without them. We are a team, and we
Speaker 1: are in partnership, and we count on each other. And
Speaker 1: that means sometimes they say to me, you let me down,
Speaker 1: and I told you to give this speech, or what
Speaker 1: happened to my third paragraph? And and sometimes I say
Speaker 1: to them, what are we That third paragraph didn't seem
Speaker 1: to fit with the rest of the speech. What are
Speaker 1: we gonna do? But I'm really proud of my staff.
Speaker 1: I'm proud that I have promoted from within several times,
Speaker 1: that my district director, for example, started out as an
Speaker 1: intern in my staff. I'm proud that, you know, my
Speaker 1: communications director has been with me from day one. I
Speaker 1: have seen him grow and he has seen me grow,
Speaker 1: and that is an amazing relationship to have. I expect
Speaker 1: a lot of my stuff. I looked the expect a
Speaker 1: lot of myself, but I don't think the American people
Speaker 1: deserve any less. With regard to the most recent stuffer,
Speaker 1: the recent stuffer who has said that I wasn't treating
Speaker 1: her fairly, I will say three things. One, I consulted
Speaker 1: with house employment counsel about what to do when she
Speaker 1: broke our office policy with regard to COVID safety. Too,
Speaker 1: I have a duty to protect the people who work
Speaker 1: in my office. If someone isn't following office policy with
Speaker 1: regard to security, or ethics or COVID, they are putting
Speaker 1: all of us, including constituents who might come into the office,
Speaker 1: at risk. So I have to think about my obligations
Speaker 1: as an employer and as a representative to keep people safe.
Speaker 1: And the third thing is I'm grateful that she was
Speaker 1: able to finish out her term. She worked two years
Speaker 1: for me as a wounded warrior fellow, and I was
Speaker 1: really grateful to have her contributions in the office, and
Speaker 1: I wish her well in her new endeavor. Where are
Speaker 1: you on congressional staff unionise saying, oh, I'm in support
Speaker 1: of that, and I think we've seen some offices trying
Speaker 1: to unionize. I think the republic things are taking in
Speaker 1: with that. But I think it's really really important. Look,
Speaker 1: I don't think this is a tough one. Every worker
Speaker 1: should be free to organize and decide to join the union.
Speaker 1: That that is a core principle. I think President Buying
Speaker 1: here has the exactly is exactly right. You would say
Speaker 1: I'm a union guy, I would say I'm a union gal. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think that's definitely true. We are having a lot
Speaker 1: of transit issues. The train collision, we had a bunch
Speaker 1: of nearer misses with aviation. What do you think should
Speaker 1: happen here? I mean, some of this is because of
Speaker 1: corporate buybacks, especially when it comes to and when you're
Speaker 1: talking about unions, I'm thinking about the the train workers
Speaker 1: who fought and fought to try to prevent this train
Speaker 1: accident from happening, and we're warning us about it. What
Speaker 1: do you think needs to happen here? There's a fundamental
Speaker 1: problem I think with this. Well, Look, I think what
Speaker 1: we see in transit is emblematic of what we're seeing
Speaker 1: in several other industries right now, which is the consequences
Speaker 1: of years of deregulation and Washington kind of giving corporations
Speaker 1: what they want and how telling to them. Um and
Speaker 1: so I think what those what this works out in
Speaker 1: is in transit is these folks have lobbied and bought
Speaker 1: and paid for sometimes bills that deregulate the industry, that
Speaker 1: take away safety protections, that limit the resources of regulators
Speaker 1: to do their jobs keeping us safe. I think the
Speaker 1: union busting and anti union activity that we've seen in
Speaker 1: transits also a factor. So I think when you decade
Speaker 1: after decade, each of these things is well, is just
Speaker 1: a little bit to help the business, is just a
Speaker 1: little bit to make it easier to do business. But
Speaker 1: when you pile those things up and nobody is willing
Speaker 1: to stand up the corporate power, at the end of
Speaker 1: the day, you have corporations that are putting profit ahead
Speaker 1: of their core business mission, in this case, to get
Speaker 1: people from our goods from point A to point me safely.
Speaker 1: That's your job. If you're an airline, that's your job.
Speaker 1: If you're a trucking company, that's your job. If you're
Speaker 1: a train along the way. We want you to make
Speaker 1: money and be able to contribute to our economy. But
Speaker 1: they are more focused on making money for themselves, on
Speaker 1: lighting the pockets of their executives and their shareholders, than
Speaker 1: they are on executing their core business models successfully. And
Speaker 1: I think there is a role for greater federal regulation here.
Speaker 1: I think we need to make sure that our cabinet secretaries,
Speaker 1: all of them in every department, are willing to stand
Speaker 1: up to those that they're regulating. I think we've seen
Speaker 1: great leadership at the Federal Trade Commission and with regard
Speaker 1: to antitrust on this front, and I think we need
Speaker 1: to keep pushing President Biden, who has shown a real
Speaker 1: willingness to stand up for workers and stand up for consumers,
Speaker 1: to make sure his cabinet in every department is doing
Speaker 1: the same thing. I have one more question with the
Speaker 1: environmental impact in Ohio terrible right, What comes next? It
Speaker 1: just seems to terrifying. Well, I think one of the
Speaker 1: really important things is that our government officials need to
Speaker 1: be on the ground making their own assessment. We cannot take,
Speaker 1: as we often have in these situations, the corporation's talking
Speaker 1: points switch out the head or on the paper and
Speaker 1: speaks out the letterhead and then make them the government
Speaker 1: talking points. The American people and especially the people living
Speaker 1: in East Palestine need to know that they are safe.
Speaker 1: They need independent verification and testing, and we need to
Speaker 1: not take the fact that we're not finding harms today
Speaker 1: as a guarantee that there won't be long term harms.
Speaker 1: We have to have to learn the lessons of environmental
Speaker 1: justice and the lessons of pollution from our past, and
Speaker 1: we can't keep repeating the same thing because it's simply expedient.
Speaker 1: For those whose campaigns are funded by the railroad of hand,
Speaker 1: we have to hold them accountable and the government has
Speaker 1: to be a trusted partner in delivering that safety information.
Speaker 1: Katie Porter, thank you so much for joining us my pleasure.
Speaker 1: I know you, our dear listeners, are very busy and
Speaker 1: you don't have time to sort through the hundreds of
Speaker 1: pieces of pundentry each week. This is why every week
Speaker 1: I put together a newsletter of my five favorite articles
Speaker 1: on politics. If you enjoy the podcast, you will love
Speaker 1: having this in your inbox every Friday. So sign up
Speaker 1: at Fast Politics pod dot com and click the tab
Speaker 1: to join our mailing list. That's Fast Politics pod dot com.
Speaker 1: Ben Schiller is the managing editor of Coin Desk. Welcome
Speaker 1: to Fast Politics, Ben. It seems like this is not
Speaker 1: crypto's greatest moment. It would certainly not be crypto's greatest moments.
Speaker 1: Definitely having a tough time, and that's coming from the
Speaker 1: pullout from the FTX scandal, which was a forty billion
Speaker 1: dollar implosion, and it's coming on the back of a
Speaker 1: lot of big claims of the industry mate in Washington,
Speaker 1: d C. Which has turned out not to be true.
Speaker 1: And it's really a reckoning moment for crypto in the
Speaker 1: capital now. So we are about to go into a
Speaker 1: week of crypto. Crypto meats government exactly. Yeah. I mean,
Speaker 1: legislators are lining up to crack down on the industry,
Speaker 1: and I have a lot of hearings, particularly from the
Speaker 1: Senate Banking Committee, and then there's a lot of action
Speaker 1: on the kind of regulatory front with the SEC of particular,
Speaker 1: So Gary Gainslow, who's the chair of the SEC, is
Speaker 1: under a lot of pressure from legislators to really come
Speaker 1: down hard on the industry. For various reasons. A lot
Speaker 1: of industries have a partisan like Republicans have oil and
Speaker 1: gas but in this I think both sides are very
Speaker 1: piste off crypto, right, Yeah, I mean I would argue
Speaker 1: that they're really taking it personally. So I mean, just
Speaker 1: to backtrack a little bit, I mean, for a long time,
Speaker 1: you could have been around since the invention of bitcoin,
Speaker 1: which is about twelve years ago, and for maybe ten
Speaker 1: of those years it wasn't really taken seriously in d C.
Speaker 1: And then last year there was a massive full run
Speaker 1: and there was a lot of money flowing around, and
Speaker 1: crypto really started to get some traction with members of Congress,
Speaker 1: and there was sort of talk of favorable legislation, you know,
Speaker 1: the packs formed, and particularly there are a lot of
Speaker 1: donations flowing around, particularly from SBF or san Band Freed,
Speaker 1: who was the CEO and founder of f t X.
Speaker 1: Him and his colleague gave money to up to a
Speaker 1: third of Congress, So I mean, you know, hundreds and
Speaker 1: hundreds of people. So when the ft X folded in
Speaker 1: this kind of very dramatic way, I think there was
Speaker 1: a kind of a loss of faith both in him obviously,
Speaker 1: but also in the industry in general, because a lot
Speaker 1: of things he'd been saying, and he was a charming guy,
Speaker 1: had this kind of tousel head, kind of young princely image,
Speaker 1: you know, when they when he turned out to be
Speaker 1: a charlatan, I think they really took it personally and
Speaker 1: there had no reason then to really be the champion
Speaker 1: of the industry. And that's what we're seeing now is
Speaker 1: kind of blowback. But didn't SPF actually give money Republicans too? Absolutely,
Speaker 1: it was it was an equal handed operation. I mean
Speaker 1: he joined the Biden election, and you know, the first
Speaker 1: Biden election he gave very heavily to Democrats, but when
Speaker 1: it came to the last two years, he was giving
Speaker 1: even handily to to both sides. Yeah. So it actually
Speaker 1: the idea that he's some kind of that this is
Speaker 1: a partisan crime is really not accurate, not at all.
Speaker 1: I mean, I think his personal leanings are definitely to
Speaker 1: the left, but in terms of building up his political
Speaker 1: capital in Washington, he was definitely giving to everybody. There's
Speaker 1: more than just SPF. That is a problem problem. Yeah.
Speaker 1: I mean, the the legislators and particularly SEC are going
Speaker 1: after all aspects of crypto. I mean, I don't want
Speaker 1: to get too into the weeds on this program, but
Speaker 1: you know, there was a big enforcement action from the
Speaker 1: SECC this week coming down on a company called Kraken,
Speaker 1: which is a leading exchange regarding its staking service, which
Speaker 1: sounds a bit sort of in the weeds, but it's
Speaker 1: a big deal for crypto because that's a big source
Speaker 1: of revenue and a big What is staking staking is
Speaker 1: when you take your bitcoin or another coin and you
Speaker 1: give it to a company like cracking, and then they
Speaker 1: give you a return on that money. So it's basically
Speaker 1: a form of collateralization in the same way that you
Speaker 1: would give money to a bank and they would give
Speaker 1: you an interest rate. And what is wrong with their
Speaker 1: staking service, Well, this goes back to what Gary Ginster
Speaker 1: has been saying about crypto all along. If you want
Speaker 1: have been listening, which is that you know, when you
Speaker 1: issue a coin and you have an expectation or give
Speaker 1: the other party an expectation of a return on that coin,
Speaker 1: then you can reasonably expect that asset to be called
Speaker 1: a security. And this is what the argument has been
Speaker 1: about all along, where Gary Gains has been saying that
Speaker 1: all tokens are basically securities, and the industry has not
Speaker 1: wanted to really believe him or really go along with
Speaker 1: the logic of that. So you know, they've been operating
Speaker 1: as if these assets are not securities, and Gary Ginsler
Speaker 1: has secretly or not so secretly been thinking they have
Speaker 1: been securities. But what about candidates Like in Yomy we
Speaker 1: have Cynthia Loomis, who has been very big on crypto.
Speaker 1: In Miami we have the Miami mayor who is a
Speaker 1: slightly lefty Republican and he went big on crypto. I mean,
Speaker 1: did these people and also like all this clebrities who
Speaker 1: did crypto ads, Like, is there any kind of like
Speaker 1: regulatory problems for these people? Do does anyone have to
Speaker 1: pay a fine? I mean not that I know, I've know.
Speaker 1: I mean most of these people have. They've taken money
Speaker 1: from SPF for or some other discredited crypto person, have
Speaker 1: given the money back, or they've given them the money
Speaker 1: away to somebody else. That's the only penalty that they faced.
Speaker 1: Do you think that people have not been hard enough
Speaker 1: on like this? You know, like think about like last
Speaker 1: year's Super Bowl was almost all crypto ads and celebrities
Speaker 1: got millions and millions of dollars, and even like all
Speaker 1: the n f T stuff that is connected to crypto
Speaker 1: that also is a huge payday for celebrities like Onwyneth Paltrow.
Speaker 1: I mean, do you think that there's been enough reporting
Speaker 1: on just the kind of how unfair that was and
Speaker 1: how misled a lot of people were, or do you
Speaker 1: think we'll generally not and just going back to ft
Speaker 1: X again. I mean, he had a number of celebrity endorses.
Speaker 1: Larry David, for instance, did a big Super Bowl ad
Speaker 1: last year, and of those people have gotten into trouble
Speaker 1: for taking all of that money. I don't believe they're
Speaker 1: even party to the bankruptcy proceedings that are going on now.
Speaker 1: It's noting like people are trying to plow that money back,
Speaker 1: so they've got a free reign. I mean, the only
Speaker 1: example really of a celebrity who has gotten to trouble
Speaker 1: is Kim Kardashian. So the SEC made a big kind
Speaker 1: of scapegoating moment out of going after her for pitching
Speaker 1: a a nonsense coin, what we call in the industry
Speaker 1: a ship coin called ethery and Max, where she basically
Speaker 1: went on her Instagram and and said this was this
Speaker 1: was the greatest project ever. And the SEC went after
Speaker 1: that for basically an illegal activity, and they used her
Speaker 1: celebrity against her, and as a sort of an example
Speaker 1: for others not to follow, you know going forward. That's
Speaker 1: really interesting. What else you seeing a coin desk right
Speaker 1: now in the industry itself, which is what we cover,
Speaker 1: you know, and we broke the the spf ft X story,
Speaker 1: So we're kind of seeing both sides of it. On
Speaker 1: the one hand, you know, this is a reckoning moment.
Speaker 1: On the other hand, you know a lot of people
Speaker 1: in the industry are not really getting it. So I
Speaker 1: think there's still that argument to play out now. So um,
Speaker 1: you know, the industry would argue that the sec has
Speaker 1: not been clear in what is and what isn't legal,
Speaker 1: and it's now being rather sort of capricious and arbitrary
Speaker 1: and enforcing traditional securities laws. On the other hand, I
Speaker 1: think most people would say, most reasonable people would say,
Speaker 1: you know, the the industry has been living under kind
Speaker 1: of a wishful thinking and imagining that they're different from
Speaker 1: the rest of the financial system when they're really not.
Speaker 1: And uh, you know, Gary Gansler has been saying for years,
Speaker 1: as I said that, you know, most tokens are securities,
Speaker 1: and the lawyers working for these companies have not wanted
Speaker 1: to really listen to that message. And they've been telling
Speaker 1: their clients, these companies that they can go and do
Speaker 1: lots and lots of kind of exotic things when you
Speaker 1: know there was no kind of legal basis for that.
Speaker 1: So I think we're seeing a process of innovation, sometimes
Speaker 1: you know, worthy and often not worthy, really catching up
Speaker 1: with the law, and regulators starting to really do what
Speaker 1: they've say they're going to do in principle actually an actuality.
Speaker 1: So I think, as I say, it's it's a reckoning moment,
Speaker 1: and it's going to be interesting to see how this
Speaker 1: plays out because there are a lot of big fish
Speaker 1: in this industry that haven't faced any regulatory action in
Speaker 1: the past who are now likely to face it. So
Speaker 1: it's a it's a big moment. Oh yeah, absolutely. I mean,
Speaker 1: doesn't it seem like bitcoin is still kind of overvalued, Well,
Speaker 1: it depends how you look at it, I guess. You know,
Speaker 1: it's been an argument about how you value bitcoin for
Speaker 1: for years and years and what sort of role it
Speaker 1: actually plays, and there's an argument there. I mean, on
Speaker 1: the plus side, you know, it does have millions and
Speaker 1: millions of people out there who really believe in the
Speaker 1: project and really are invested in it, not only financially,
Speaker 1: but in terms of its values and in terms of
Speaker 1: its kind of bigger message and that kind of ideas
Speaker 1: that it kind of holds onto. On the other hand,
Speaker 1: it's made some claims about being a source of value
Speaker 1: in in inflationary times hedge against inflation, which really hasn't
Speaker 1: proven true. It's made some claims about being a currency
Speaker 1: on the Internet, which isn't really true. And so I
Speaker 1: can kind of see it both ways. On the one hand,
Speaker 1: you could say, well, there's an enormous community and that
Speaker 1: community equals something important on the Internet. On the other hand,
Speaker 1: you can say, well, it's made these big claims and
Speaker 1: it hasn't really fulfilled them. So you know, it's kind
Speaker 1: of an argument now about whether Bitcoin is going to
Speaker 1: remain the pre eminent cryptocurrency or whether some other, more nimble,
Speaker 1: more technologically advanced projects will really begin to take over.
Speaker 1: And that's particularly ethereum, but not only ethereum Um, and
Speaker 1: that that argument is very much so sort of taking
Speaker 1: shape now, and it's both an ideological argument and it's
Speaker 1: also a practical sort of technological and financial argument. Jesus,
Speaker 1: what an interesting and strange time we live in. What
Speaker 1: would be an exchange that would seem better, you know,
Speaker 1: would that be a theoryum? I mean what coin would
Speaker 1: be more stable than Bitcoin? Well, I mean none of
Speaker 1: them are particularly stable and less you include what are
Speaker 1: called stable coins, which are expressly designed to be stable,
Speaker 1: i to to not fluctuate in price. And that's always
Speaker 1: been a problem with Bitcoin as a currency. It's it
Speaker 1: goes up and down too much to be um something
Speaker 1: you would actually want to use in a store, because
Speaker 1: you know, if it's going up, then you don't wanna,
Speaker 1: you know, spend it, because then you're losing the potential upside.
Speaker 1: The industry came up with these this idea of stable coins,
Speaker 1: which are sort of mediums of exchange which retain their value.
Speaker 1: But now even though stable coins are now under trouble,
Speaker 1: you know, in trouble legally and in terms of regulation.
Speaker 1: And just this week a stable coin project called pack Sauce,
Speaker 1: which is based here in New York, was forced to
Speaker 1: stop issuing a stable coin on behalf of a very
Speaker 1: big crypto company called finance. It's called be USD. That's
Speaker 1: also seen as rather foreboding for the market because if
Speaker 1: the stable coins, which are supposedly stable are also going
Speaker 1: to full foul of the law, then that could really be,
Speaker 1: you know, an existential threat to the industry going forward,
Speaker 1: because if you don't have stable coins, and you don't
Speaker 1: have big companies like FTX, and you have these other
Speaker 1: issues that the industry is facing, then what do you have?
Speaker 1: And that might be good for bitcoin because bitcoin is
Speaker 1: a sort of unmediated project. That's kind of the whole
Speaker 1: point of it. It kind of ticks on in the background.
Speaker 1: It doesn't need any kind of CEO or any management,
Speaker 1: and that can be good in a time when crypto
Speaker 1: or other aspects of crypto are relying on intermediaries for
Speaker 1: its well being. So that might actually be good for
Speaker 1: bitcoin in the long term. Well, a little bit of
Speaker 1: good news for bitcoin. Uman, you so much for joining us.
Speaker 1: I hope you'll come back. Thanks very much, money if
Speaker 1: it's a pleasure. Jesse Cannon, Molly John Fast. We've all
Speaker 1: been waiting for Fatty Willis to head it down, and
Speaker 1: it's here. I know you'll be shocked to hear this.
Speaker 1: She thinks there may be some lying liars who lie
Speaker 1: in Trump World. Congratulation to all involved. That's it for
Speaker 1: this episode of Fast Politics. Tune in every Monday, Wednesday
Speaker 1: and Friday to your 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. H