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 Trump accidentally helped Democrats get some
Speaker 1: key judicial nominees approved by taking Republicans to watch this
Speaker 1: SpaceX launch. Thank God. How presidential, very modern day presidential.
Speaker 1: We have a great show for you today. The Washington
Speaker 1: Post Dana Milbank stops by to talk to us about
Speaker 1: Donald Trump's nominations and what they're signaling for our dismal
Speaker 1: political future. Then we'll talk to Russian media monitor Julia
Speaker 1: Davis about how Russia is delighting in Trump's recent moves.
Speaker 1: But first the news.
Speaker 2: Somali a lot of fun news today, as I'm sure
Speaker 2: you'll be very shocked, mister Trump is only nominating the
Speaker 2: best people. And we have wrestling magnate Linda McMahon as
Speaker 2: Secretary of Education. You might be wondering what she has
Speaker 2: to do with education, as I was until I read
Speaker 2: this article.
Speaker 1: Linda McMahon I actually know from my misspent youth, because
Speaker 1: she did try once to run for Senate in Connecticut.
Speaker 1: It was universally hilarious until she dropped out. But I
Speaker 1: want to point out Linda McMahon. Trump wants to close
Speaker 1: the Department of Education. So Linda wanted to be Commerce Secretary.
Speaker 1: She was the co chair of Trump's transition team. She
Speaker 1: gave him a ton of money, and she thought she
Speaker 1: was going to be Commerce Secretary. Now what happened was
Speaker 1: this guy called Howard Lutnek, who also was co leading
Speaker 1: the transition team with her, ended up getting Commerce Secretary.
Speaker 1: And that meant that Linda had nothing to get. And
Speaker 1: since Donald Trump feels he's going to close this Department
Speaker 1: of Education anyway, he figured he'd just put her there. Now,
Speaker 1: what I want to realize is like in the last
Speaker 1: Trump admin, Trump actually put someone in there who was
Speaker 1: not without her problems, but who was actually interested in education,
Speaker 1: quite a pedigree. Right had done some education stuff, was
Speaker 1: from a family they were Some of their education ideas
Speaker 1: might have been a little screwy, but she actually did
Speaker 1: work in education. This time, there's no pretense. We're just
Speaker 1: got a donor needs a job. Let's figure it out.
Speaker 1: And so she is now going to be heading the
Speaker 1: Department of Education. This is a little ironic because in
Speaker 1: two thousand and nine, when she ran for Senate in Connecticut,
Speaker 1: she had stated that she had a bachelor's degree in education.
Speaker 1: I don't know how you would get that, But in fact,
Speaker 1: she had earned a degree in French and a teaching
Speaker 1: certificate from East Carolina University, and that is not the
Speaker 1: same thing. And during her brief tenure on the Connecticut
Speaker 1: State Board of Education the error was made public. It
Speaker 1: became an issue during her twenty ten campaign for US Senate.
Speaker 1: She decided to step down from that board because of
Speaker 1: legislative limits on her political fundraising that could hurt her
Speaker 1: campaign goals. The point here is that she lied about
Speaker 1: her education and then tried to run for her senate.
Speaker 1: Then now she is leading the Department of Education, which
Speaker 1: is so very perfectly trumpy. I am not even a
Speaker 1: little surprised. Are you surprised, Jesse?
Speaker 2: I sure not.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 2: I was a little shocked this morning where I saw
Speaker 2: some news as I also learned I shocked some listeners
Speaker 2: on Monday because I got a text in the morning
Speaker 2: about our episode that said, why the fuck did you
Speaker 2: randomly say hot tub crime machine in the middle of
Speaker 2: the Rick Wilson segment. I said, that is a callback
Speaker 2: to what you me and Rick used to do. The
Speaker 2: New Abnormal as we would call Matthew.
Speaker 1: Whittaker hot tub crime machine.
Speaker 2: That's right.
Speaker 1: He has other nicknames. There's a nickname he gets called
Speaker 1: a lot, but hot tub crime machine is because Matthew
Speaker 1: Whittaker has been involved in all sorts of gadgy small businesses,
Speaker 1: including toilets for well and down men, hot tubs. He
Speaker 1: was involved in some kind of time machine situation, right
Speaker 1: am I remembering season one of this fiasco correctly.
Speaker 2: The point what we could say is when you read
Speaker 2: his dossier of weird fuckery, you literally feel like you
Speaker 2: may have been slipped at acid tap.
Speaker 1: So, needless to say, he has a job in this
Speaker 1: advent because Trump only knows a few people.
Speaker 2: But only the best people, right.
Speaker 1: A lot of these cabinet picks are people you've seen
Speaker 1: on television.
Speaker 2: He has a qualification that Trump likes. Big goomba energy
Speaker 2: is what I like to call it.
Speaker 1: I can't say that because I'm Jewish and that seems
Speaker 1: like a slur.
Speaker 2: I come from the part of New Jersey where that's
Speaker 2: just coming.
Speaker 1: You can say it because you're Italian? Are you Italian?
Speaker 2: No, that's not true.
Speaker 1: I can say that's not true. You can say.
Speaker 2: Sopranos was filmed.
Speaker 1: You can say it just he's getting canceled. So anyway,
Speaker 1: he adds actually served three months as the nation's top
Speaker 1: law enforcement official after Jefferson Beauregard session step down for
Speaker 1: allowing Trump to be investigation. Did you remember Jefferson Beauregard
Speaker 1: Sessions the craziest attorney general we ever thought Trump could
Speaker 1: appoint before Matt Gates. Whittaker does not bring any so
Speaker 1: he's going to be I just want to point out
Speaker 1: he's going to be the ambassador to the North American
Speaker 1: Treaty Organization NATO, something that Trump has liked. The Department
Speaker 1: of Education mused about shutting down so you could tell
Speaker 1: how important this job is to Trump. Mister Whitterker does
Speaker 1: not bring any foreign policy experience to a job that
Speaker 1: may serve as the focal point for mister Trump's complaints
Speaker 1: about how much the United States pay is to help
Speaker 1: NATO keep Europe secure. And this is like a gift
Speaker 1: to Vladimir Putin, right, Like, let's put one of our
Speaker 1: guys in there who doesn't know anything and isn't super
Speaker 1: interested in it. He is known for his personal loyalty
Speaker 1: and willing to defend mister Trump during his first administration.
Speaker 1: He is likely to bring a similar approach to his
Speaker 1: ambassadorship doing something he knows nothing about.
Speaker 2: I just want the record to show that I have
Speaker 2: looked up at Goomba's a sawyer and it actually means friend.
Speaker 1: All right, Yes, I'll let you. Just just let the
Speaker 1: record show only cancel Jesse for this, Okay. Mister Trump
Speaker 1: has repeatedly voiced skepticism about the alliance. He has long
Speaker 1: threwn to a draw from it, and now hot tub
Speaker 1: crime machine will run it.
Speaker 2: Okay, on to a last bit of a fucker in
Speaker 2: the section. House speaker Mike Johnson has waited on the
Speaker 2: use of bathrooms in the Capitol Complex. What are you
Speaker 2: seeing here?
Speaker 1: So Nancy Mays, in her long quest to become Marjorie
Speaker 1: Taylor Green has his bathroom bell, Mike Johnson. Now it's
Speaker 1: a bathroom bell targeted at the new member from Delaware.
Speaker 1: She wants to make it so she can't use the
Speaker 1: bathroom because because Sarah McBride is traned. Now, Mike Johnson
Speaker 1: has a problem here, right, which is he is leading
Speaker 1: a group that is you know, really delights in hurting
Speaker 1: trans people. But he is at least theoretically a very
Speaker 1: serious religious person. So he does not know how he
Speaker 1: should he be horrible to the trans woman because that's
Speaker 1: what the base likes, or should he try to operate
Speaker 1: a little bit in his principles. So he's gone back
Speaker 1: and forth. So first he said that he wants to
Speaker 1: make everyone comfortable, and later he said he had to
Speaker 1: go back and be a little meaner because that's what
Speaker 1: the base wants. So he said, all single sex facilities
Speaker 1: in the Capitol and office building are reserved only for
Speaker 1: individuals of that biological sex. And he then went on
Speaker 1: and on. He even said, you know, women can only
Speaker 1: be women, men can only be men. It was more
Speaker 1: of that, and he also said, like all it's enforceable.
Speaker 1: We have single sets facilities where reason women's deserve women's
Speaker 1: only spaces. We're not anti anyone, we're pro woman. Again,
Speaker 1: that's not really true. They're really not. By the way,
Speaker 1: if there's one thing they're not, it's pro women. I
Speaker 1: think it's important policy for us to continue. It always
Speaker 1: has been, I guess, an unwritten policy, and now it's
Speaker 1: in writing. He added again, Yeah, it's hard to be
Speaker 1: both very religious and believe that you're there to take
Speaker 1: care of others and also be run by a troll.
Speaker 1: But here we are Speaker Mike Johnson again trying to
Speaker 1: thread the needle between religion and cruelty.
Speaker 2: SAMAI I said that that was one last piece of fuckery,
Speaker 2: but but it's not. I did realize there's something we
Speaker 2: have to address here, which is that right now we
Speaker 2: are in these big, big standoff. There's a bunch of
Speaker 2: journalists right outside the ass Ethics can be while they're
Speaker 2: weighing whether to release this report on nominated ag Matt cats.
Speaker 2: One of the things that we were reminded of is
Speaker 2: at our time with The Daily Beast, there was a
Speaker 2: very big scoop about all the Venmo payments he made
Speaker 2: to these possibly underage women, and there's some more details
Speaker 2: about that here. What are you seeing here?
Speaker 1: Oh, Venmo gate? So it's Gatesgate. So remember Gates resigned
Speaker 1: last week to avoid this Ethics Committee report from being published.
Speaker 1: The Ethics Committee. I just want to point this out.
Speaker 1: The House Ethics Committee is known to be particularly toothless.
Speaker 1: So this whole thing becoming such a big deal shows
Speaker 1: just what a big problem Matt Gates has. Now we
Speaker 1: have these Venmo payments. Okay, the House Ethics I mean,
Speaker 1: I think this is the drip to a drip of
Speaker 1: the House Ethics stuff coming out. But remember the lawyer
Speaker 1: is speaking to the press. Some of the witnesses are
Speaker 1: speaking the press. The House Ethics Committee obtained records, including
Speaker 1: a check and the records of VENMO payments. Remember, Matt
Speaker 1: Gates's VENMO had been accidentally not private. He had accidentally
Speaker 1: people could have could see it paid more than ten
Speaker 1: thousand dollars to two women who were later witnesses in
Speaker 1: sexual misconduct probes conducted by the House and the Justice Department.
Speaker 1: According to documents obtained by ABC News, the VENMO records
Speaker 1: showed that between July twenty seventeen and January twenty nineteen, Gates,
Speaker 1: who was first elected in twenty sixteen, allegedly made twenty
Speaker 1: seven VEMO payments totaling ten thousand, two hundred and twenty
Speaker 1: four dollars and two cents to the two witnesses who
Speaker 1: were over the age of eighteen at the time. Good
Speaker 1: for them for being over eighteen. They are the very
Speaker 1: few people in the story who are over eighteen. The payments,
Speaker 1: which sources said were displayed during closed door testimony ranged
Speaker 1: from one hundred to more than seven hundred dollars each.
Speaker 1: Probably not what you want in an attorney's general, but
Speaker 1: we shall have to watch this play out. The Milbank
Speaker 1: is a columnist at The Washington Post and the author
Speaker 1: of Pools on the Hill, The Hooligans, Saboteurs, conspiracy theorists,
Speaker 1: and dunces who burned down the House. Welcome back, my
Speaker 1: friend here to keep me from completely falling apart? Data
Speaker 1: mail Bank.
Speaker 3: Well, Molly, if I'm the one who's will keep you
Speaker 3: from falling apart, you're in big trouble because I'm I'm
Speaker 3: just picking up the pieces over here.
Speaker 1: Yes, you emailed me like what are we going to
Speaker 1: talk about? And I was like, I saw the email
Speaker 1: and I was seized with panic. And then I was like,
Speaker 1: we are just so incredibly down the fucking rabbit hole.
Speaker 1: So I wanted to Can we talk a little bit
Speaker 1: about the uh, the geniuses who are running and now
Speaker 1: we will again run the United States Congress? Please?
Speaker 3: Yes, indeed, I'd love to talk about.
Speaker 1: That, because you have a book about that.
Speaker 3: I do a book about that, which you were kind
Speaker 3: enough to mention on this this very podcast. And they
Speaker 3: did such a fabulous job time that they've been returned
Speaker 3: with it even it looks like maybe even a smaller majority. Yes, certainly,
Speaker 3: no better than the last time. So if you thought
Speaker 3: the last one was a disaster, wait till this one.
Speaker 1: Get ready. I want to talk about the United States
Speaker 1: Congress and the House of Representatives because they were so
Speaker 1: bad in this last two year period. They won the
Speaker 1: majority quote unquote by you know whatever two or three seats.
Speaker 1: Then they fired their speaker because Matt Gates got into
Speaker 1: a fight with him, and then they were almost unable
Speaker 1: to pass anything even like postal office namings. This time discuss.
Speaker 3: Well, this time we don't have Matt Gates to kick
Speaker 3: around because he made me the Attorney General of the
Speaker 3: United States.
Speaker 1: Again, we laugh to keep from crying.
Speaker 3: Continue, I guess so and then, and what are we
Speaker 3: going to do? Well, Nancy Mace is already moving to
Speaker 3: ban the first ever trans member of Congress from going
Speaker 3: to the bathroom. So you know that that is exactly
Speaker 3: what the voters were asking this Congress to do. They said,
Speaker 3: we're suffering from inflation in the border, but yep, don't
Speaker 3: let any trans person in Congress, p.
Speaker 1: Ever use a bathroom. Yeah. One of the things with
Speaker 1: Nancy Mace is she's such a great example of what
Speaker 1: MAGA does when Maga gets the chance. Like, here's someone
Speaker 1: who was in a much more mixed district, right, and
Speaker 1: then she got redistricted, and so she decided she no
Speaker 1: longer believed in any of the more normal values that
Speaker 1: she had.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean that's pretty similar to the Aleast Stephanic route.
Speaker 3: Also now going to be a member of the Trump administration.
Speaker 1: But least Ivonna got one of those jobs that women
Speaker 1: get in the Trump administration. You know, you can have
Speaker 1: that because he really wants to end the un anyway.
Speaker 3: Right, And that's exactly And Linda McMahon's the other great
Speaker 3: example of that. You know, who knows you know, because
Speaker 3: you know, professional wrestling definitely teaches you how to run
Speaker 3: the education system in the United States. But of course
Speaker 3: Trump wants to abolish that.
Speaker 1: Sue anyway, right. I mean that's the thing is, like
Speaker 1: you are allowed to lead a department that Trump has
Speaker 1: already said he wants.
Speaker 3: Gone, right, so you're you're in charge of turning out
Speaker 3: the lights I guess.
Speaker 1: Right, I mean, does that mean he keeps it going
Speaker 1: now because he wants Linda to have something to do
Speaker 1: because she did run transition.
Speaker 3: Well, he keeps it going because he won't have the
Speaker 3: votes to shut it down, you know, And I wonder,
Speaker 3: Molly about all of these things about I feel like,
Speaker 3: you know, reading the personnel announcement, it's like onion headlines.
Speaker 3: I mean, it's just, you know, it's too insane to
Speaker 3: be believed with hag Seth and Gates and all the others.
Speaker 3: But I wonder how much of this is to just
Speaker 3: give the app hearans that he's going to go mad
Speaker 3: and shake everything up and then but we don't know
Speaker 3: what he's actually going to do. I mean, you got
Speaker 3: to assume it's at least a possibility. He starts a
Speaker 3: trade war, he surrenders Ukraine, China goes after Taiwan. You know,
Speaker 3: we're off to the races here. But you know, last
Speaker 3: time he didn't do as many crazy things as it
Speaker 3: seemed he might. Now, I don't want to say he's
Speaker 3: going to be normal. I'm not doing the whole He's
Speaker 3: going to be moderate things that ship has already sailed,
Speaker 3: But the actual level of disruption is tbd.
Speaker 1: Let's say, well, one of the things that really worked
Speaker 1: for his favor when he ran for office was he
Speaker 1: was able to say, well, you know, I said all
Speaker 1: this stuff, but I didn't do it because Democrats prevented
Speaker 1: him from doing a lot of it. That is not
Speaker 1: the makeup anymore. Right, you know, he controls the House,
Speaker 1: not by a huge majority. He has there's a you know,
Speaker 1: Mitch McConnell is not in charge anymore. He really wanted
Speaker 1: to get what's his name, the guy that looks like
Speaker 1: the president from Mars attacks in there. He was unable
Speaker 1: the floor Rick Scott, Yes, Scott, Yes, Rick Scott. You
Speaker 1: know he has Thune who is not quite as much
Speaker 1: of a lackey. Though. We'll see what happens. Hard to
Speaker 1: imagine that anyone fails his plans. But again, that was
Speaker 1: the thing when he was running for office, you know,
Speaker 1: and voters would say, well, we don't believe he's actually
Speaker 1: going to do any of that stuff, right, you.
Speaker 3: Know, I'm of two minds on this one. Is you know,
Speaker 3: because they have the trifecta of power that they can
Speaker 3: do all of these truly alarming things that you know,
Speaker 3: like the House Republicans did try to do last time,
Speaker 3: and say, well, you know, Chuck Schumer and Joe Biden
Speaker 3: are bottling it up, whether that's going to be restoring
Speaker 3: the Confederate names or banning the abortion pillar, whatever else.
Speaker 3: So there's no excuse now. So I mean, I'm worried
Speaker 3: and alarmed about the potential damage they can do now,
Speaker 3: but there is part of me that says, have at it, guys,
Speaker 3: now you've got no excuse. Let's see what your actual
Speaker 3: agenda is. Because there is nobody to them other than themselves,
Speaker 3: and I think people will probably quickly see that they
Speaker 3: can't actually govern in this Congress. You know, like this
Speaker 3: this House is not going to line up and walk
Speaker 3: the plank on a vote after vote, but they're not
Speaker 3: going to be able to blame the Democrats this time.
Speaker 1: I mean, if you harken back to last season of
Speaker 1: Congress doesn't do anything. We saw the House really deadlocked
Speaker 1: and basically they needed Democrats to pass anything they could pass.
Speaker 3: That's absolutely right. But then they could turn around and say, well,
Speaker 3: you know it's the Senate that's democratic control, or you know,
Speaker 3: you know Biden will veto something. But those excuses are
Speaker 3: all gone now. So it's just like, if they can't
Speaker 3: do something, it's the Republicans, who can't do something, And
Speaker 3: of course they're not going to be able to do
Speaker 3: a lot of the crazier things, unless, of course, that
Speaker 3: they succeed in getting them to walk the plank, and
Speaker 3: then this little fun experiment ends very badly.
Speaker 1: Yes, I mean, one of the things that I think
Speaker 1: a lot about is camps.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 1: Donald Trump wants camps, and Steven Miller wants to give
Speaker 1: him camps. Right, wants to deport seven trillion immigrants and
Speaker 1: ten zillion billion children and families and YadA, YadA, YadA.
Speaker 1: One of the things when you think about this idea,
Speaker 1: you have to think about, like, where are you going
Speaker 1: to build the camps, who's going to staff the camps?
Speaker 1: How's this going to work? And the big problem with
Speaker 1: deporting millions and millions of people, besides the ethical considerations
Speaker 1: of deporting people who are here legally okay, and the
Speaker 1: fact that you're going to have a lot of trouble
Speaker 1: getting a country to go along with us, is that
Speaker 1: you don't have the money to pay for it, right,
Speaker 1: Like Congress wouldn't give them money for border security, So
Speaker 1: how are they going to get money to deport millions
Speaker 1: and trillions and zillions of people?
Speaker 3: Right. Well, and this was the point with border security
Speaker 3: during the Biden administration when they looked at the whole
Speaker 3: list of things that Trump said, you're not continuing my
Speaker 3: tough on the border policies. Well, that's because many of
Speaker 3: them were unfunded in the first place, and they had
Speaker 3: no choice, or the courts had blocked them and they
Speaker 3: had no choice. So yeah, so the border policy is
Speaker 3: about to run smack dab into reality. I mean, it's
Speaker 3: it's so hard to imagine the camps being built federal land.
Speaker 1: Are they on state land? Right? Yeah?
Speaker 3: National parks?
Speaker 1: Who is going to staff them? The National Guard? I mean,
Speaker 1: like you really are down a rabbit hole here.
Speaker 3: Right and there of course there's no actual plan. There's
Speaker 3: probably not even in the concept of a plan here,
Speaker 3: and you.
Speaker 1: Know, we love a concept of a plan.
Speaker 3: We're going to solve the housing crisis by kicking out
Speaker 3: illegal immigrants as if they're the source of the housing crisis,
Speaker 3: when in fact they're disproportionately the ones building the house
Speaker 3: that we need, you know, in the same thing with
Speaker 3: agriculture workers and everything else. And then how do you
Speaker 3: get the states to cooperate with all of these things?
Speaker 3: So it all sounded good, But this is one of
Speaker 3: those areas where I suspect this, you know, the outrageous
Speaker 3: rhetoric is going to run into reality. And yeah, he'll
Speaker 3: make a show of something, but I mean, we all
Speaker 3: know he's not deporting. What did he say, twenty million people?
Speaker 1: Twenty million people. It's problematic because there if you're going
Speaker 1: to like technically look at this, it's a lot of
Speaker 1: people and many of them are actually not even the
Speaker 1: math is not math. But the good news about math
Speaker 1: is that the government efficiency agency named DOGE, which is
Speaker 1: run by the richest man in the world who got
Speaker 1: rich off government subsidies. The irony here is pretty pretty
Speaker 1: rich and another guy who is basically a miniatureum but
Speaker 1: from Ohio. Those two are going to cut our shumongos.
Speaker 3: Dad discuss yes, no, and they've already got brilliant plans underway.
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 3: Ramaswami's idea was to cut everything that is not currently authorized,
Speaker 3: you know, like the not renewed. So oh, sorry, veterans,
Speaker 3: you've just lost your healthcare.
Speaker 1: They're super psyched about that.
Speaker 3: No, that's right, that's perfect. And then Elon must said, right,
Speaker 3: we're going to cut two trillion dollars. But Trump is
Speaker 3: already you know, off limits is social Security and Medicare. Defense,
Speaker 3: I can't do anything about, you know, payments on the debt.
Speaker 3: So you're down to about let pocket of what is it,
Speaker 3: forty percent discretionary spending or maybe twenty percent, you know,
Speaker 3: if we're not including non defense discretionary spending. So you're
Speaker 3: going to cut two trillion out of that. But guess
Speaker 3: what that is? About two trillion? So if you were
Speaker 3: down to the point where you are going to stop
Speaker 3: every single function that government does, you know, whether that's
Speaker 3: food safety or TSA or the FBI or everything else
Speaker 3: the government does. So we'll just say goodbye to that.
Speaker 3: So that's another place where I'll be I'll be very
Speaker 3: interested to see how they follow through on that.
Speaker 1: I want you to go back and explain to our
Speaker 1: listeners because you did it as a drive by, but
Speaker 1: I think it's really important, this idea of not funding
Speaker 1: programs that Congress hasn't approved. Those programs are not fungible.
Speaker 3: Well, there's two categories. Well, you know, some are the
Speaker 3: entitlement categories, you know, which which you can't touch at all,
Speaker 3: but some are I guess in theory. Ones that you know,
Speaker 3: you could touch. But a lot of government runs on autopilot,
Speaker 3: so you know, they're not renewed when they're supposed to be,
Speaker 3: but by general consent, they just keep getting funded anyway,
Speaker 3: So you know, I mean, I guess Congress could intervene
Speaker 3: on the other side to stop that from happening, but
Speaker 3: they haven't done that either. So I don't know. We're
Speaker 3: talking about half a trillion dollars here, but including as mentioned,
Speaker 3: what is it. You know, it's one hundred something billion
Speaker 3: for veterans healthcare, and it's not like because it's not
Speaker 3: currently authorized or whatever the proper word is, that doesn't
Speaker 3: mean that the Congress actually does not want to give
Speaker 3: healthcare to.
Speaker 1: Veterans, right, I mean, I feel like healthcare to veterans
Speaker 1: probably not going to be a popular thing.
Speaker 3: To cut, No, but it has always been the case that, yes,
Speaker 3: if we're going to get the budget under control and
Speaker 3: start making a dent in the debt, you have to
Speaker 3: do something about the things that are driving that, and
Speaker 3: that is primarily entitlement. So I mean, if you're not
Speaker 3: going to touch Medicare and Social Security, whether that's with
Speaker 3: you know, higher taxes for wealthier earners, or extending the
Speaker 3: retirement aage. I mean, none of it's terribly popular, but
Speaker 3: that's really the only way to fix the problem. And
Speaker 3: or increasing revenues through taxes, well, that's off the table.
Speaker 3: And then you know, then the huge chunk of the
Speaker 3: budget that is a defense, Well, okay, if that's off
Speaker 3: the table, you know, and we did get down to
Speaker 3: this happened in the last Congress. You know, they looked
Speaker 3: at the you know, all of the House Republican commitments
Speaker 3: on this, and that's where I got that bit about
Speaker 3: they literally have to eliminate everything the government does outside
Speaker 3: of entitlements and.
Speaker 1: Defense and paying off the debt.
Speaker 3: Right, Yeah, that's not that's not an option. Well, I
Speaker 3: guess anything's an option. Now, we could go into we
Speaker 3: could go into default on the dest.
Speaker 1: I mean that Trump has in his own personal life
Speaker 1: gone into default on debt. Not to get too dumroush here.
Speaker 3: And we had this fight during the last Congress, and
Speaker 3: you did have a significant chunk of the you know,
Speaker 3: the MAGA Republicans saying that, well, this debt limit, it's
Speaker 3: not you know, we can we can blow through it.
Speaker 3: It's not a real thing. We can prioritize debt and
Speaker 3: pay the debts we want to pay off. I mean,
Speaker 3: and who knows, it's never happened before. Maybe they could
Speaker 3: get away with it. But also, you know, maybe that
Speaker 3: destroys the dollar as the world's reserve currency and throw
Speaker 3: it in the deepest depression we've ever seen. I don't know.
Speaker 1: Let's roll the dice, right, delights Russia, Good for Russia.
Speaker 1: I mean, if anyone is winning here, it's Russia.
Speaker 3: Right, well, or China it could be it could be
Speaker 3: close on that school, right, It's true, Right, they're doing well.
Speaker 3: And of course Bobe's done exceptionally.
Speaker 1: Yeah, BB, it's it's been great for Babe.
Speaker 3: Oh heck, it's been good for urban. This has been
Speaker 3: good for a lot of people.
Speaker 1: Molly, right, exactly, Thank you for orbon BB, all of
Speaker 1: arcs around the world. Space travel, can we just talk
Speaker 1: about I don't want people. I know there are people
Speaker 1: still listening to this podcast as I decompensate rapidly, But
Speaker 1: I do think it has been strangely these rich people,
Speaker 1: while wanting to kill us all, are really into space travel.
Speaker 3: No, it's true, that's not That's not an area of
Speaker 3: complaint that I have I'm sorry that all the money
Speaker 3: is going to Elon Musk, but sure, I'd love to
Speaker 3: see somebody on Mars. I mean, it is funny the
Speaker 3: way we're sort of bargaining with ourselves and that's not
Speaker 3: so bad, and then we're thinking like, well, actually there
Speaker 3: are some intro maybe maybe we don't need fluoride in
Speaker 3: the water. It's some of the things RFK says that crazy,
Speaker 3: you know, like, yeah, yeah, it's be good to limit
Speaker 3: pharma and have healthier food. Right, We're all sort of
Speaker 3: bargaining here to say, oh, it won't be that bad.
Speaker 1: Well, it's also like, this is the thing about authoritarianism, right,
Speaker 1: because that's what this is. I mean, maybe the maybe
Speaker 1: some of the systems hold and we don't completely become
Speaker 1: Russia and we are able to keep this. But ultimately,
Speaker 1: if you think about it, right, there are no choices here.
Speaker 3: There are no choices.
Speaker 1: There are no choices. Right, this is happening.
Speaker 3: Yes, I mean we strap in and enjoy the ride.
Speaker 3: I mean the only other option, as I was writing about,
Speaker 3: is you know, just sort of retreating and ignoring it.
Speaker 1: Yes, tell us what you're writing about this week in
Speaker 1: the Washington Post.
Speaker 3: Right before we came on. I was saying, I am
Speaker 3: spending this week writing about my adventures on this tractor
Speaker 3: I just bought out on the farm. In the many
Speaker 3: ways it is conspiring to kill me because I don't
Speaker 3: know what I'm doing with it. So yeah, I'd love
Speaker 3: to be just spending my days not reading the news.
Speaker 3: I'm reading scandalously little now I'm watching zero in just
Speaker 3: sort of wishing it away. But you know, I wrote
Speaker 3: this to be saying, you know, we can't retreat. You
Speaker 3: have to engage, you know. I mean, look, if you know,
Speaker 3: if they send us to the Gulag, I look forward
Speaker 3: to bunking with you or something. But until that happens,
Speaker 3: you know, we have to engage and do our best
Speaker 3: in this. But you also need to pace yourself and
Speaker 3: breathe a little bit, and you know, yeah, it is happening,
Speaker 3: and we got to do what we can to fight
Speaker 3: the worst excesses of it. But also know that, you know,
Speaker 3: we also have our lives.
Speaker 1: We've got to protect norms and institutions, and that's in
Speaker 1: my mind.
Speaker 3: Got to protect those things. And you've got to protect
Speaker 3: the norms in your own life and not decompensate, as
Speaker 3: you put.
Speaker 1: It, and that's why I think that you know, we
Speaker 1: will continue to do this and until we get sent
Speaker 1: away to the camps. But I do think people it's
Speaker 1: okay to take the next until January. He's not in
Speaker 1: office until January, so none of this is happening until January.
Speaker 1: So we should all ride tractors, read Joan Didion, and we.
Speaker 3: Have sixty days to breathe and to.
Speaker 1: Breathe, and so we should enjoy those sixty days of
Speaker 1: tractor writing and reading Joe Didion.
Speaker 3: That's it. That's the best we can come up with,
Speaker 3: and I'm taking it.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Dana Mobank.
Speaker 3: Molly, It's always a delight.
Speaker 1: Julia Davis is the creator of Russian Media Monitor, a
Speaker 1: columnist for The Daily Beast, and the author of, in
Speaker 1: their own words, Welcome to Fast Politics Kennel, where dogs
Speaker 1: bark and we talk about politics.
Speaker 4: Julia Davis, Hi, thank you so much for having me.
Speaker 1: So you and I know each other for a while,
Speaker 1: and you do a thing that you do. You watch
Speaker 1: Russian television.
Speaker 4: Yes, and analyze it because it's remarkably informative as to
Speaker 4: put In splints.
Speaker 1: And one might even say prescient. Often Putin's plans and
Speaker 1: the newly re elected president of the United States. Plans
Speaker 1: dovetail together. So here is the scariest sentence I will
Speaker 1: say today, Hopefully, what does Putin have planned?
Speaker 4: Well, actually, it's remarkably similar to what they have been
Speaker 4: discussing for years. The only thing that is different is
Speaker 4: that the Trump's reelection happened later than they have hoped.
Speaker 4: But they have been talking about this for years, and
Speaker 4: unfortunately it's shaping up exactly as what they have hoped.
Speaker 4: They have always said that everything depends on Trump being
Speaker 4: in power, because they know he will give them Ukraine
Speaker 4: and then they can keep moving forward with the rest
Speaker 4: of their plans. But also another important part of that
Speaker 4: is they believe that Trump is a destroyer of America,
Speaker 4: and in his second term he would be totally unhinged.
Speaker 4: He would be unchained, there would be no guardrails, no
Speaker 4: adults in the room, and he would get to destroying America,
Speaker 4: which would then become a regional player that is totally
Speaker 4: embroiled in its internal affairs, and it would also be
Speaker 4: quiet authoritarian, so he wouldn't have to care how much
Speaker 4: of the population agrees with his chosen course of action,
Speaker 4: So he would become very much like Putin in that
Speaker 4: and America would start to resemble Russia, with a circle
Speaker 4: of billionaires controlling poligarchy exactly controlling everything. And the rich
Speaker 4: people that agree to fall in line would also be
Speaker 4: fine and be able to enrich themselves. The rest of
Speaker 4: the population would be too impoverished to have any ability
Speaker 4: to fight back, and protests would be outlawed. And you know,
Speaker 4: Trump already said he would use the military to stop
Speaker 4: any protests. And unfortunately, based on everything we're seeing, based
Speaker 4: on what Trump himself has been saying, and the team
Speaker 4: that he has chosen, everything points to that dark future
Speaker 4: looming on the horizon, and that is exactly what Russia wanted.
Speaker 4: They also predicted the West would blink first and not
Speaker 4: go all the way to support Ukraine, go only as
Speaker 4: far as it takes to keep the war going, but
Speaker 4: not really to damage Russia severely. Unfortunately, these approvals to
Speaker 4: use long range missiles are too late. Unfortunately, there's not
Speaker 4: much time left. And what I'm hearing on Russian state
Speaker 4: television right now is that Russia is un likely to
Speaker 4: retaliate in any big way against the United States or
Speaker 4: the West because they know Trump will give them exactly
Speaker 4: what they want, so it'll be worth it for them
Speaker 4: to just hold out for that. And they just released
Speaker 4: the Tass, which is one of their biggest newspapers. They
Speaker 4: just released an article where an unnamed member of Trump's
Speaker 4: transition team told them that Trump would be willing to
Speaker 4: lift all sanctions, resume normal relations with Russia, all trade,
Speaker 4: all economic relations. Then the next day Putin says, well,
Speaker 4: he's ready to negotiate. It all seems like it's falling
Speaker 4: into place where Putin will be rewarded for his aggression
Speaker 4: and will get to keep portions of Ukraine that they
Speaker 4: managed to conquer, in addition to those that they declared
Speaker 4: as theirs but never were able to and they expect
Speaker 4: Trump will be fine was letting them keep that as well.
Speaker 4: So it's really not looking good either for Ukraine or
Speaker 4: for the United States.
Speaker 1: Yes, and also this is propaganda, right, so explain to
Speaker 1: us a little bit like you are watching Russian propaganda.
Speaker 1: So Russia wants Americans to think this is a feed
Speaker 1: to complete, but it's actually not right. So I want
Speaker 1: you to talk with that in mind. I want the
Speaker 1: information from it, but not the gloom because I think
Speaker 1: the idea that this has already happened is really the
Speaker 1: most dangerous way we can think of this, because it
Speaker 1: hasn't right. Donald Trump is not president yet a lot
Speaker 1: of things. You know, America has been this anti democratic before.
Speaker 1: I talk to anyone who grew up in this Jim
Speaker 1: Crow South version of color. You know, there's always been
Speaker 1: a push pull here. And again, yes, I agree that
Speaker 1: this is not this is far from my deal, but
Speaker 1: we have to I think, be thoughtful about not just totally.
Speaker 1: Like Russia had never been a democracy, they had really
Speaker 1: weak institutions to push back. We have again not great
Speaker 1: checks and balances. Republicans are really willing to roll over,
Speaker 1: but there still is a real history in this country
Speaker 1: if nothing else.
Speaker 4: Absolutely, and it is not a done deal. But I
Speaker 4: think it's important for Americans to realize what the worst
Speaker 4: case scenario is so that if we see the country
Speaker 4: moving in that direction, we proactively do something. And I'm
Speaker 4: observing so much resignation and despair and that's not the
Speaker 4: time for that, because if we are resigned to it,
Speaker 4: that's when it becomes possible for sure.
Speaker 1: And so talk to me though about this sort of
Speaker 1: is Russia telegraphing glee at the Trump election. Explain to
Speaker 1: us sort of what you're seeing on Russian television.
Speaker 4: Yes, they're absolutely thrilled with his victory and with almost
Speaker 4: all of his picks, especially Tulsey Gabbard.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm hoping you could talk about Tulsea Gabbert.
Speaker 4: Sure, yes, And she has been spouting essentially the same
Speaker 4: talking points as they have been for years. They have
Speaker 4: been rebroadcasting her along with Stucker Carlson. She's about the
Speaker 4: same magnitude of importance to them, and so they're absolutely
Speaker 4: thrilled that she will now be in charge of all
Speaker 4: of these intelligence agencies, and they believe she will help
Speaker 4: dismantle or undermine them because for years they have openly
Speaker 4: discussed her and described her as their girlfriend, their friend,
Speaker 4: their agent, and they are beyond thrilled that she is
Speaker 4: getting this position of prominence. And it's really interesting even
Speaker 4: back in twenty two. In twenty twenty three, she was talking,
Speaker 4: for example, about how they might cut our undersea cables
Speaker 4: or Western undersea cables, to quote unquote retaliate against US
Speaker 4: for helping Ukraine. And look what is happening now.
Speaker 1: Yeah, can you talk to us about the Russian undersea
Speaker 1: cables and what that's about.
Speaker 4: Yes, they are cutting internet cables at least that's what
Speaker 4: is being said. That it's being attributed to their sabotage,
Speaker 4: and they have talked about it for years now. As
Speaker 4: a matter of fact, they initially attributed this idea to
Speaker 4: Tucker Carlson who said in twenty twenty two that what
Speaker 4: if they do this? And their response from government officials
Speaker 4: on their state TV was oh, what a great idea?
Speaker 4: Why not? And then Talca Gebbert was throwing around the
Speaker 4: same ideas as deterrent for the United States opposing Russian anyway.
Speaker 4: So they're essentially helping them to put these threats into
Speaker 4: American mainstream to scare people off. So that way the
Speaker 4: average person would say, well, why would we risk this happening?
Speaker 4: Why not just appease Russia and mind our own business?
Speaker 4: And that's exactly what they want.
Speaker 1: Right now talk to us about the missiles because Biden
Speaker 1: it's very late to do this, but Biden did in
Speaker 1: fact give Ukraine land minds at missiles. Will that shift
Speaker 1: the calculus or is it too light?
Speaker 4: I hope that it will, because Russia is really in
Speaker 4: a bad state economically. They don't have enough people, which
Speaker 4: is why they're involving North Koreans, and they've been talking
Speaker 4: about that for a while now. They not only do
Speaker 4: they not have enough cannon fodder at this point, but
Speaker 4: also they don't have enough laborers to even keep making
Speaker 4: their munitions and their weapons. They are running out of people, period,
Speaker 4: and so that's why they are an act of desperation
Speaker 4: turning to North Korea, which is quite humiliating for Russia.
Speaker 4: They really are teetering, and that's what is so disheartening
Speaker 4: is that Trump is coming here to potentially throw them
Speaker 4: a lifeline where they are not in a good position.
Speaker 4: They're not in a strong position right now, and I
Speaker 4: hope Ukraine will keep hammering them and taking out their
Speaker 4: weapons depots and the troops and whatever else they can
Speaker 4: because it does make a difference, and they still have
Speaker 4: time to cause considerable damage and retaliation for Russia's invasions.
Speaker 4: So I was certainly happy to see that this decision
Speaker 4: was finally made.
Speaker 1: Do you think that Ukraine can theoretically win this in
Speaker 1: such a short I mean it's still three months or
Speaker 1: two and a half months.
Speaker 4: Well, you know, the best case scenario in terms of winning,
Speaker 4: it doesn't necessarily mean a Ukrainian troops storming the Kremlin.
Speaker 4: What it simply means is that Russia would withdraw from
Speaker 4: Ukraine the way the Soviet Union withdrew from Afghanistan. And
Speaker 4: they could call it a victory or whatever they decide
Speaker 4: to call it, but that would be a victory. If
Speaker 4: they were depleted of their resources and of their human
Speaker 4: resources to the point where they had no choice but
Speaker 4: to withdraw, that would be a victory. And it is possible.
Speaker 1: Because Russia really is very depleted. Explain to us sort
Speaker 1: of what that looks like, because I know they've sent many, many,
Speaker 1: many young men to the front and many have died, right.
Speaker 4: Yes, And they have been initially promising that they would
Speaker 4: only send the trained soldiers in the battle, but they
Speaker 4: ended up sending just anyone they could get their hands on.
Speaker 4: And the only reason they're not declaring a real mobilization
Speaker 4: because even their shaky demographic have been apparently falsified, so
Speaker 4: they don't even have as many people as they were
Speaker 4: said to have, which is already not enough for Russia's size,
Speaker 4: So they are really in a state where it's not
Speaker 4: feasible for them to keep this going without outside the support,
Speaker 4: and they're already talking about North Korea sending more soldiers,
Speaker 4: and that's literally because they need that to keep going.
Speaker 4: They can't keep doing it on their own. And it's
Speaker 4: a good thing that Ukraine's strikes with these missiles are
Speaker 4: specifically targeting the places where they have the North Korean troops,
Speaker 4: so hopefully deter North Korea from sending even more when
Speaker 4: they see that it's to their certain death.
Speaker 1: Yeah, great, So explain to us a little bit about
Speaker 1: sort of the other picks. So they like Tolci Gabber
Speaker 1: for any number of reasons, I'm not saying it, but
Speaker 1: members of Congress have said it that she is Russian asset.
Speaker 1: I mean, like, I've seen at least four different Democratic
Speaker 1: members of Congress say that on television. So clearly there
Speaker 1: is a there is a group that believes that who
Speaker 1: else are they excited about in the cabinet?
Speaker 4: Certainly Musk. They're thrilled about him, and they are repeating
Speaker 4: and rebroadcasting almost every statement that he makes that relates
Speaker 4: to Ukraine or Russia and demeaning Ukraine and talking about
Speaker 4: how Russia is in nuclear power and we should make
Speaker 4: a deal with them. And yes, they certainly thrilled about
Speaker 4: Musk and the other picks. They're thrilled because they are
Speaker 4: inexperienced and not fit for their positions. So that's the
Speaker 4: part of Trump destroying America. And they say that that
Speaker 4: basically almost everyone on his team is inexperienced and unprepared
Speaker 4: for what they were chosen to handle. So they like
Speaker 4: that a lot. The only reservations they had were about
Speaker 4: Waltz and Rubio. But after Waltz criticized the decision for
Speaker 4: Ukraine to be able to use American missiles for these strikes, yes,
Speaker 4: they said, okay, so they too will fall in line.
Speaker 1: So they're watching pretty close. Huh, very close.
Speaker 4: I could see something on our television here and then
Speaker 4: I turn on there and they're already talking about it.
Speaker 4: We are like their pet cause they're obsessed with us.
Speaker 4: They don't have any politics in Russia, it's whatever Putin says,
Speaker 4: so there's nothing to discuss about their own affairs, and
Speaker 4: their future depends on what happens in America. So they
Speaker 4: are obsessively watching and calculating their next steps.
Speaker 1: So what do they think of tackle Carholson.
Speaker 4: They thought that Trump would make him his press secretary
Speaker 4: and they were completely thrilled about his visit to interview Putin.
Speaker 4: They believe that he delivered some message, some messages between
Speaker 4: Trump and Putin at that time, that he was delivering
Speaker 4: some sort of back and forth messages at that time.
Speaker 4: So they totally So they say yes, they say that
Speaker 4: I haven't seen any obviously, any anything concrete, but they
Speaker 4: believe that there was some exchange of messages that may
Speaker 4: have taken place. And then that interview looked like it
Speaker 4: was produced by North Korean producers the way it was
Speaker 4: gushing over everything and didn't ask Putin almost any important questions.
Speaker 1: But one of the things about Russian propaganda, which is
Speaker 1: what you have to watch, is that it wants you.
Speaker 1: I mean again, I'm not defending chuckle crosson by any
Speaker 1: certain imagination, but it wants you to think things that
Speaker 1: may or may not be true, right like the Steele dossier,
Speaker 1: Like it's better for them. They would like the American
Speaker 1: media to run with every story in order to discredit them.
Speaker 4: Well, yes, they actually intermixed some truth with some fiction
Speaker 4: and try to pass it off as a story that
Speaker 4: the paints Russia as an omnipotent country that gets to
Speaker 4: pull the strings here and there, so waiting through that
Speaker 4: is those are murky waters, definitely.
Speaker 1: Yeah. And in fact, like what I think is so
Speaker 1: interesting about like if you look at a lot of
Speaker 1: the stuff that came out about Trump and Russia, some
Speaker 1: of the bits of the Steele dossier really did undermine
Speaker 1: anything else that it called into credibility other things that
Speaker 1: seemed more credible.
Speaker 4: Right, It was muddy. The waters were muddy because it
Speaker 4: was you know, it had had some things that were
Speaker 4: based in reality and others that were not, and it
Speaker 4: sort of discredited the whole thing. And it's certainly something
Speaker 4: that Trump and his followers have capitalized on, just trying
Speaker 4: to discredit the whole idea that there is something under
Speaker 4: the surface.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Do you see that as a way that the
Speaker 1: admin the coming admin will try to get the media
Speaker 1: in trouble, to flood the zone with things that may
Speaker 1: be true, may not be true in order. I mean
Speaker 1: we saw that a little bit with the first Trump admin,
Speaker 1: where they'd be leaking stuff to some people that might
Speaker 1: not be true or might be set up to embarrass them.
Speaker 4: Yes, I think that our media is in for some
Speaker 4: rocky times, and unfortunately some are starting to obey and
Speaker 4: advance and are I'm sure are afraid of retribution, and
Speaker 4: others will you know, they have to be emboldened by,
Speaker 4: you know, the flood of lies that got this election
Speaker 4: where we have it today, and I'm sure we'll only
Speaker 4: get worse.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Thank you, Julia.
Speaker 4: Davis, Thank you so much, Molly always my pleasure, no.
Speaker 1: More, Jesse Cannon, my John Fasts.
Speaker 5: And one of the things we've been talking about a
Speaker 5: lot lately is the concept of obeying, an advanced concept
Speaker 5: that Timothy Snyder popular arized and we as Democrats are
Speaker 5: trying to not kowtow to trumpet advanced.
Speaker 2: But man, they're winding up down in Texas. Is in
Speaker 2: the Republican Party to do it? What are you see
Speaker 2: in here?
Speaker 1: So this is a little more complicated than that. I
Speaker 1: think where we are here is just deep deep Craven
Speaker 1: sucking up to Trump in the hopes of getting something
Speaker 1: from him. Now the Texas Land Commissioner, that's an elected
Speaker 1: job in Texas. Remember, Texas is in a race to
Speaker 1: impress Donald Trump and get you know, whatever good is
Speaker 1: Donald Trump can bestow on them. And remember this is
Speaker 1: all oligarchy, right, This is a sort of oligarchy kind
Speaker 1: of situation, So Texas Land Commissioner Don Buckingham, showing that
Speaker 1: the ladies can be just as crazy as the men
Speaker 1: use of the one four hundred and two acre ranch
Speaker 1: in Star County on the US Mexico border for the
Speaker 1: construction of deportation facilities. Buckingham, a Republican, made the offer
Speaker 1: in a letter sent to Trump on Tuesday, in which
Speaker 1: she pledged to support what she has described as the
Speaker 1: largest deportation of violent criminals in the nation's history. Guess
Speaker 1: what's also going to be in their families? People who
Speaker 1: are here legally and perhaps a journalist or too. Trump
Speaker 1: made cracking down on a legal immigration a key component
Speaker 1: is a successful twenty twenty four presidential campaigns began to
Speaker 1: rally in October, the then Publican candidate said he won.
Speaker 1: The border will be sealed, the invasion will be stopped,
Speaker 1: the migrant flights will end. On Monday, Trump indicated that
Speaker 1: he plans to declare a national emergency and deploy the
Speaker 1: military to assist with deportation. In a post on his
Speaker 1: Truth social website, It's going to get real dark, real fast.
Speaker 1: And also I would like to point out that Trump,
Speaker 1: in his first admin twenty sixteen, deported like about a
Speaker 1: million people less than Obama did, and heard his first administration.
Speaker 1: That's it for this episode of Fast Politics. Tune in
Speaker 1: every Monday, Wednesday, Thursday and Saturday to hear the best
Speaker 1: minds and politics make sense of all this chaos. If
Speaker 1: you enjoy this podcast, please send it to a friend
Speaker 1: and keep the conversation going. Thanks for listening.