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 now Mike Pence says Donald Trump
Speaker 1: endangered his family. On January sixth, we have a fun
Speaker 1: show today. Congressman Eric Swawell stops by to talk to
Speaker 1: us about what it's like to have a Speaker of
Speaker 1: the House who's an abject moron. Then we'll speak to
Speaker 1: Danica Saverino Wynn, the vice president for Abortion Access at
Speaker 1: Planned Parenthood, and she will talk us through the horrors
Speaker 1: of post row America. But first we have the host
Speaker 1: of the Enemy's List, the One, the Only, the Lincoln Projects,
Speaker 1: Rick Wilson. Rick Wilson back on the podcast. Greetings, Molly
Speaker 1: John Fast, Welcome back. I am delighted to be with
Speaker 1: you as always. Yay fucking better be I mean delighted
Speaker 1: to have you as one is. Ron de Santis struggles
Speaker 1: with charisma, struggles with nect in with voters. It's short
Speaker 1: will be our next president? Discuss the last point is
Speaker 1: the problematic one of this of this theory, because all
Speaker 1: sides in the magic eight ball of Republican politics point
Speaker 1: to know. Look, is he short? He's shorter than me,
Speaker 1: and Dan Bongina says, I'm a dwarf at five ten.
Speaker 1: He literally tells people I met Wilson, he's only five one.
Speaker 1: Like the fuck are you talking about? Bro? I'm taller
Speaker 1: than you, bitch. But DeSantis is like five seven, five eight,
Speaker 1: somewhere in that zone. And he's taken his people in particular,
Speaker 1: flip the fuck out if you mentioned his lifts or
Speaker 1: his little cowboy boots with their kicky little heels. I
Speaker 1: gotta tell you, I got so much twitter, like we'll
Speaker 1: run to Santos. Where's cowboy boots? Like men do? I'm like,
Speaker 1: uh huh, tell me more, tell me more about this
Speaker 1: soft handed lawyer who's never been outside of Dana's fucking life.
Speaker 1: Can we talk about the Michael back so, he says.
Speaker 1: De Sander struggles with connecting with the audience. He has
Speaker 1: trouble speaking. I mean, how does he even become a
Speaker 1: real candidate? Mom? He doesn't? Okay, Look, he is Jeb
Speaker 1: Bush without the smoldering sensuality. Okay, he's he's Marco Rubio
Speaker 1: without the without the thick masculine musk. I mean, this
Speaker 1: is a guy who cannot make eye contact when he's
Speaker 1: talked to normal people. Right. I noticed it when I
Speaker 1: met him a few times when he was well before,
Speaker 1: like well before he was a maga congressman. He was
Speaker 1: a Paul Ryan acolite when he was a backbencher, right
Speaker 1: when he was a normal, sort of basic bitch, a
Speaker 1: boot Republican. Okay, this guy does not look you in
Speaker 1: the eye. Now. Is that because he is arrogant or aspergery,
Speaker 1: I don't know. But he does not focus on people.
Speaker 1: This is a notorious problem with his staff in Tallahassee
Speaker 1: as the governor, where he does not want to go
Speaker 1: into meetings, he does not want to focus on people
Speaker 1: or things. He goes and schemes away and he talks
Speaker 1: to Casey and that's it. Somebody this weekend was making
Speaker 1: a case to me that the driver here, Yeah, Ron
Speaker 1: de Santas is ambitious, But he's ambitious because Casey. If
Speaker 1: you look back, this woman is Tracy Flick and she's
Speaker 1: every little she's every cliche that Republicans used to say
Speaker 1: about Hillary Clinton. Oh, she's the scheming mastermind behind the scenes.
Speaker 1: She's the reason he's going to be a president. It's
Speaker 1: the same exact story, only much more real. Bill Clinton
Speaker 1: had a native ambition about him and a set of
Speaker 1: skills that Hillary could help him amplify. I mean, Casey,
Speaker 1: the Santis should be the one running for president. She's
Speaker 1: the one with the real, raw ambition and the talent.
Speaker 1: But also, I mean, Bill Clinton was charismatic as fuck. Yeah,
Speaker 1: oh yeah, bitches, don't a panties on the stage is?
Speaker 1: Eddie Murphy used to say, I mean, this is a
Speaker 1: guy who had the gift. Okay, I'm gonna be honest
Speaker 1: with you, guys. Donald Trump had the gift. That has
Speaker 1: the gift right, absolutely, no question. Now it's a different
Speaker 1: thing than Bill Clinton had. As Bill Clinton made people
Speaker 1: who met with him feel like they had a personal connection,
Speaker 1: that he got them, that he understood their internal needs
Speaker 1: and where their family was at and where their life
Speaker 1: was at. And he had that gift of real connection
Speaker 1: with people. It saved his ass. Even though he came
Speaker 1: in well behind in New Hampshire, people thought they connected
Speaker 1: with him, okay, and it changed the course in the
Speaker 1: vector of his campaign. None of the other Republicans in
Speaker 1: twenty sixteen had that gift, and frankly, so far, none
Speaker 1: of the other Republicans in twenty twenty four have that gift.
Speaker 1: I've said this one hundred times and people who are
Speaker 1: not experienced in presidential campaigns, and I've not been around
Speaker 1: the block and seen the elephant a couple of times.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna tell you something. When ron De Santist goes
Speaker 1: to New Hampshire, Okay, or goes to Iowa, He's going
Speaker 1: to have to go and sit with the deputy county
Speaker 1: state committeeman for bumfuck County New Hampshire, and that motherfucker
Speaker 1: is going to want to talk about the gold standard
Speaker 1: or some other crazy shit that he's obsesk about. Okay,
Speaker 1: He's gonna want to talk to Ronda Stantz for an
Speaker 1: hour in a diner. Okay, right, And you know who's
Speaker 1: gonna do. You know he's gonna sit there. Fucking Nicky
Speaker 1: Haley will go there, and Tim Scott and the rest
Speaker 1: of the idiots and Mike Pens and they will sit
Speaker 1: with this guy. Go. You know, your thoughts on the
Speaker 1: gold standard, the Breton Woods Agreement are really profound, and
Speaker 1: I'm going to make that a part of my presidential playform. Now,
Speaker 1: Ronda Santas will go in there and go to jan
Speaker 1: I went to Harvard and Yale. I went to Harvard
Speaker 1: and then to Yale. I was at Yale and also Harvard,
Speaker 1: and I have a degree from Harvard and a degree
Speaker 1: from Yale. And I'm I'm not woke. And it's he's
Speaker 1: like this Johnny one note kind of player. And you
Speaker 1: want somebody who can go into these small meetings and
Speaker 1: these small states and connect with people. And again, the
Speaker 1: gigantic death star machine that Ronda Santa is inherited right
Speaker 1: from Jeb that you helped create, you monster from Jeb
Speaker 1: and Rick Scott and Charlie Chris and also you right
Speaker 1: ye may well, look, I'm one of the many people
Speaker 1: who helped build a big, fat, super effect Republican campaign
Speaker 1: method in Florida. There were guys who did the grassroots stuff,
Speaker 1: and there were guys like me who did the media stuff.
Speaker 1: And this gigantic machine, it is a very specific flavor.
Speaker 1: They were like the Cantonese restaurant. Okay, in a small town,
Speaker 1: there's only one Cantonese restaurant, not in my town. But yes, well,
Speaker 1: I know you're you don't live in a small town.
Speaker 1: You live in a tiny village on the up whatever,
Speaker 1: let's not say yes, I see I left it out there,
Speaker 1: even though ye yes, tasteful, wasn't it. But look this,
Speaker 1: this desire of these people in these states like Iowa, Okay,
Speaker 1: to have the person who's who they who possibly could
Speaker 1: be president of the United States come and sit in
Speaker 1: their living room or sit in their local diner, or
Speaker 1: come to their child soccer game or whatever the fuck
Speaker 1: it is. Rhonda Santis has a problem. First off, he's
Speaker 1: constitutionally personally unable to connect with people like that. Okay.
Speaker 1: And oh, by the way, I know that they've already
Speaker 1: been pitching a story out to national reporters that's like
Speaker 1: the softer side of Ron de Santis, the one you
Speaker 1: just don't seem friendly individual who people are finding strikingly
Speaker 1: connected with. But it's bullshit. They're working so hard on
Speaker 1: that story, and it's just and it's sad because I've
Speaker 1: had a couple of reporters to go, are you fucking
Speaker 1: kidding me with this? What the hell? But but what
Speaker 1: but I mean Michael Bender story for a minute, the
Speaker 1: headline was something to the effect of well, awkward, well
Speaker 1: struggling with connecting with people, Ron de Santis, you know,
Speaker 1: I mean, how do you start from there? You put
Speaker 1: Ron de Santis on the National Review cruise ship, and
Speaker 1: he's gonna do fucking great. Okay, I'm not even very well.
Speaker 1: His constituency right now are basically three groups, Okay, Wall
Speaker 1: Street and hedge fund dudes and Silicon Valley dudes who
Speaker 1: desperately do not want to be forced again to be
Speaker 1: in the Trump universe. They love the tax cut. They
Speaker 1: hate him aesthetically, which is the worst reason to hate
Speaker 1: Trump right. Hate him as he's a race assayst hate
Speaker 1: him because he's an idiot. Hate him because he's a scumbag, racist,
Speaker 1: authoritarian dip shit who tried to wreck our country. But
Speaker 1: my wife doesn't like the way he says nast do
Speaker 1: things about women's vaginas. You know, come on, those are
Speaker 1: the people that are Rohnde Santis is number one fuel
Speaker 1: in the engine. And we've talked about this before. Those
Speaker 1: guys in twenty sixteen said to Jeb Bush, you, sir,
Speaker 1: other leader, we will never abandon you. We will stand
Speaker 1: by you until the last dog dies. Nothing. Oh hey, Jeff, listen,
Speaker 1: I gotta I gotta give Trump some money. Man, Just
Speaker 1: we love you. You're a young guy. You can run again.
Speaker 1: But I got I got. This Trump thing is really crazy.
Speaker 1: I gotta give him some money or I'm gonna miss
Speaker 1: the train. And they did this like clockwork. They're gonna
Speaker 1: do this to Ronda Santis again too. They're gonna say, Ron,
Speaker 1: you're young, you're so talented, You've done such a great job.
Speaker 1: But look, man, you know it's maybe it's just not
Speaker 1: your time. Maybe Trump's gonna win. So listen, I'm gonna
Speaker 1: I'm gonna have to give him a million or two,
Speaker 1: you know, just to shut him up so he doesn't
Speaker 1: attack my company. And that's going to happen, just like
Speaker 1: it did in sixteen. The other part of this, Molly,
Speaker 1: it's it's important understand about retail politics is the best
Speaker 1: day of your campaign is the first day. If If
Speaker 1: you think that Rohda Santis is having stories written about
Speaker 1: him now about being awkward and weird and diffident and
Speaker 1: off putting and a guy who doesn't look people in
Speaker 1: the eye or connect with humans, imagine what it's going
Speaker 1: to be like when every other Republican candidate is nuking
Speaker 1: the living shit out of him every day. I also
Speaker 1: want to say this, de Sanna's thought he was going
Speaker 1: to be clever and go to Iowa on his book tour, which,
Speaker 1: by the way, I read two chapters of that book
Speaker 1: you did. That shit is the hottest garbage and the
Speaker 1: reviews are so bad. You know what his editor sad
Speaker 1: to me tell me it's written by him. Well, I
Speaker 1: heard it was written by a bunch of other other
Speaker 1: goons that rewrote what he wrote. It feels like a
Speaker 1: focus group. The power to be free, the freedom to
Speaker 1: be power, the freedom to be, the freedom to be
Speaker 1: the fed, the power of freedom to be free. How
Speaker 1: about the freedom to write a book that no one
Speaker 1: will read, but many special interest groups will buy copies
Speaker 1: of Oh they're like I heard the Club for Growth
Speaker 1: is buying one hundred thousand copies and he's gonna make them.
Speaker 1: He's gonna make a bank on this thing. God bless him.
Speaker 1: But well, transfer, Hey, I'm a I'm a capitalist, but
Speaker 1: you know anyway, But look, the first day of your
Speaker 1: campaign is the best day. The only easy day was yesterday, right,
Speaker 1: And I gotta say something that people are not going
Speaker 1: to like, because I'm not one to give Donald Trump
Speaker 1: props very often, but there's a sign this week that
Speaker 1: Donald Trump has professionals advising him in the campaign. He
Speaker 1: has a really good team, unfortunate way he does. And
Speaker 1: Chris Lassavita is a brilliant campaign strategist. He's a very
Speaker 1: very very smart guy. Do not liberal listeners underestimate them.
Speaker 1: This is not the Corey Leewindowski Brad Pascal fuck show.
Speaker 1: These are smart, professional people and there are some of them.
Speaker 1: As my friend Terris sent I pointed out yesterday that
Speaker 1: I've worked for de Santists and know where the bodies
Speaker 1: are who worked for his Santis and know how to
Speaker 1: rat shit, know it pisses him off. And my god,
Speaker 1: if there's one person in America that can piss people off,
Speaker 1: it's Donald fucking TRUMPA yeah, but anyway, Trump was out
Speaker 1: there blasting to Santis when he goes to Iowa for
Speaker 1: being a Paul Ryan accolyte for wanting to shut down
Speaker 1: the ethanol program, which which I listen listen to. Santis
Speaker 1: isn't wrong. If I wanted to shut down the ethanol program,
Speaker 1: it's a goddamn nightmare, crony capitalist bullshit, But in Iowa
Speaker 1: it is these sacred cows. And also ethanol is not green. No,
Speaker 1: it's not great, but it does which was the fucking
Speaker 1: bullshit where I'm sold that ethanol was great. But ethanol
Speaker 1: is Iowa's favorite thing. It's Iowa's favorite thing. So he
Speaker 1: went out there and what is he What else does
Speaker 1: Trump know about the Iowa electorate? It's old as fuck.
Speaker 1: I don't have the data in front of me right now,
Speaker 1: but I seem to recall the Iowa electorate is the
Speaker 1: fourth or fifth oldest in the country for turnout in
Speaker 1: Republican primaries. It's old. So Trump's out there saying de
Speaker 1: Santis wants to end your so security and Medicare Medicaid,
Speaker 1: and he wants to kill ethanol. And I mean, this
Speaker 1: is a guy who being advised by people who are
Speaker 1: giving him talking points. Now, is he executing them in
Speaker 1: his Trump and fuck weirdo way? Yeah, of course he is.
Speaker 1: But he has a platform that message gets out there,
Speaker 1: and DeSantis is out there taking these very mild sort
Speaker 1: of s sideways bank shotty kind of well out of
Speaker 1: a winner and whole. Oh yeah, that shit's gonna last
Speaker 1: about five fucking seconds. When Trump gets too on a
Speaker 1: debate stage rips out, you're livering, right, tiny d That's
Speaker 1: the other thing that has triggered the run hotties, as
Speaker 1: I've come to call them lately. Is it when I
Speaker 1: said tiny d the other day on Twitter? It was
Speaker 1: all the usual like Mark Hemingway and Baseball Crank and
Speaker 1: all the Republican like desant isn't want to be subcabinet members.
Speaker 1: They're like, you have fallen so far, Wilson, how dare
Speaker 1: you use an insult? I'm like, they're like, you're just
Speaker 1: like Trump. I said to Mark Himya, I'm like, bitch,
Speaker 1: when I run for president, you can bring this up again, Okay,
Speaker 1: but I'm always I am, I am who I always have.
Speaker 1: Then I'm up in your shit. Mark, I Meanway was
Speaker 1: like her grandfather was a communist worth noting, and I
Speaker 1: was like, okay, I was like, that is worth noting,
Speaker 1: you fucking idiot. I'm a communist as long as I've
Speaker 1: known you, Molly. The one thing you've brought up in
Speaker 1: conversation over and over again as your desire to see
Speaker 1: the means of production. I mean, you never stopped talking
Speaker 1: about it. I don't know why I'm a communist. Let's
Speaker 1: go Stalin twenty twenty eight. Let's dig him up, zombie Stalin.
Speaker 1: But I think the important question is So Fox News
Speaker 1: has had a pretty bad week, and I think the
Speaker 1: top line here is Hell hath no fury like a
Speaker 1: voting machine company scored. Well. Look, I know their attorneys,
Speaker 1: clairelock I know I know that legal team very well.
Speaker 1: I know attorneys at Clairelocke who I am very familiar
Speaker 1: with the ability of that law firm to rain down
Speaker 1: hell on bad guys and what they have produced in
Speaker 1: this The reputational harm that Fox has cast itself by
Speaker 1: the divergence of its bullshit to its reality is a
Speaker 1: gift that will keep on giving, I think for some
Speaker 1: period of time, because what has been shown here extraordinarily
Speaker 1: clearly is as I've been saying for years and years
Speaker 1: and years. It's all a fucking act, especially with Tucker.
Speaker 1: I've a people this for years. Tucker's a nihilist. He
Speaker 1: loves money, he loves being in this spotlight. There's no
Speaker 1: there there other than that. And so this this idea
Speaker 1: that he's despises Trump and all that. I mean. The
Speaker 1: problem for Fox that it writ large is their dominance
Speaker 1: for a generation in politics in America was because there
Speaker 1: was not an alternative. I mean, Chris Roddy had Newsmax.
Speaker 1: It was kind of like Onesie two zy stuff down there,
Speaker 1: and it was on you know, channel four thousand, six
Speaker 1: hundred nineteen on Dish or on in mar SAT or
Speaker 1: some bullshit. What about OAN? But now you have oa
Speaker 1: N which you can't spell ononism without on on is
Speaker 1: you know o AN and Fox and the streaming channels
Speaker 1: in Lindell TV and Red State Broadcasting. I love Lindell
Speaker 1: the best. I watch it constantly. I never turn it off.
Speaker 1: That's right. It's on the big screen in the living
Speaker 1: room all day, all night. Yeah, but how how do
Speaker 1: you even get it? I don't know. I sense it
Speaker 1: when I'm sleeping. I close my eyes on my pillow.
Speaker 1: But the optionality now in the right, and these people
Speaker 1: are tuning into places that this is a little scary too,
Speaker 1: by the way, that are even less moderated and even
Speaker 1: less considered, and even less giving a fuck about legal repercussions.
Speaker 1: That their audience is tuning in because they were trained
Speaker 1: for a long time seek out the pure, seek out
Speaker 1: the ones that will punish the rhinos, I mean, and
Speaker 1: own the libs. These other networks. Is the outlets now
Speaker 1: own the libs better than Fox. And now there's a question. Now, people,
Speaker 1: some fraction of Fox viewers are going to watch Tucker
Speaker 1: and go I think he's playing me again. He hates Trump,
Speaker 1: and slowly but surely it corrodes the audience, and when
Speaker 1: there's an option to go somewhere else, you know, they
Speaker 1: might vote with their clicks. Now, does this mean that
Speaker 1: Fox is going to disappear tomorrow? Of course not. They're
Speaker 1: the largest cable network in the country, and the last
Speaker 1: round of negotiations with the cable carriers they browbeat and
Speaker 1: blustered and screamed and jumped up and down and said,
Speaker 1: ah h, you know, we're the big thing. You've got
Speaker 1: to pay us the twenty bucks a month per head. Right.
Speaker 1: I think as there's a new round of negotiations coming
Speaker 1: up with the big carriers, that may change. Now. I
Speaker 1: also have a point that I want to make that
Speaker 1: I've been critical of the White House and the administration
Speaker 1: on something for the fucking last time. President Biden. Use
Speaker 1: an executive order and take Fox off every goddamn military
Speaker 1: cable system in the country. It is radicalizing people in
Speaker 1: our US military. It is a danger. It is a
Speaker 1: foreign propaganda network that is absolutely being used to corrode
Speaker 1: faith and belief in the American system among our military.
Speaker 1: Just fucking say no, take it off. Do it now.
Speaker 1: The other thing you could do, mister president, is to say,
Speaker 1: nor will the United States government do further business with
Speaker 1: any cable carrier that carries the Fox network. You see,
Speaker 1: this is the kind of thing where when Donald Trump
Speaker 1: was using executive power, and when rodn Santus in Florida
Speaker 1: uses executive power, which he does every day, every fucking
Speaker 1: minute of the day, these people put it in their
Speaker 1: spank bank and masturbate to it for a fucking year.
Speaker 1: I love you, just you gotta push it a little
Speaker 1: over the top. Go on, God, I do, Molly, I've
Speaker 1: got to push it. I've got to push it. Good
Speaker 1: Christ Yeah, continue these ideas. Are they not conservative? No,
Speaker 1: they're not particularly conservative. But the other side is using
Speaker 1: every weapon in the book. Right. And when Donald Trump
Speaker 1: said the things took companies like Caterpillar and Ford, you'll
Speaker 1: do what I want or I'll punish you politically, Republicans said,
Speaker 1: this was the greatest leadership we've ever seen. I'll do
Speaker 1: any question. Well, guess what. I'm a skeptic of executive
Speaker 1: orders as a broad in a broad sense, except for
Speaker 1: some very narrowly crafted areas. But this is the kind
Speaker 1: of thing that it is a fifth column that is
Speaker 1: pumping propaganda inside the military every day. If al Jazero
Speaker 1: was somehow the network that Republicans claim it is, and
Speaker 1: it was pumping this into our into every government office
Speaker 1: every day, people would lose their fucking mind. So it's
Speaker 1: tuned for the president to also do what Rupert Murdoch
Speaker 1: is doing to him and to this country and fuck
Speaker 1: back right right? No, I agree, I mean, and I
Speaker 1: think that is a really good idea. Now, talk to
Speaker 1: me about the implication. I mean, does this hurt the
Speaker 1: does this hurt the opinion host? Does this hurt the money? Honey?
Speaker 1: Talk to me, Well, look, I think it hurts the money, honey,
Speaker 1: because she seems like she's getting thrown under the bus.
Speaker 1: I feel like she may be the blood sacrifice, but
Speaker 1: she's not the right sacrifice. Susanne Scott is the right sacrifice, right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: they'll get someone worse though. Arena Burganti is the right sacrifice. Oh,
Speaker 1: are you allowed to evoke the name Arena Baganti? Arena Burganti? Yeah,
Speaker 1: Aagan Arena Burganti. Go bring some kind of beetle Jews
Speaker 1: Hell's game. No. Look, this is something that Fox is
Speaker 1: really wondering right now. If they throw somebody off the
Speaker 1: sled and let the wolves eat them doesn't work. I
Speaker 1: don't think it does honestly. And bartar Romo is cuckoo
Speaker 1: and everybody and Fox has known it for a long time.
Speaker 1: She is sort of an Ale's legacy project that has
Speaker 1: somehow been protected there. I don't know what the what
Speaker 1: the rundown is, but is Rupert going to have to
Speaker 1: kill somebody to get dominion to go away? I don't
Speaker 1: think it works, right even if he does. Even if
Speaker 1: he does, it doesn't matter. It doesn't change their case
Speaker 1: against him because they were working for him at the time.
Speaker 1: It seems like you cannot satisfy dominion. Like they know
Speaker 1: their brand is ruined, you know, I mean they know
Speaker 1: that Fox did this. Fox News took this to deliberately
Speaker 1: with full knowledge it was false and what I believe
Speaker 1: as a non lawyer, but I can look at the
Speaker 1: world and see how things lie with a state of
Speaker 1: malicious intent. From the jump. They knew what would happen.
Speaker 1: They knew it was a lie. They perpetuated the lie.
Speaker 1: They joked internally about how crazy the people they were
Speaker 1: putting on the air were. They were koops and lunatics
Speaker 1: and nuts and everything else. They brought every aspect of
Speaker 1: this problem on themselves. They brought every single part of
Speaker 1: this problem on themselves. They knew it was a lie
Speaker 1: from the start. They knew there was no secret fucking
Speaker 1: backdoor into the voting machines by the ghost of Hugo
Speaker 1: Chavez or Zombi Fidel Castro, or that ladies with psychic
Speaker 1: powers weren't secretly telling them where the code in Rome
Speaker 1: was being used to manipulate I mean it, just the
Speaker 1: lavish insanity of it would have been enough of the
Speaker 1: giveaway for an actual journalistic enterprise to say, hold up,
Speaker 1: this is too crazy. But it wasn't because they knew
Speaker 1: they were going to play their audience. And the other
Speaker 1: part to this Molly, I think is really important. It
Speaker 1: goes back to the first part of this conversation about
Speaker 1: where the Fox audience goes. Just like MAGA believed that,
Speaker 1: or just like the Republican Party once believe that they
Speaker 1: controlled Maga, that they could make could bring him out
Speaker 1: of the closet every two years or four years and
Speaker 1: get them to devote the right way and put them back,
Speaker 1: just like they believed that the mob would never eat them,
Speaker 1: that the alligator would never crawl up on the dock
Speaker 1: when they were out of fried chicken for it and
Speaker 1: eat them. I feel like you're speaking from personal experience.
Speaker 1: That's one of my grandmother's favorite phrases, because you know,
Speaker 1: she's like, you can throw that frat chicken in that
Speaker 1: alligator all day long, but when you're out, it's going
Speaker 1: to crawl up on the dock and eat you, right,
Speaker 1: And that's what's happening. And that, yes, if you're wondering
Speaker 1: how southern she was, there's no greater. You cannot pokee.
Speaker 1: You cannot spike the southern meter any higher than my
Speaker 1: grandmother was. But Fox is a captive of its audience now,
Speaker 1: and if they start conforming their behavior to reality, which
Speaker 1: is why, by the way, this desperate play that Tucker
Speaker 1: is doing this week, and I don't know this for
Speaker 1: a fact, but I've heard four and I don't know
Speaker 1: if it's true, but I've heard before that the nightside
Speaker 1: hosts are incentivized in terms of their comp by advertising,
Speaker 1: oh and eyeballs. So they're trying to get the audience
Speaker 1: to stay with them. That's why Tucker is doing this
Speaker 1: whole historical rewrite of January sixth. I'm trying to make
Speaker 1: it into the tourist visit blah blah blah. That's why
Speaker 1: they're starting, I believe, to make the turn back toward Trump.
Speaker 1: Captive of the audience, thank you Rick Wilson for joining us.
Speaker 1: You are more than welcome. Congressman Eric Swallwell represents California's
Speaker 1: fifteenth district. Welcome back to you fast politics, my friend,
Speaker 1: Congressman Eric Swawell', I'm very excited to have you. Shall
Speaker 1: we first talk about that committee hearing from yesterday? Yeah,
Speaker 1: just shooting layups over here, Molly with these guys. Congressman
Speaker 1: Jim Jordan. Paint the scene here for a minute. Jordan
Speaker 1: has created a Subpoena compliance Committee, and I was named
Speaker 1: by the Democrats to lead that. And essentially he sends
Speaker 1: these letters to the Department of Justice that read like
Speaker 1: a Jim Jordan ranch. Before they even read the long letter,
Speaker 1: He's sent them a subpoena and then he brings them in.
Speaker 1: So yesterday's hearing was about protecting parents under the guys
Speaker 1: of protecting parents, well, he does not like the FBI
Speaker 1: looking at parents who terrorize school board members, and so
Speaker 1: he has a conspiracy theory that Merrick Garland has designated
Speaker 1: all parents as domestic terents. Now, of course there's no
Speaker 1: evidence of that and came out of that. But I
Speaker 1: did make sure to read many of the death threats
Speaker 1: that were sent to volunteer school board members and you know,
Speaker 1: shows some of the violences occurred at these school board
Speaker 1: hearings and look at Jim Jordan and their gang and
Speaker 1: say like, is this who you guys stand with? Now?
Speaker 1: You know, when you're not visiting terrorists at the DC
Speaker 1: jail who are responsible for January six, Now you're going
Speaker 1: to come in here and be on the side of
Speaker 1: people who are terrorizing school board members. These are parents
Speaker 1: who are threatening school board members. And Jim Jordan is
Speaker 1: upset that the FBI is then going to question them. Yes,
Speaker 1: he wants to be tough on terrorists unless the terrorists
Speaker 1: like Jim Jordans. That's kind of my faith. Wow, tell
Speaker 1: me about what your sort of takeaway was from this experience. Oh,
Speaker 1: first of all, by the way, taking a step back,
Speaker 1: it's pretty fucking rich that Jim Jordan's of all people
Speaker 1: in the world would hold a hearing on subpoena compliance, right,
Speaker 1: I mean, really is shocking that a guy who was
Speaker 1: referred to the Ethics Committee because he didn't honor a
Speaker 1: congressional subpoena has some thoughts on people honoring congressional subpoenas. Now,
Speaker 1: the DJ witnessed did what Jim Jordan was not willing
Speaker 1: to do, which was show up, talk to Congress talk about,
Speaker 1: you know, what he knew and didn't know. And it
Speaker 1: was quite easy. Jim Jordan could have done it. He
Speaker 1: could have raised his right hand and answered questions about
Speaker 1: the crime that he witnessed leading up to January sixth,
Speaker 1: but he refused to do it. And he wants to
Speaker 1: lecture all of us about what the Department of Justice
Speaker 1: should do when he's the one signing the subpoena. Why
Speaker 1: do you think that is? We're living through this krrupt
Speaker 1: bargain where for Jim Jordan to have a gabble and
Speaker 1: Kevin McCarthy to have the title of speaker. There's installment
Speaker 1: payments that have to be made, and so Marjorie Taylor
Speaker 1: Green has to go on the Homeland Security Committee. We
Speaker 1: have to harbor the International Wanted criminal George Santos, And
Speaker 1: we have to buy into this idea that police officers
Speaker 1: should not be looking at parents who terrorized school board
Speaker 1: meetings because those parents share the beliefs of Magan Nation.
Speaker 1: And so Jim Jordan has formed one of the largest
Speaker 1: law firms in DC with the Weaponization Committee, the Subpoena Committee,
Speaker 1: the Judiciary Committee, and it's essentially just a law firm
Speaker 1: that has one client right. And so they're going to
Speaker 1: work on behalf of Donald Trump and the Republican Conference
Speaker 1: will be this vessel state of Maga Nation so that
Speaker 1: they can just carry out all of Trump and his
Speaker 1: supporters grievances. But it's backfired every single time. Right, You've
Speaker 1: got Matt Gates reading from like the China Times to
Speaker 1: make a point. By the way, that was an amazing
Speaker 1: moment where the witness was like, where did you get
Speaker 1: that from? That? Lauren Bobert is citing statistics from the
Speaker 1: Trump administration to own the Bind administration. Matt Gates, two
Speaker 1: weeks before the China Times debacle, brings in a guy
Speaker 1: to say the pledge of allegiance, who's an accused murderer.
Speaker 1: After trying to make the point that Democrats don't want
Speaker 1: to say the Pledge of Allegiance and Molly during that
Speaker 1: debate where David Cecillini had the crazy idea that if
Speaker 1: you're going to come in and say the Pledge of
Speaker 1: Allegiance again and Gates doesn't give a shit about saying
Speaker 1: the Pledge of Allegiance, by the way, this is just
Speaker 1: to like try and give a Democrat to vote against it, right.
Speaker 1: Cellini kind of pushed back and said, well, if you're
Speaker 1: gonna say the Pledge of Allegiance, we should at least
Speaker 1: be able to vet who this individual is. And Tom
Speaker 1: McClintock on the Republican side, I'm not shitting you, says, well,
Speaker 1: it's not like we're going to bring in somebody who
Speaker 1: committed murder, which they then did. Yeah, he actually did.
Speaker 1: So it's just a comedy of heirs right now, a
Speaker 1: failure to launch, so to speak, on their side. As
Speaker 1: I said, it's just shooting layups right now with these guys.
Speaker 1: It's not the hardest work we've had to do. I
Speaker 1: want to know Kevin McCarthy has his job. He is
Speaker 1: nominally Speaker of the House, speaker light Speaker of Light, right,
Speaker 1: I mean really I think he is Kevin McCarthy the
Speaker 1: Speaker of the House, or really is Tough Garlson the
Speaker 1: Speaker of the House. Yeah, so I would say he
Speaker 1: has the title. Marjorie Taylor Green has the job because
Speaker 1: he can't do anything without her support. Part of the
Speaker 1: reoccurring payment plan that McCarthy has to stay in a
Speaker 1: speaker was that installment payment to Tucker Carlson, you know,
Speaker 1: with the sensitive security footage from January six and so
Speaker 1: we're going to see more, you know, installment payments that
Speaker 1: Will Jeffert has our national security, like one of them
Speaker 1: being defunding the troops by seventy five billion dollars, which
Speaker 1: was another promise he made to become speaker. And by
Speaker 1: the way, well, I really don't think Kevin McCarthy wants
Speaker 1: anything more than just the title of speaker. I don't
Speaker 1: think he's never demonstrated like that he's got an idea
Speaker 1: that would solve a problem. I think he just knows
Speaker 1: enough to know that it's cool to be speaker. And
Speaker 1: beyond that, I don't think he really cares about like
Speaker 1: the job of governing and getting shipped done. Yeah, there's
Speaker 1: no evidence to support the idea that he is pictually
Speaker 1: interested in this job, like in legislating. Correct. And if
Speaker 1: you think back to the first one hundred days when
Speaker 1: Democrats were in the majority in twenty nineteen and then
Speaker 1: back again with Biden this president, we delivered a lot.
Speaker 1: I mean, we were busy, we were working passing historic
Speaker 1: legislation as marks of what we do when we were
Speaker 1: in the majority in the Senate, in the White House.
Speaker 1: And then we did it again when we had that
Speaker 1: kind of holy trinity, and we're able to do it.
Speaker 1: But here they promised a border bill, they haven't delivered that.
Speaker 1: They've promised a budget and his hockey and Jeffreys has
Speaker 1: said the budget has gone into the witness protection program. Like,
Speaker 1: we have no idea where their budget is. And again
Speaker 1: I think it's just he doesn't know how to do this.
Speaker 1: He doesn't really want to do this. He just wants
Speaker 1: to be called speaker. What other stuff are they cooking
Speaker 1: up there? There's this congressional delegation that Marjorie Taylor Green
Speaker 1: is leading to the DC jail. They really call them
Speaker 1: codel This is, you know, like a taror deal. They're
Speaker 1: going to go visit those responsible for January six, which
Speaker 1: again for the first time in their lives, they care
Speaker 1: about the rights of inmates. But again it's only it's
Speaker 1: not because of any concerning or criminal dress. It's just
Speaker 1: their friends. It's these are these people that they rooted
Speaker 1: for during the riot. We are now behind balls. This
Speaker 1: was the pathway to the most disappointing mid term performance,
Speaker 1: you know, for the party, not in the White House ever,
Speaker 1: that they just pulled off, and it doesn't seem that
Speaker 1: they've learned from it at all. You know, the voters
Speaker 1: rejected this nonsense in November, and it's just they're just
Speaker 1: doubling down. Yeah, it is really interesting that they are
Speaker 1: completely uninterested in like stopping and saying, well, like this
Speaker 1: was the kind of stuff that lost us in twenty
Speaker 1: twenty and twenty eighteen and twenty twenty two. Perhaps we'd
Speaker 1: like to pause in client reflect action and try for
Speaker 1: something else. But there seems to be no interest in that.
Speaker 1: Huh No. And again that's because no one has figured
Speaker 1: out how to grab the mantle of leadership from maganation,
Speaker 1: which again is not the majority of Republicans, but it's
Speaker 1: the loudest, most violent, most provocative, and so everyone else
Speaker 1: just wishes this problem away and no leadership has emerged,
Speaker 1: you know, to try and solve it or variant, and
Speaker 1: so it persists. And I think we're in for another
Speaker 1: cycle or two where it's chaos versus competency on the ballot.
Speaker 1: If you look at this Republican Party right, so we're
Speaker 1: it certainly looks like Trump is in for more legal
Speaker 1: problems in your mind, I mean, do you think that
Speaker 1: these people will go along with the Santis, which is
Speaker 1: the hope of the donor class. I mean, you're with
Speaker 1: them every day. I mean, do these seat people seem
Speaker 1: like they would switch their allegiances. I still seem only that,
Speaker 1: you know, Donald Trump commands thirty tot of you know,
Speaker 1: the Republican base, and if it's a crowded field, he's
Speaker 1: going to keep that base. And by the way, Ronda
Speaker 1: Santis is one charmless guy. I don't know if met him,
Speaker 1: but we don't elect charmless people to be president of
Speaker 1: the United States. The way that Trump has been like
Speaker 1: just pounding him and getting so personal with him, calling
Speaker 1: him a groomer, you know, etc. And de Santis isn't
Speaker 1: punching back. It reminds me of Ted Cruz and that
Speaker 1: didn't last long. If you're not going to punch back
Speaker 1: against Trump, I think you're going to be chewed up
Speaker 1: and spit out, just like the other eighteen candidates in
Speaker 1: twenty sixteen. And so if he's not willing to do that,
Speaker 1: and I think he will join the ranks of you know,
Speaker 1: Jeb Scott Walker and many of the other rising stars
Speaker 1: you know in the party whose names and whereabouts were
Speaker 1: all unclear on now, right, I mean it seems like
Speaker 1: the on de Santis could very much have a ted
Speaker 1: cruise trajectory. Again. If you're not willing to punch back
Speaker 1: and you can't do again, you can't do it in
Speaker 1: a you know, Marco Rubio immature way, right, you're going
Speaker 1: to have to land punches. And to me, you're I
Speaker 1: don't want to give these guys advice, But Donald Trump
Speaker 1: is a loser, right. He lost the House in eighteen,
Speaker 1: he lost the White House in twenty. He weighed in
Speaker 1: against the advice of everybody in the party in twenty
Speaker 1: two and just lost across the board. And so you
Speaker 1: can run a cult in America, but in a democracy,
Speaker 1: I just don't understand how you can run a party
Speaker 1: and lead a party if you're a three time loser,
Speaker 1: and it doesn't seem to me that you need to
Speaker 1: say anything more than that. But if you do that,
Speaker 1: you better be able to stand up to what's going
Speaker 1: to come back from him. And if you're not able to,
Speaker 1: then you're not going to beat him. And you certainly
Speaker 1: haven't passed the test of being president, which means having
Speaker 1: to stand up to a lot of bad people in
Speaker 1: the world. So let me ask you about what is
Speaker 1: happening with the Congress now? Is there any serious stuff
Speaker 1: getting done in this Jim Jordan Congress. Yeah, they're about
Speaker 1: to make the AR fifteen the National Gun of America.
Speaker 1: And I get a lot of letters asking me where
Speaker 1: are we going to name a national gun of America?
Speaker 1: So that makes sense that they've focused so much on that. Yeah,
Speaker 1: because it's it's a problem. I mean, you're not kidding,
Speaker 1: you're actually being serious. Yeah, they're seeking to do that. Yes,
Speaker 1: there's legislation. Wait what, Yes, I'm not I'm not kidding.
Speaker 1: That's pretty stupid. But Molly, the way I see it,
Speaker 1: there are three things they have to do, really like,
Speaker 1: they can do all their crazy They can name national
Speaker 1: guns of America. They can go to the DCH jail,
Speaker 1: you know, and have as many visits as they like.
Speaker 1: But you have to pay America's bills by extending the
Speaker 1: debt ceiling. You have to keep the government open later
Speaker 1: this fall, and you have to keep Ukraine in the
Speaker 1: fight against Russia. And you're going to have to mondo
Speaker 1: the crisis of the moment right now as we speak.
Speaker 1: You know, there is a major, major banking crisis. Silicon
Speaker 1: Valley Bank, which banks a lot of tech biotechs startups,
Speaker 1: is in collapse. And if we don't find a way
Speaker 1: to guarantee deposits beyond the FDIC limit, a lot of companies,
Speaker 1: small and medium sized companies are not going to be
Speaker 1: able to make their pay and it could it could
Speaker 1: tank the global economy if we don't get it right.
Speaker 1: And so again, you can go to the dcjail all
Speaker 1: you like, but you actually have to do real things
Speaker 1: when a real crisis comes. And I'm just afraid that
Speaker 1: these guys may not be up for it. So if
Speaker 1: they can take time away from the DC jail and
Speaker 1: just focus on paying our bills, funding the government, keeping
Speaker 1: Ukraine in the fight, and responding to a crisis like this,
Speaker 1: everything will be Okay. The good news is there's competency
Speaker 1: on our side. We only need just a few of
Speaker 1: them to cross over. We don't need Gates and Jordan
Speaker 1: and Green and Bobert. We just need a few responsibles
Speaker 1: to cross over, and we'll be fine. Because that's the
Speaker 1: next big dramas the dead ceiling in June. Yeah and
Speaker 1: so yeah, Secretary Yelling said, you know, this is around
Speaker 1: the corner. There's no magic wand away. There's no going
Speaker 1: back in time and changing spending that we already agreed
Speaker 1: to in dollars. I already went out the door. We
Speaker 1: just have to show the world and creditors that, you know,
Speaker 1: when we wrack up a bill, whether you're at a
Speaker 1: bar or you're at a federal bank, we pay our bills.
Speaker 1: And so Republicans want to use this to otherwise pass
Speaker 1: priorities that they couldn't pass, you know, in Congress. You know,
Speaker 1: so again it's it's very antimajority. They want to enact
Speaker 1: harsh cuts to Social Security or Medicare, or get deeper
Speaker 1: into Hunter Biden's laptop and leverage the need to extend
Speaker 1: the debt ceiling. And it's just not going to work.
Speaker 1: I agree with the president on not negotiating around this
Speaker 1: because a big chunk of that debt is Donald Trump's
Speaker 1: debt and spending that they did in twenty seventeen, you know,
Speaker 1: the Trump tax bets, and so that's not negotiable. Yeah, unbelievable.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Thanks Molly. Danica Saverina Wynn is the vice
Speaker 1: president for Abortion Access at Planned Parenthood. Welcome, Too Fast Politics, Dannica,
Speaker 1: thank you for having me. So I wanted to talk
Speaker 1: to you about what I mean. I don't want to
Speaker 1: talk about it, but I feel that we have to
Speaker 1: talk about this post row landscape. So first, will you
Speaker 1: explain to our listeners what you do and how you
Speaker 1: are functioning in this post Row world. Sure. Yes, I
Speaker 1: am a midwife by training. I provide sexual and reproductive healthcare,
Speaker 1: including medication abortion. I also have the privilege of working
Speaker 1: for Planned Parenthood Federation of America or PPFA as the
Speaker 1: vice president of Abortion Access. As you can imagine, that
Speaker 1: is a busy job nowadays. Is the ruling in the
Speaker 1: Jobs decision that overturned revivweight means that I spend a
Speaker 1: lot of time working with my team and teams across
Speaker 1: the national office to ensure that in states where abortion
Speaker 1: is still legal, that we are able to provide care
Speaker 1: to the best of our ability and see as many
Speaker 1: patients as possible and sure they get the care that
Speaker 1: they need and deserve. Will you explain to us a
Speaker 1: little bit about what's happening right now with medication abortion
Speaker 1: in America. Yeah, absolutely so. Over the past several years,
Speaker 1: medication abortion has increased in popularity for a variety of reasons.
Speaker 1: Now more than half of abortions in the United States
Speaker 1: are abortioned by pills, which is another term for medication abortion.
Speaker 1: It's typically done early in the pregnancy, usually up to
Speaker 1: about ten or eleven weeks gestation in many places. Right now,
Speaker 1: there is an active case in the Northern District of
Speaker 1: Texas where one of the medications that's used for medication abortion,
Speaker 1: it's a typically two step process, mithopristone, is at risk
Speaker 1: of being taken off the market. This ruling is unprecedented
Speaker 1: as this drug has FDA approved and has been used
Speaker 1: for years with an incredible safety record. What it means
Speaker 1: is that we could lose access to the most effective
Speaker 1: method of medication abortion and also a very effective method
Speaker 1: for miscarriage management in this country, and it could impact
Speaker 1: both states and without access to abortion. So I want
Speaker 1: to ask you a little bit about how the FDA
Speaker 1: monitors method pre zone because it's pretty interesting. Will you
Speaker 1: talk about that, because it's not monitored like a normal drug,
Speaker 1: it's actually monitored more right, Right, myfopristone has been under
Speaker 1: what's called the rems by the FDA for a long time.
Speaker 1: So what that means is that there is a registration
Speaker 1: basically that has to happen in order for it to
Speaker 1: be dispensed, and prior to very recently, it wasn't only
Speaker 1: able to be dispensed in an office setting, so people
Speaker 1: had to go into an office to be provided with
Speaker 1: the medication. And because of that, we have even more
Speaker 1: extensive data than we would otherwise about the safety and
Speaker 1: effectiveness of mythoprestone. Right. But I want to point out
Speaker 1: I think really an important kind of thing that Republicans
Speaker 1: are doing the Anti Choice Crew. Part of their argument
Speaker 1: is that methapre zone is not safe, right, which is
Speaker 1: patently false. So it is unfortunately a case where we
Speaker 1: have politicians and decision makers in government making a decision
Speaker 1: about evidence based research without the knowledge and training to
Speaker 1: do so. So these are decisions that should be made
Speaker 1: between a person and their healthcare provider because we understand
Speaker 1: and know, oh that that's the best and safest way
Speaker 1: to provide care. And in this case, we have a
Speaker 1: situation where there's basically junk science being used to make
Speaker 1: decisions about medical care that's incredibly personal. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: incredible that we're in this place in twenty twenty three
Speaker 1: where we're having to demonstrate over and over again that
Speaker 1: the literature and the research clearly show safety. Yet there
Speaker 1: is a potential that one judge could make a decision
Speaker 1: for the whole country to remove a medication that is
Speaker 1: completely safe from the market. Yeah, it's it's completely crazy.
Speaker 1: I mean this reminds me a lot of SBA, because
Speaker 1: in Texas, SBA was passed and we kept thinking that
Speaker 1: someone would do something sane and no one ever did
Speaker 1: right in the right right. I mean I feel like
Speaker 1: everyone was like, yeah, yeah, SPA. I mean, but they
Speaker 1: were like but eventually, and so I'm curious. I mean,
Speaker 1: this is so is a similar attitude people have, which
Speaker 1: is that, oh, a judge can do an injunction against
Speaker 1: this right. I mean, there's a lot of feeling that
Speaker 1: maybe the legal channels will prevent this from being enacted. Sure,
Speaker 1: I mean, there are a lot of different ways that
Speaker 1: this could come down, and really we won't know the
Speaker 1: exact ramifications or impact of this case until we actually
Speaker 1: see the decision and see how it's written. Advocates will
Speaker 1: continue to fight every step of the way to prevent
Speaker 1: methocystem from being taken off the market, but at the
Speaker 1: end of the day, we really just have to question
Speaker 1: how did we get here and what are they coming
Speaker 1: for next? Well, yeah, I want to just also mention
Speaker 1: that if this keeps getting kicked up in the courts,
Speaker 1: which a lot of these anti choice activists are quite
Speaker 1: good at finding things and getting them kicked up in
Speaker 1: the courts, ultimately our Supreme Court is profoundly anti choice. Yeah.
Speaker 1: We saw that certainly in the oral arguments for the
Speaker 1: Job's case. I mean, their feelings were pretty clear if
Speaker 1: you read through those or arguments or if you were listening.
Speaker 1: So it is incredibly alarming to have a politically active
Speaker 1: Supreme Court. That's just not how it's supposed to go.
Speaker 1: And so knowing that that is a possibility definitely should
Speaker 1: make people worried about what that means, what The larger
Speaker 1: implications are for healthcare, because abortion is healthcare. Healthcare is
Speaker 1: a human right, and this could just be the tip
Speaker 1: of the iceberg. If one judge is able to take
Speaker 1: a medication off the market, what's next? No, exactly. Now
Speaker 1: here's a question for you about this. There's a case
Speaker 1: in Tensis right now of these women who could not
Speaker 1: get the treatment that they needed because of the SBA law.
Speaker 1: Can you talk a little bit about that. What we're
Speaker 1: seeing is a case where five people have come forward
Speaker 1: who medical care was denied and delayed as a result
Speaker 1: of the restrictive laws in Texas, cases where they were
Speaker 1: experiencing fetal loss or significant harm to themselves due to
Speaker 1: complications in their pregnancy. The idea that somebody needs to
Speaker 1: be so sick that they are in critical danger of
Speaker 1: death before they can get life saving medical care because
Speaker 1: of restrictive laws and not due to any type of
Speaker 1: science is alarming. And these are a perfect example of
Speaker 1: how it's not just about abortion. It goes so much
Speaker 1: further a mess right. This has impacts on miscarriage management,
Speaker 1: It has impacts on providing people life saving care during pregnancy,
Speaker 1: has impacts on IVF and again like We just really
Speaker 1: need to think about what the larger ramifications are if
Speaker 1: we do not rise up together and fight against this.
Speaker 1: The thing I'm struck by is that we're finally starting
Speaker 1: to see these women who are not pro choice, but
Speaker 1: who have gotten pregnant and have had needed miscarriage management,
Speaker 1: They too, are starting to understand this. Yeah. I mean,
Speaker 1: we hear stories, unfortunately all the time, of people who
Speaker 1: faced harm or near harm because of restrictive laws like
Speaker 1: lens in Texas. I've certainly heard stories as well if
Speaker 1: people worried about moving during their pregnancy to a state
Speaker 1: with an abortion ban because they worry about their health
Speaker 1: and state of health care for them while they're pregnant.
Speaker 1: Criminalization of pregnancy is absurd. Having life threatening health outcomes
Speaker 1: because of laws is absurd. There is no place for
Speaker 1: a politician in an exam room in a hospital. Providers
Speaker 1: should really be able to make the best decisions based
Speaker 1: on evidence and based on science that they can for
Speaker 1: their patients without having to worry about prosecution. As this
Speaker 1: goes on, we're seeing more and more just how much
Speaker 1: abortion really is healthcare. Yeah, I mean, I am grateful
Speaker 1: in many ways that you said that, because I do
Speaker 1: think it is allowing people to understand just how complex
Speaker 1: this issue is and that it really does have a
Speaker 1: much larger impact than conservatives in our government would like
Speaker 1: you to believe. Yeah, I think it's pretty interesting. So
Speaker 1: there's clearly like a concerted effort from these anti choice
Speaker 1: activists to take away all choice period paragraph whatever that
Speaker 1: looks like, and abortion and miscarriage management, which isn't even
Speaker 1: a choice, right, it's just what it is. What else
Speaker 1: do you see on the horizon of them going after
Speaker 1: I mean, I think they've made it very clear that
Speaker 1: they want to see a federal ban on abortion. Actually
Speaker 1: they said that they want to leave it to the states,
Speaker 1: but then they're clearly signaling what they would do if
Speaker 1: they are able to get the majority in twenty twenty
Speaker 1: four elections, and so that's terrifying. But I think we're
Speaker 1: also seeing attacks on what we are seeing attacks on
Speaker 1: gender affirming hormone therapy, we're seeing attacks on contraception. I
Speaker 1: think the restrictive access that could happen even in some
Speaker 1: states has trickle effects on our whole country. Twenty something
Speaker 1: states cannot take care of everyone across the country when
Speaker 1: it comes to their sexual and reproductive health needs, and
Speaker 1: in situations where we are seeing the ability for government
Speaker 1: to interfere with even the medications that we have on
Speaker 1: the market outside of the FDA and outside of evidence
Speaker 1: is striking. I wanted to talk for one second about
Speaker 1: the larger implications of like the morning after pill, for example,
Speaker 1: like that has We've seen a lot of conservatives come
Speaker 1: for the morning app right, they're sort of that IVF.
Speaker 1: I mean, those are sort of what is first control maybe,
Speaker 1: I mean, that is what seems like it's on the
Speaker 1: agenda for them. Yeah, And it's the constant misinformation campaigns
Speaker 1: that I think allow them to march forward and continue
Speaker 1: to spread lies that you know, the morning after pill
Speaker 1: or emergency contraception is the same as an abortion. It's
Speaker 1: patently untrue. It is that is not how it works. Similarly,
Speaker 1: you know, we heard those arguments when they were working
Speaker 1: really hard to prevent the morning after pill from going
Speaker 1: over the counter. But despite the science, despite the evidence,
Speaker 1: they continue to push forward misinformation as a way to
Speaker 1: push forward their agenda of removing choice. Such a bomber.
Speaker 1: What is it like working with people on the ground.
Speaker 1: Are you seeing a lot of panic? I mean, so
Speaker 1: I am a provider who because of my work with PPFA,
Speaker 1: I see patients about once a month. I can tell
Speaker 1: you that my colleagues across the country who are in
Speaker 1: health centers day in and day out, are overwhelmed and
Speaker 1: they are hearing stories that are heartbreaking about people traveling
Speaker 1: distances for care that are beyond reasonable, beyond unreasonable. Rather,
Speaker 1: they are hearing stories of people having to cobble together
Speaker 1: funds and patchwork support for child care in order to
Speaker 1: travel from southern Texas to Kansas, for example, or to Illinois.
Speaker 1: They are being asked to provide care for more and
Speaker 1: more people, and they want to because people who work
Speaker 1: in this space typically it is a passion. They're there
Speaker 1: because they want to support patients. And so I think
Speaker 1: the patients are struggling, and the patients deserve access to healthcare.
Speaker 1: But the providers are all so struggling, and they have
Speaker 1: been asked to take on larger and larger caseloads to
Speaker 1: serve more and more people because of restrictive laws in
Speaker 1: some states. Do you think Republicans just keep going? I mean,
Speaker 1: do you think they ever are like, Wow, this is
Speaker 1: not popular. People don't like this. I mean, that's The
Speaker 1: thing I'm always shocked by is like I feel like,
Speaker 1: shouldn't sooner or later they have a kind of come
Speaker 1: to Jesus moment and they're like, this is ridiculous. Obviously
Speaker 1: this is not serving anyone or but that seems to
Speaker 1: not be what's happening. I mean, we would only hope
Speaker 1: because truly it's not reflective of right what the people
Speaker 1: across this country want. Democratic Republican I mean, it's so clear. Yeah,
Speaker 1: overwhelmingly we see that people support the right to abortion access,
Speaker 1: and so I don't know what it will take to
Speaker 1: get folks to recognize that this is not the will
Speaker 1: of the people. That I do hope that in upcoming elections,
Speaker 1: as more and more of this comes out and as
Speaker 1: people really see what the agenda is here, that they
Speaker 1: are going to make their voices heard in the voting
Speaker 1: booths and they're going to make sure that folks who
Speaker 1: are ignoring the will of the people are not in
Speaker 1: charge of our country. Thank you so much, Donica, that
Speaker 1: was really I really am glad you came, and I
Speaker 1: hope you'll come back. Thank you so much. Thanks for
Speaker 1: having me. I appreciate you raising up awareness about the
Speaker 1: state of reproductive healthcare and abortion access in this country.
Speaker 1: So in Florida, Ronda Santas fired a prosecutor named Andrew Warren,
Speaker 1: a state attorney. Yes, who we've both been talking to, right,
Speaker 1: we both talked to him after Ron fired him. It
Speaker 1: was revealed this week that when Ronda Santis's staff brought
Speaker 1: him the report, he wanted to say, tell me how
Speaker 1: he's a liberal sorrows controlled libtard liberal. It turned out
Speaker 1: they were like, we don't have anything on this. So
Speaker 1: he just fired him based purely on executive preference, not
Speaker 1: for cause. Can he do that? There's a long reason
Speaker 1: why governors are more powerful right now that they don't
Speaker 1: want to talk about on the air, But I'll tell
Speaker 1: it to you off the air later. But Florida governors
Speaker 1: have a lot more power than they used to since
Speaker 1: the two thousand constitutional revision. Okay, so this is a
Speaker 1: state issue. Yeah, it looks like he can. But in
Speaker 1: the legal case that was brought against De Santists, it
Speaker 1: doesn't look like that they told the truth about this.
Speaker 1: So I don't know where it leads. But the moment
Speaker 1: of fuckery here is a pure example that Rod de
Speaker 1: Santists for every one of these National Review jerk offs
Speaker 1: who think I want to live in the limit the
Speaker 1: power of government. Right, Well, your boy Rod de Santis,
Speaker 1: who you write twenty thousand words a week about claiming
Speaker 1: that his farts smell like rainbows and honeysuckle, and then
Speaker 1: he's the best tallest person ever and the smartest man
Speaker 1: in the room, and the savior of the Republican Party,
Speaker 1: that women get pregnant just by looking at him, and
Speaker 1: that the women sings a sweet song every night when
Speaker 1: he puts his head on the pillow. All this bullshit.
Speaker 1: This is a guy who is rampant, who is a
Speaker 1: rampant record of an abusive state power. He is the
Speaker 1: number one abuser of state power in the country and
Speaker 1: that includes states like fucking Tennessee and Mississippi. People, Okay,
Speaker 1: so Florida, stan Is. This is one more example that
Speaker 1: if you are a limited government conservative, the few that
Speaker 1: are left, this is not your guy. But if you're
Speaker 1: an unlimited government conservative, which is the new breed of Republican,
Speaker 1: well there you go. My moment of fuckery has got
Speaker 1: to be the poor Nicky Haley destroying herself as she
Speaker 1: continues to try to win people over with raising the
Speaker 1: retirement raid and cutting medicare. Oh yes, there's just nothing.
Speaker 1: There's nothing seniors want to hear more. Then, hey, grandma,
Speaker 1: you can eat that food into your seventy She is
Speaker 1: an incredible politician because two weeks ago she was like,
Speaker 1: there should be a competency age for everyone over seventy five.
Speaker 1: Those are your voters. So they love for you. You
Speaker 1: say that they're in competent already, they love that. And
Speaker 1: then the second thing, which my other favorite, is that
Speaker 1: everyone who's in their twenties now should not, you know,
Speaker 1: have raised the retirement age. They are rioting in France
Speaker 1: right now because of this raising. Is what seventy right,
Speaker 1: Mark it down. Nicky Haley is going to come in
Speaker 1: third or maybe fourth in her own home state. Mark
Speaker 1: it down. Put it down. I'm putting one hundred bucks
Speaker 1: on it. Mark it down. She's going to come in
Speaker 1: third or fourth in her own home state. This person
Speaker 1: is not a good candidate, yea. She is a candidate
Speaker 1: who has again remember what I said earlier, your best day,
Speaker 1: your campaign's your first day. She's on the downhill slope
Speaker 1: in this thing right now, headed toward political oblivion at
Speaker 1: rocket speed. She is not a good candidate. We need
Speaker 1: to have to understand that some people have the gift.
Speaker 1: Nicky Haley does not have the gift. Do any of
Speaker 1: these candidates have the gift besides Donald Trump? And again,
Speaker 1: the gift is a curse. But I don't do you
Speaker 1: see anyone who's like charismatic and who's going to go
Speaker 1: on there and charm the field. Name one of those
Speaker 1: people who has the gift. You can't even the hypotheticals. Okay, well,
Speaker 1: Mike Pence, no, certainly no Scott, Tim Scott maybe gift adjacent,
Speaker 1: but he's not. He's not ready for this thing for
Speaker 1: a host of reasons that need not be discussed. He's
Speaker 1: not going to survive the vetting. Oh Tim Scott isn't. Yeah,
Speaker 1: no way, no fucking way. Let's put it this way.
Speaker 1: South Carolina is not going to produce a presidential candidate
Speaker 1: right now. Right there's just not The flaws are too
Speaker 1: vast for the for the rest of the field, it's
Speaker 1: not going to happen. But none of these people that
Speaker 1: are even perspectives, I mean, Jesus Christ, Josh Holly, ted Cruise,
Speaker 1: even if they wanted to get in right and there
Speaker 1: are still a lot of there like I'm not going
Speaker 1: to run, but they're working out right, right. None of
Speaker 1: them have the gift. Some of them have the gift
Speaker 1: with Republican like own the Libs stuff, right, But that's
Speaker 1: not sufficient to win a presidential nomination. It's not sufficient
Speaker 1: to win a presidential race. And I will tell you
Speaker 1: a great candidate with a bad campaign can sometimes pull
Speaker 1: it off. A bad candidate with a great campaign can
Speaker 1: rarely pull it off. Rick Wilson, there it is, and
Speaker 1: there it is the moment of wisdom. Thank you, Yes,
Speaker 1: I shall not return. That's it for this episode of
Speaker 1: Fast Politics. Tune in every Monday, Wednesday and Friday to
Speaker 1: your the best minds in politics makes sense of all
Speaker 1: this chaos. If you enjoyed what you've heard, please send
Speaker 1: it to a friend and keep the conversation going. And again,
Speaker 1: thanks for listening.