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 Ron De Santis called Trump voters
Speaker 1: listless vessels. Whoops, what does that even mean? We have
Speaker 1: such a great show today. Quick Political Report editor and
Speaker 1: cheap Amy Walter analyzes the latest polls. Then we talked
Speaker 1: Lakota Nation member Jesse Shortball about his documentary Lakota Nation
Speaker 1: Versus the United States. But first we have the host
Speaker 1: of the Enemy's List fan favorite my friend in yours,
Speaker 1: the Lincoln Projects, Rick Wilson. Welcome back, too, Fast Politics,
Speaker 1: Rick Wilson.
Speaker 2: Molly John Fast, zero presence.
Speaker 3: I want to talk to you.
Speaker 1: There's so such a broad spectrum of fuckery to talk
Speaker 1: about today, Like we got to start with your close
Speaker 1: personal friend and man who desp really wants you, Dad
Speaker 1: roger Stone.
Speaker 2: You know, Molly, the reason roger Stone hates me is
Speaker 2: because I'm one of the few people in the world
Speaker 2: who's who's been around long enough now to know that
Speaker 2: Rogerstone's entire life is built on one line of bullshit.
Speaker 2: It's a fake, it's a fraud. Everything about him is
Speaker 2: a fraud. And the fact that he's been caught out,
Speaker 2: uh once again criming for Donald Trump. Criminals don't like
Speaker 2: it when you say, hey, I just saw that guy
Speaker 2: robbing a bank. So you know, look, I'm not really
Speaker 2: worried about Roger being able to kill me at this point.
Speaker 2: First off, he's like ninety seven years old. He's not
Speaker 2: gonna he's not gonna. He's not gonna come to me
Speaker 2: that way. And all of his little proud boy bitch
Speaker 2: minions are going to go to jail. That was his
Speaker 2: little sort of shock troops. What you see in this,
Speaker 2: in this uh, in this documentary on the Storm for
Speaker 2: Cold documentary, is that Stone was behind a lot of
Speaker 2: the plotting and scheming and the inspiration for a lot
Speaker 2: of the plotting and scheming that went into this whole thing.
Speaker 3: Right, A lot of this was his idea.
Speaker 2: Yes, the fake electors is same to have in part
Speaker 2: originated from Roger, and of course it also came out
Speaker 2: of Sydney Powell and the rest of the frame cru Yeah. Right,
Speaker 2: if there's an opposite of a brain trust, it's like
Speaker 2: the brainless trust whatever. These super lawyers around him, and
Speaker 2: so look, Roger is always in trouble. I suspect that
Speaker 2: this documentary. I do know that this video has already
Speaker 2: been in the hands of the January sixth Committee, and
Speaker 2: it's now probably in the hands of Jack Smith. I
Speaker 2: think that the methodical nature of the prosecutions as it's
Speaker 2: gone up and up and up the chain with the
Speaker 2: one six prosecutions, that Roger is preparing for his time.
Speaker 2: As they say in the barrel.
Speaker 3: I mean, do you think you'll go to jail?
Speaker 2: Roger was going to jail before until Trump pardoned him.
Speaker 2: This is a guy who is not going to have
Speaker 2: an easy ride when it comes to sentencing, because in
Speaker 2: part Trump commuted his sentence, and I'm sure there was
Speaker 2: some sort of like go forth and send no more
Speaker 2: commandment after that, but instead Roger said, up, I got
Speaker 2: my sentence commuted, and as the documentary also shows, he
Speaker 2: was asking Trump for a preemptive pardon. That to my mind,
Speaker 2: was the most like revelatory moment in the documentary. He
Speaker 2: wrote Trump an email saying I need a party for
Speaker 2: the things I've done for you and in the attempt
Speaker 2: to steal the election, and I mean, you're just like unbelievable.
Speaker 2: The one more thing about Roger I observed in this
Speaker 2: whole thing. Was that as a sad and lonely old man. Yeah,
Speaker 2: I mean he's a lot of the like the high
Speaker 2: school football star in age twenty five, crews in the
Speaker 2: parking lot in his camaro. Yeah, you can see how
Speaker 2: diminished his world is.
Speaker 1: I really want to talk to you about another person
Speaker 1: you know from this world. One you actually worked for
Speaker 1: America's mayor, hair dye aficionado Rudy Giuliani. I mean, so
Speaker 1: this week we had he's selling his apartment, He's in
Speaker 1: financial trouble. He went down, you know, Hail Mary Pass
Speaker 1: to try to get Trump to cover his legal bills.
Speaker 1: That did not work. Talk to me about how you
Speaker 1: think that went. Can you imagine going down to Trump
Speaker 1: to beg him to pay your legal bills.
Speaker 2: Rudy is a very proud guy. Yeah, Okay, he has
Speaker 2: a very very very healthy Egan from what everybody in
Speaker 2: prior Rudy world is talking about and what everybody in
Speaker 2: the Trumpian demimond that leaks like a sieve is talking about.
Speaker 2: As Rudy went down there, he needs millions of dollars
Speaker 2: and he believes that he had a handshake deal with Trump.
Speaker 2: First off, there's a flag right there. Handshake deal with
Speaker 2: Trump for twenty thousand dollars a day.
Speaker 3: Twenty thousand dollars a day.
Speaker 2: Pretty five thousand dollars a day or twenty or twenty
Speaker 2: five seems like a lot. He says he ran up
Speaker 2: eight hundred thousand legal bills during the space between election
Speaker 2: day and whenever he was thrown off the boat. Trump
Speaker 2: was never going to pay him and is never going
Speaker 2: to pay him, and all these poor son of a
Speaker 2: bitches who do not understand at this point, Molly in
Speaker 2: the Year of Our Lord twenty twenty three, that that
Speaker 2: motherfucker does not pay his lawyers. He just doesn't. But Rudy's,
Speaker 2: Rudy's decline that we're we're now in the and I was,
Speaker 2: you know, I did an interview with Dan Barry from
Speaker 2: the Times article The Times yesterday about Rudy's you know,
Speaker 2: the crisis and the decline and everything else. It reminded me.
Speaker 2: I told Danni's story of the time I ran into
Speaker 2: Rudy and it was at one of the debates in
Speaker 2: twenty sixteen, and he was all up on Trump, and
Speaker 2: I was like, boss, listen, I'm begging you. This guy
Speaker 2: will destroy you. He will absolutely destroy your reputation. Please
Speaker 2: don't do this, Please don't do this. Because my relationship
Speaker 2: with Rudy was always I was a smart guy that
Speaker 2: worked for him, but there was always like a you're
Speaker 2: not a new worker, you don't get it thing that
Speaker 2: underpinned a lot of our interactions over the years.
Speaker 3: Yeah, because you're from Florida, man.
Speaker 2: Sorry, right, However, I am a fucking genius and I
Speaker 2: also and one of the most experienced political consultants in
Speaker 2: the world. But that's just not just let's leave that
Speaker 2: aside for a moment, because my modesty is too great
Speaker 2: to talk about. I was going to say, but my
Speaker 2: consistent record of being right, especially regarding Trump. He just
Speaker 2: kind of shrugged it off, and it was like, you know, hey,
Speaker 2: he gets me. I get him. He's going to take
Speaker 2: care of me. I'm like, oh my god, this fucking
Speaker 2: guy got taken by the worst con artist in America. Yeah,
Speaker 2: by the most obvious, fucking conn artist in America. And
Speaker 2: so here we are. Rudy is broke, he's selling his apartments,
Speaker 2: he's doing cameo videos for people for three hundred bucks.
Speaker 3: Speaking of which Jesse's.
Speaker 2: Thanks you very much. Two fifty. Oh, it's a discount, now,
Speaker 2: I love it.
Speaker 3: It might be somebody's birthday when this show airs. This
Speaker 3: might be the birthday episode. It might be someone's fucking
Speaker 3: birthday tomorrow. God damn it. Go on.
Speaker 2: Yes, Molly, Yes, you're gonna your your thirty fifth birthday
Speaker 2: is wonder celebrate. Yes, and I just I want to
Speaker 2: wish you a very happy in advance.
Speaker 4: No.
Speaker 2: Look, but Rudy, Rudy is He's probably the most extreme
Speaker 2: outlier of the everything Trump touches dies premise. And I
Speaker 2: said this in the CNN documentary. All of us who
Speaker 2: have been around Rudy over the years have said some
Speaker 2: variation on this, whether it's you know me or Ken
Speaker 2: Friedman or John Avlon or anybody. The truth of the
Speaker 2: matter is, if Rudy had stopped, if he had just
Speaker 2: stopped after two thousand and eight, you have gone and
Speaker 2: done the Giuliani Center for Public Governance NYU or whatever
Speaker 2: whatever something. You know, some withdrawal from the from the
Speaker 2: the addiction from the hair. When he needed a public adorage. Well,
Speaker 2: you know what, when he dies in a few years,
Speaker 2: when the cigars take him in a few years, they
Speaker 2: would have named Bridges after him. They would have named
Speaker 2: high schools after him. There would have been a valedictory
Speaker 2: moment in this guy's life that would have said, you know,
Speaker 2: he was complex, he could be a very bad guy.
Speaker 2: But when push came to shof in the moments of
Speaker 2: the worst crisis, he did this. But now his eulogy,
Speaker 2: his memorial, his memory, the thing written on the cenotaph
Speaker 2: of Rudy's life will be that he shamed and humiliated
Speaker 2: himself in service to a con man, an entertainment huckster
Speaker 2: who tried to overthrow the government of the United States
Speaker 2: and spent the remaining years of his life either in
Speaker 2: prison or on probation as a convicted felon. And that
Speaker 2: Rudy was the king of Rico prosecutions when he was
Speaker 2: a US attorney is the richest irony of all Molly. Literally,
Speaker 2: I sat with him at dinners in New York. He's like,
Speaker 2: you see that guy over at that table that was
Speaker 2: like Jimmy the Bone And I put his cousin and
Speaker 2: his brother and his brother in law and jail and this,
Speaker 2: I mean all this crazy shit, right, he knew how
Speaker 2: to Wilbe's cases. How is it that he's in the
Speaker 2: middle of one of these things, building a criminal conspiracy
Speaker 2: against himself, and never has the self awareness to go, hey,
Speaker 2: maybe I've stuck my dick in a light socket. Maybe
Speaker 2: I should stop fucking said light socket because I might
Speaker 2: electrocute myself and burn my dick off. This is something
Speaker 2: he had no self awareness that they couldn't figure out,
Speaker 2: and he thought. And this is part of a broader
Speaker 2: theory that I'm starting to articulate, not just about the conspiracy.
Speaker 2: I think there's been something that's happened to an entire
Speaker 2: generation of Republican leaders that they've lived in this soft
Speaker 2: bubble of fox for so long, and they've decided they
Speaker 2: can get away with any line of bullshit they because
Speaker 2: they're only feeding the bullshit back to their people, and
Speaker 2: the world doesn't operate that way. Now, when they're actually
Speaker 2: having to answer questions under oath, they can't just say, well,
Speaker 2: what about Hunter Biden's laptop and the dick pics?
Speaker 3: Right, So let me ask you a question. Here.
Speaker 1: We are this Republican Party, it's going to be the
Speaker 1: nominee I mean unless I mean, it just seems like
Speaker 1: we are careening into disaster for them.
Speaker 3: Well, deserved yet again.
Speaker 2: Look, Donald Trump's numbers Americas have now had a week
Speaker 2: to process it. Okay, they've had a week to see
Speaker 2: the charges out of Georgia. And you know what's happened
Speaker 2: to his numbers of Republican base voters in the primary voters.
Speaker 2: They've got up again. Yeah, and I'm sorry. I've been
Speaker 2: saying this to people for a year and a half.
Speaker 2: If you think the Republican base vote in the primaries,
Speaker 2: the likely Republican voter profile in the primaries is crying
Speaker 2: out for Glenn Youngkin in a sweater vest or Vivek
Speaker 2: Ramaswami and his sassy comebacks, or Ron DeSantis and his
Speaker 2: weird posthuman android malfunctioning like Lichi software. If you think
Speaker 2: that's what those people are after, it is not get help,
Speaker 2: because they're not. They want the show, the spectacle, the chaos.
Speaker 2: They want Donald Trump and they're not shy about it.
Speaker 2: They tell people this all the time. I don't You
Speaker 2: can focus group the living fuck out of these people,
Speaker 2: and you know what you're gonna find.
Speaker 3: They love Trump.
Speaker 2: They love Trump. And here's the other dirty little secret.
Speaker 2: Most of the people, even in those focus groups that say,
Speaker 2: oh I wish you wouldn't tweet. I hope you know.
Speaker 2: I'd love to have a president who doesn't commit crimes
Speaker 2: every day. You know what, they're still going to do.
Speaker 2: Ninety percent of those fucking people are still going to
Speaker 2: vote for Donald Trump because the behavioral impulses in the
Speaker 2: Republican Party to go back in the nest, to get
Speaker 2: back in the matrix, are so powerful that it's almost irresistible.
Speaker 1: So let's just talk about this for one second. I
Speaker 1: want you to game this out for me. I was
Speaker 1: talking to Nicole Wallace about this yesterday. I feel like
Speaker 1: this you both come from a similar or. You know,
Speaker 1: you were working for Rudy, she was working for Bush.
Speaker 1: I mean, game this out for me. What happens? I mean,
Speaker 1: do they become the wigs? I mean, I mean, does
Speaker 1: No Labels make Trump president again?
Speaker 3: I mean where does this go?
Speaker 2: First off, No Labels is trying to reelect Donald Trump.
Speaker 2: That's they can posture all they want. You know, they
Speaker 2: put up this commonsense policy briefing last week, and it
Speaker 2: turns out the guy that wrote it is a rabid
Speaker 2: Republican who what's Joe Biden impeached and Kamala Harris put
Speaker 2: in prison. So that's great news. But we're going to
Speaker 2: see Trump as the nominee again. We're going to see
Speaker 2: a brutal race where the alternate reality version of everything
Speaker 2: is going to come front and center once again. You know,
Speaker 2: we're going to live and pretend world where even our
Speaker 2: friends in the mainstream media see things like, well the
Speaker 2: hunter budon laptop is very concerning, even though they know
Speaker 2: it's bullshit. We're going to have a hard fight. Look,
Speaker 2: Joe Biden's in a better position than he was in
Speaker 2: twenty twenty. The economies much better were past COVID as
Speaker 2: a rule. I mean, we may have some more like
Speaker 2: adventurous with it, but it's it's not the scope and
Speaker 2: scale that it was in twenty On the economic front,
Speaker 2: we're seeing progress that if it were Donald Trump in
Speaker 2: this position, the people would be screaming from the rooftops.
Speaker 2: It's the greatest, most most brilliant active.
Speaker 3: Genius of all time, right right right.
Speaker 2: But instead now we've got like even allies, I'm like, well,
Speaker 2: I just wish we could have gotten more climate change. Okay,
Speaker 2: take the fucking win, people, take the win.
Speaker 1: But I do want a minute to say progressives have
Speaker 1: been much more in line than you thought they would be.
Speaker 2: I'm happy to say you're right. Yeah, I was concerned
Speaker 2: that they were going to be, you know, grumbling on
Speaker 2: the sidelines. But I think they're getting it, and I
Speaker 2: think I think America is getting it, and I think
Speaker 2: the media is starting to get it as well.
Speaker 3: But the media has been slow.
Speaker 2: They have been slow, and and look, my biggest concern
Speaker 2: a couple of weeks ago was the media was like, well,
Speaker 2: let's cover RFK Junior, like he's a real person that
Speaker 2: came that win, that's gone away now, which I think
Speaker 2: is a sign of maturity that they're not going to
Speaker 2: get played by Steve Bannon's bullshit show. We've got a
Speaker 2: very significant suite of challenges ahead of us. These trials
Speaker 2: are going to be insane. The Republican field is going
Speaker 2: to have some sprintsing back and forth, but it's at
Speaker 2: the end of the day, it's going to end up
Speaker 2: where we think it's going to end up. I mean
Speaker 2: a short of Donald Trump having a massive stroke and
Speaker 2: dying in place, and even then he may still win
Speaker 2: the primary. Right, he's not dead, he's just resting or
Speaker 2: actually being put in prison in communicado that's that.
Speaker 3: Rick Wilson, thank you so much for joining us.
Speaker 2: I am delighted to be with you. As always.
Speaker 1: Amy Walter is the editor in chief of Political Report.
Speaker 3: Welcome back, Too Fast Politics, Amy Walter, Well, thank you.
Speaker 5: I'm glad to be here and to hopefully be fast.
Speaker 3: Yes, you just well, hopefully people just listen to this
Speaker 3: at two x speeds, sad, very speedy.
Speaker 1: I wanted to get you here because I think of
Speaker 1: you as the person and there are other people too,
Speaker 1: but I think of you as the person who sort
Speaker 1: of knows what the landscape looks like for the House
Speaker 1: and the Senate and also the presidency. But like that,
Speaker 1: you really have a sort of a lot of data
Speaker 1: and history of doing this, so you really are able
Speaker 1: to sort of pull from previous decades.
Speaker 3: Frank, get that you're that old, but you know.
Speaker 5: Well I am that old, but you know, I like
Speaker 5: to think of it as seasoned, right, And yes, I
Speaker 5: try to spend a lot of time pulling back from
Speaker 5: the weeds, because we all get caught in the weeds.
Speaker 5: It's understandable it is hard to take in all this
Speaker 5: information day in and day out and try to make
Speaker 5: sense of it. You've got to really make sure you
Speaker 5: have some perspective on it. And I think we're living
Speaker 5: at a time where, in some ways our politics is
Speaker 5: so incredibly stable. Just think about what has happened over
Speaker 5: the course of the last three years between pandemics, impeachments,
Speaker 5: and economic fallout from the pandemics, and the facts that
Speaker 5: you've had January sixth and indictments and all of the
Speaker 5: stuff that happened, and yet opinions about former President Trump
Speaker 5: and President Biden remain pretty stable.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's a really interesting and important point that I
Speaker 1: don't know that we spend enough time talking about, which
Speaker 1: is that it seems like very.
Speaker 3: Little moves the needle in a certain way.
Speaker 5: That's exactly right. And so if people are really just now,
Speaker 5: they are so committed to their team, to their side,
Speaker 5: however you want to describe it, they're not moving off
Speaker 5: of them regardless of events. So what events tend to
Speaker 5: do then is either energize or depress one side or
Speaker 5: the other. Or they may bring people who are not
Speaker 5: jersey wearers, in other words, people who do not spend
Speaker 5: their time they get about politics, they don't wear wake
Speaker 5: up and wear a blue jersey or red jersey every morning.
Speaker 5: It gets them engaged or disengaged versus the old days
Speaker 5: when we would look and you know, I'm old enough
Speaker 5: to remember the nineteen eighty eight election where you know
Speaker 5: there were big blowouts in presidential elections, that there could
Speaker 5: be these big wave elections from year to year.
Speaker 2: Those just don't happen.
Speaker 1: So is this a Dave Wasserman moment where we're talking
Speaker 1: about it will all come down to turnout.
Speaker 5: I think it all comes down to a lot of things, right, So,
Speaker 5: of course turnout always matters, and the kind of people
Speaker 5: that turn out, and this is always the challenge. I
Speaker 5: think in trying to understand who turns out. We have
Speaker 5: pretty rough data. We can say, well, what percent of
Speaker 5: the electorate is Latino, what percent of the electorate is
Speaker 5: under thirty, But who those people are within that demographic
Speaker 5: matters too. And so what we saw, for example, the
Speaker 5: analysis after the twenty twenty two election about Latino voters.
Speaker 5: The Latino voters who turned out in twenty twenty two
Speaker 5: were more likely to be supportive of Democrats. But a
Speaker 5: lot of the Latino voters who voted in twenty twenty
Speaker 5: but and then show up in twenty twenty two, those
Speaker 5: voters are more likely to be supportive of Republicans. So
Speaker 5: if those voters show up in twenty twenty four, right, right,
Speaker 5: it's going to change them. It's going to change the map.
Speaker 5: So it's not just what percent of the electorate is X,
Speaker 5: it's the kinds of people within that And that is
Speaker 5: really hard to get from such a crude measurement that
Speaker 5: we have in traditional pulling.
Speaker 1: Right, Yeah, And I mean that is one of the
Speaker 1: polling problems I think. So let's talk about that in
Speaker 1: relation to the Senate map, because I mean, I know
Speaker 1: we're still eighteen months away from it, but we've spent
Speaker 1: so much time on this presidential and very little on
Speaker 1: the Senate map. I feel like in the mainstream media
Speaker 1: it's a very hard map for Democrats. But it's also
Speaker 1: a map where if you ran the wrong people, like
Speaker 1: in twenty twenty two, you could lose as a Republican.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 5: I'm fascinated by this too, Mali, because we have two
Speaker 5: ends that are about to collide. In listening to Eletteresting,
Speaker 5: one is we have a map that you're right, on
Speaker 5: its face, looks really bad for Democrats and historically li
Speaker 5: since twenty sixteen, It's been really hard for a candidate
Speaker 5: that is of one party to win a Senate race
Speaker 5: in a state that that party's presidential nominee does not
Speaker 5: also win. In those last two presidential elections twenty sixteen
Speaker 5: and twenty twenty, only Susan Collins has been successful in
Speaker 5: winning an a state where the presidential nominee of her
Speaker 5: party did not win. So obviously Trump lost main she
Speaker 5: won me. Now, can three Democrat buck that? Can we
Speaker 5: just stop the death for one second? What about Lisa Murkowski?
Speaker 5: A little more complicated, but that same kind of idea, Right, Well,
Speaker 5: I coult her in a different category only because they
Speaker 5: have that ranked choice voting.
Speaker 3: Right. Oh, interesting, Okay, continue.
Speaker 5: But it's a very fair point if you then look
Speaker 5: and you say, all right, based on that, Even in
Speaker 5: twenty twenty two, Mally, all the Democrats who won, Look,
Speaker 5: they had tough races, and they were in swing states,
Speaker 5: but those were also states that Biden carried. Democrats didn't
Speaker 5: need to win any red states in order to hold
Speaker 5: the Senate. This time they do. Now we also know
Speaker 5: though that beyond.
Speaker 6: The fact that the candidates on the Republican side are unknown,
Speaker 6: and to your point, they could end up being really flawed,
Speaker 6: and right, they could carry Lake exactly, we could have
Speaker 6: somebody like Kerry Lake. But let's even go to the
Speaker 6: three that matter, West Virginia, Montana, and Ohio. I say
Speaker 6: they matter because if Republicans win two of those, it's
Speaker 6: game over. It doesn't matter what happens in Arizona, Wisconsin,
Speaker 6: or Pennsylvania. Now, West Virginia obviously being the toughest, but
Speaker 6: you look at Joe bang and you go, well, the
Speaker 6: I has won in presidential years where obviously no Democrat
Speaker 6: carried that state. I don't remember how much Barack Obama
Speaker 6: lost that state when Mansion won it, but obviously he
Speaker 6: had to outperform Obama considerably. Now he's got to outperform
Speaker 6: even more, right, kuse the state's even more republican. And
Speaker 6: then you even go to a place like Ohio, where
Speaker 6: you know, we look at that state now and we go, boy,
Speaker 6: that's a really republican state. But in twenty twelve, the
Speaker 6: last time that Jared Brown was on the ballot with
Speaker 6: the president in a presidential year, he got the same
Speaker 6: percent of the vote as Obama did. They both got
Speaker 6: fifty one percent. Joe Biden's not gonna get fifty one
Speaker 6: percent in all. And then Montana again, another place where
Speaker 6: Tester has pretty consistently outrun a presidential nominee, He's going
Speaker 6: to have to do it again. So we have two
Speaker 6: places where they have outrun the presidential nominee, one place
Speaker 6: where they have it. We're in a different era.
Speaker 2: Now. That's why I say there are these two factors colliding.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 5: It's like it looks as if we nationalized everything. Yet
Speaker 5: these three have a history of overcoming the drag of
Speaker 5: the national party brand, and Republicans also have their own
Speaker 5: intraparty challenges right right, who may be problematic, So that
Speaker 5: all politics is local between and all politics as national
Speaker 5: really will come to a head in those third places.
Speaker 3: I want to talk about share O Brown for a minute.
Speaker 1: If your shared you're feeling pretty good about that ballot initiative.
Speaker 1: I know ballot initiatives tend to lean more liberal than
Speaker 1: the candidates, but that has to feel like a good
Speaker 1: sign for him, right, Ohio ballad initiative in August.
Speaker 5: Absolutely, because it wasn't a narrow win one and two.
Speaker 5: It really energized the kinds of voters that Brown needs
Speaker 5: to show up in twenty twenty four, saying this really matters.
Speaker 5: When you participate, it matters, and then it makes a difference. Now,
Speaker 5: of course, if your shared Brown, you also really would
Speaker 5: prefer that the actual ballot initiative on abortion would be
Speaker 5: in twenty twenty four, not twenty right three, right right,
Speaker 5: But their contention, and my colleague Jessica Taylor wrote about this.
Speaker 5: If you go to Cookpolitical dot com you can read
Speaker 5: her story about this. The your side contends that, look,
Speaker 5: even though it's not on the ballot in twenty twenty four,
Speaker 5: the energizing and the organizing matter. Right that you organize
Speaker 5: voters to show up and vote in twenty twenty three,
Speaker 5: you can go back to those voters in twenty twenty
Speaker 5: four and say, you know, continue the progress we made.
Speaker 5: The other thing that Brown has going for him, as
Speaker 5: you pointed out, is, you know, he's seen as kind
Speaker 5: of his own person, right. He's a unique kind of
Speaker 5: brand in an era where so many candidates are seen
Speaker 5: as kind of cookie cutter, right, or you know they
Speaker 5: just sort of ear liberal democrat, you're conservative Republican. He
Speaker 5: fits into that style of uh, you know, populist working
Speaker 5: class democrat who look, he's not he's not a moderate,
Speaker 5: he's not conservative, but he's hard to brand as a
Speaker 5: sort of a typical Democrat.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it feels like he has sort of been able
Speaker 1: to create his own thing. I don't want to compare
Speaker 1: him to Susan Collins because he's certainly nothing like Susan Collins,
Speaker 1: but Susan Collins had a similar people. They thought of
Speaker 1: her as more like Angus King and less like, Yeah,
Speaker 1: she's not Ted Cruz.
Speaker 5: Nobody's gonna nobody's gonna believe it. If you ran a
Speaker 5: campaign against Susan cons and said she's just like Ted Cruz,
Speaker 5: everybody in Maine would laugh you out of the state.
Speaker 5: But the one thing that I think is challenging for Brown,
Speaker 5: as I said, you know, he he basically got the
Speaker 5: same percent of the vote as Oba. In some ways,
Speaker 5: you know, Ohio, it has moved much more to the
Speaker 5: right in this last That feels again not that it
Speaker 5: would be these voters saying I'm against Shared Brown, but
Speaker 5: that it's harder for a Democrat to be able to
Speaker 5: make the case. I mean, you know, you talk to
Speaker 5: somebody like well, we saw it in twenty twenty two
Speaker 5: with the Democratic nominee running for Congress there who had
Speaker 5: a similar message to Shared Brown, and you know, he
Speaker 5: would go into these places make the same sort of
Speaker 5: pitch that Shared Brown did get really good response, and
Speaker 5: yet voters would go, yeah, that's that sounds great, But
Speaker 5: I'm voting for the Republican. I'm voting for the Trump candidate.
Speaker 5: And the having a D after your name is is
Speaker 5: much more of a drag now than it was even
Speaker 5: back when Obama was was running or in twenty eighteen,
Speaker 5: the last time that Shared Brown was on the ticket.
Speaker 1: So let's talk about the House, because it does seem
Speaker 1: to me. I was writing about George Santos this week,
Speaker 1: and it really does seem like these New York Republican seeds,
Speaker 1: these guys all won by like three thousand votes, I mean,
Speaker 1: just unbelievable.
Speaker 5: And they are being overshadowed by not just George Santos,
Speaker 5: because even if you're a Republican An upstate, you're getting
Speaker 5: asked about George Santos all the time, but you're getting
Speaker 5: overshadowed by Trump all the time. You are right that
Speaker 5: if you look at New York in California, two states
Speaker 5: where Democrats were really underperformed, turnout was really low mistakes
Speaker 5: were made exactly. You can look at both of those
Speaker 5: states and go, look, turnout will be higher in twenty
Speaker 5: twenty four. And so all Democrats need to do is
Speaker 5: put a decent candidate on the ballot, and the turnout
Speaker 5: the higher. You know what, that whole high, higher tide
Speaker 5: lifting all boats. But just that that turnout is going
Speaker 5: to be enough to get those Democrats over the top.
Speaker 3: And that's true in California too.
Speaker 5: Yeah, so the freshmen are the ones who are in
Speaker 5: the hardest position. And look, we saw this in twenty
Speaker 5: twenty where Democrats fell short in the House or those
Speaker 5: races they picked up in the midterm election in seats
Speaker 5: that were really basically in Republican districts. Charleston, South Carolina,
Speaker 5: Oklahoma City, some of the one of those upstate New
Speaker 5: York districts. Right, these were places that they won in
Speaker 5: a great year, but when when turnout turned back to
Speaker 5: normal and we got to a presidential year, they just
Speaker 5: couldn't hold up.
Speaker 2: They just couldn't hold them.
Speaker 5: The other thing Democrats have going for them is that
Speaker 5: these redistricting cases actually are breaking their way.
Speaker 3: Yeah, so me isign.
Speaker 5: Yeah, in a way that we really hadn't predicted. So
Speaker 5: between new districts in Alabama potentially Louisiana. Now there's movement
Speaker 5: in Florida as well. Well, this isn't twenty seats that
Speaker 5: are going to shift. But as we know, when you're
Speaker 5: talking about a five seat majority, you put three Democratic
Speaker 5: seats now into the mix. Boy, that makes a difference. Right,
Speaker 5: you're more than halfway there.
Speaker 1: I want to ask you a question about leadership. So
Speaker 1: you have McCarthy. By all outside indications, the man is
Speaker 1: not a whipper, right of a whipper. He is really
Speaker 1: kind of he always feels like he's a little bit behind.
Speaker 3: And you have McConnell.
Speaker 1: Who is known as kind of a genius at winning votes,
Speaker 1: and he's not himself clearly, and also he is being
Speaker 1: targeted by Trump and by Trump's people who are furious
Speaker 1: with him. So I'm curious, like what you think the
Speaker 1: effect and it may be nothing, but if you think
Speaker 1: that this leadership problem will hurt as you go down.
Speaker 3: The ticket, yeah, you know.
Speaker 5: What I find kind of interesting though, is after the
Speaker 5: vote on the speaker that took the fifteen ballots and
Speaker 5: all that, the initial response from a lot of media
Speaker 5: folks was Okay, well, good luck Kevin McCarthy making it
Speaker 5: to the end of the year, right, like you're going
Speaker 5: to get ousted or you're going to get rolled. This
Speaker 5: guy is just not going to be able to be effective.
Speaker 5: And you know, actually that hasn't happened, and he's kept
Speaker 5: his team together and he's gotten the votes he's needed
Speaker 5: time after time. Now to your point, it's still at
Speaker 5: any moment the ice could break and he's in trouble.
Speaker 5: But I'll say this way, it's much less chaotic, and
Speaker 5: I think many assumed it would be in the House,
Speaker 5: and that while the Freedom Caucus is still flexing their muscle,
Speaker 5: I think that McCarthy and leadership or however this has
Speaker 5: worked out, has been effective in allowing them to blow
Speaker 5: off steam in other ways. Right, Oh, you want to
Speaker 5: go put a committee together, go after Hunter Biden?
Speaker 2: Great, go to you that you want to.
Speaker 5: Talk about impeaching my Orcus Okay, right, like you guys,
Speaker 5: go google those things.
Speaker 2: Just let's not shut down the government.
Speaker 1: Right, But doesn't that ultimately hurt the hurt the swingy candidates.
Speaker 3: Doesn't that hurt the Purple State Republicans?
Speaker 1: I mean, the reason why Paul Ryan wouldn't let people
Speaker 1: do that was because ultimately, and the reason why Nancy
Speaker 1: Pelosi wouldn't let people do that the sort of the
Speaker 1: left and the right, was because they knew it would
Speaker 1: hurt the swingy candidates.
Speaker 5: That's right, and that's what we're going to have to
Speaker 5: find out is Look, I think at the same time,
Speaker 5: you could argue that one of the things that really
Speaker 5: hurt the swingy candidates in let's say the twenty eighteen election.
Speaker 5: Trump was obviously a major factor, but so was the
Speaker 5: votes taken on overturning Obamacare and the tax cuts, right,
Speaker 5: those were also really problematic for Republicans. In this case,
Speaker 5: I do think the thing that could be most problematic
Speaker 5: for those swing voters kind of know it is an
Speaker 5: impeachment against Biden. Thus far, McCarthy has kept the door open.
Speaker 5: Oh yeah, no, we're going to investigate, We're going down
Speaker 5: all the roads. We're gonna do what we can without
Speaker 5: giving them the aok on, let's go full on, you know,
Speaker 5: so that in twenty twenty four we're impeaching Biden. Now
Speaker 5: the pressure it will be very interesting to see where
Speaker 5: Biden case goes. We obviously case with Trump. So but
Speaker 5: if I'm a House member. Right now, my biggest concern
Speaker 5: if I'm a vulnerable House Republican, the one thing that
Speaker 5: I cannot control but that has the most impact on
Speaker 5: my chances to win is Donald Trump. They can't do
Speaker 5: anything other than try to show some independence from him.
Speaker 7: And then they get crushed in the primary without drawing
Speaker 7: a primary. So actually they're in some ways, it's much
Speaker 7: better than it was in twenty eight.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 5: He's up present, so they don't have to run around saying,
Speaker 5: what do you think about this?
Speaker 2: How come you voted with him on that?
Speaker 5: Now it's just like, look, he's this, I'm going to
Speaker 5: do what I do in the House, and I've been
Speaker 5: doing all these great things and blah blah blah. Oh yeah,
Speaker 5: then there's Donald Trump. You bring with him on this,
Speaker 5: but whatever Joe Biden's worse and then pivot back. Right,
Speaker 5: That's that's going to be their play. But that that
Speaker 5: top of the ticket drag is going to be a
Speaker 5: bigger problem for them than whatever happens.
Speaker 2: I think on the House side.
Speaker 1: Amy, I hope you will come back.
Speaker 3: So interesting, so important, So many months still to go.
Speaker 5: So many months, so so many months.
Speaker 3: Oh my god, it's a lot of months.
Speaker 1: Jesse short Bull is a member of the Ogla La
Speaker 1: Lacodaation tribe. I'm the director of Lacodaination Versus United States.
Speaker 1: Welcome too fast politics, Chelsey.
Speaker 4: Oh, thank you, Molly. Pleasure to be here.
Speaker 3: So let's talk about this movie. First. Explain to us how.
Speaker 1: You've decided to do this movie the Lakota Nation versus
Speaker 1: the United States.
Speaker 4: Yeah. Yeah, so, Molly, how I became involved with this
Speaker 4: project involved quite a bit of synchronicity. I grew up
Speaker 4: in South Dakota. I knew of our Treaty councils. I've
Speaker 4: heard of the Treaty before, never quite too familiar.
Speaker 2: With it, but I was aware of it.
Speaker 3: Explain to us what the treaty is.
Speaker 4: Yeah, the Treaty is basically the document that sets everything
Speaker 4: for our tribe's governance today and everything that we have,
Speaker 4: our healthcare, education, and it's basically the foundation of how
Speaker 4: we exist today. And it also involves our land, which
Speaker 4: is predominantly centered on the Black Hills in South Dakota,
Speaker 4: and for our indigenous nation in South Dakota. The Treaty
Speaker 4: is something that's very much alive and discussed every day
Speaker 4: and is a part of everyday governance through these sovereign nations.
Speaker 1: I want to give a little backstory for people who
Speaker 1: don't completely know the story here. In nineteen eighty, the
Speaker 1: United States Supreme Court ordered one hundred million dollars to
Speaker 1: be paid to the Great Sioux Nation, which is the tribe.
Speaker 2: Right, Yeah, the Great Sioux Nation, that's correct.
Speaker 1: After ruling that the US government broke a nineteenth century
Speaker 1: treaty by taking control of the Black Hills from this group, from.
Speaker 3: Your group, which includes the Lakotas.
Speaker 2: Yes, that's correct.
Speaker 1: So now this sum it has been put in escrow
Speaker 1: and it's now two billion dollars.
Speaker 2: Yep, that's right.
Speaker 1: The money has been sitting there because now explain to
Speaker 1: us why exactly what happened?
Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, Well, to the people, it was never a
Speaker 4: question of money, and today is still never a question
Speaker 4: of money because there is no amount of money that
Speaker 4: the ocetti chacolin, or the term that's used to describe
Speaker 4: all of the tribes together. It's impossible to put a
Speaker 4: monetary value on this place because for Lakota culture, Dakota culture,
Speaker 4: and Dakota culture, it's how that culture was emerged from.
Speaker 4: It came from there. It's a covenant that can't have
Speaker 4: a price on it. I think it's really remarkable that
Speaker 4: our people, despite economic challenges, despite immense poverty, continue to
Speaker 4: refuse that money.
Speaker 1: Right, so there is two billion dollars in a bank account.
Speaker 1: Can you explain to me why you can't just take
Speaker 1: the two billion dollars and buy the land.
Speaker 4: That's a good point that sort of discussion, as you know,
Speaker 4: using that money or rant, you know, kind of using
Speaker 4: it looking at as rant or a payment and to
Speaker 4: use that money to purchase land. But I think that
Speaker 4: it's also a very slippery slope for our tribes as
Speaker 4: once you get a hold of money and you have money, well,
Speaker 4: then things start to change. You know, maybe we do this,
Speaker 4: maybe we do that, and then there's a very immense
Speaker 4: amount of distrust with money and that what it can
Speaker 4: do to people and some of the decisions that can
Speaker 4: lead to less than desirable outcomes. We don't want to
Speaker 4: go any of that route. I mean, our people whole firm,
Speaker 4: They just want the land. They don't care about the money.
Speaker 4: What's on the land right now, Well, it's you know,
Speaker 4: South Dakota. One of it's primary industries is tourism and
Speaker 4: Black Hills are a tourist haven. Of course, there's the
Speaker 4: Custer National Forest, Black Hills National Forest, there's several national parks,
Speaker 4: and then of course Mount Rushmore.
Speaker 1: Oh wow, that's so interesting. So talk to about where
Speaker 1: you are with this struggle right.
Speaker 4: Now, Molly. You know, our people since the time of warfare,
Speaker 4: so late eighteen sixties till today, the time that there
Speaker 4: was bloodshed, our relatives experienced Immen's tragedies. But ever since
Speaker 4: that time, there have always been people committed to the
Speaker 4: sovereignty of our Indian nations and the upholding of the treaty.
Speaker 4: A lot of those people will never know their names,
Speaker 4: but it has come down through the generations and I
Speaker 4: think that you know, in the movie, we showcase that
Speaker 4: as early as eighteen ninety, our tribal leadership has been
Speaker 4: trying to get some sort of remedy. The decision to
Speaker 4: take the Black Hills was in eighteen seventy seven, and
Speaker 4: then by eighteen ninety our people started to take action
Speaker 4: against the United States to try to uphold them to
Speaker 4: what they said they would do. And I think that
Speaker 4: through that time, you know, they're there's been hope, but
Speaker 4: there's also been We've been told no things have not
Speaker 4: gone in our favor, and things look very bleak.
Speaker 2: I think now though, at least.
Speaker 4: In the short time that I've been paying close attention,
Speaker 4: I think that the optimism for the United States to
Speaker 4: resolve this somehow has been probably at its highest that
Speaker 4: at least I can recollect. And I think that's because
Speaker 4: you know, we have a Native woman in the Department
Speaker 4: of Interior Secretary Debt Halan. I think that really stimulated
Speaker 4: a new sense of optimism that maybe we can exert
Speaker 4: some sort of influence at the highest levels there in
Speaker 4: Washington that you know, hey, this still matters. It's very
Speaker 4: much matters to a lot of people, and you know, legally,
Speaker 4: you know, again, we uphold our end of the bargain
Speaker 4: of the treaty. It's never been a relic, it's never
Speaker 4: been an antique or a scrap of paper that to
Speaker 4: no value. We've always upheld our end of the bargain.
Speaker 4: And now, like one of our elders, stay Milo Yellow
Speaker 4: here in the film, we're still waiting for the United
Speaker 4: States to do the same.
Speaker 3: Right, right, right? What will the next steps be?
Speaker 4: Yeah, well, I think that they're already actively going Mali
Speaker 4: because once the current administration. The Biden administration came into office,
Speaker 4: people were trying to take advantage of that momentum, and
Speaker 4: I think that for the first time, I mean, and
Speaker 4: the Biden administration, you know, set a standard about how
Speaker 4: they were going to work with tribes government to government,
Speaker 4: and I think that what we're kind of seeing is
Speaker 4: and this is maybe behind the scenes. Most people may
Speaker 4: not see this actively or hear about it in the news,
Speaker 4: but I think that our tribal governments are treaty governments
Speaker 4: are looking at ways with the United States to see how,
Speaker 4: at least in the terms of public land stewardship co
Speaker 4: management are possible as a first stepping stone. I think
Speaker 4: that is actively being pursued as we speak. Anything more
Speaker 4: than that, as far as land return, that might be
Speaker 4: a longer term picture, because the Black Hills have an
Speaker 4: incredible amount of public lands that are federally control and
Speaker 4: so I think those wheels are turning, and it's just
Speaker 4: a question of what that's going to look like as
Speaker 4: this administration comes to the close of this term.
Speaker 1: I spend a lot of time thinking about what justice
Speaker 1: would look like for Indigenous people in.
Speaker 3: This country, and I'm curious what you think it would look.
Speaker 4: Like there's a couple of things that at around my
Speaker 4: mind there, Molly, I think first and foremost, I look
Speaker 4: at our young people, and our young people are a
Speaker 4: good reflection of what needs to be done. Our young
Speaker 4: people have the hardest burden to carry, and some of
Speaker 4: that burden is way too much for a young person
Speaker 4: to have. And I think that until we can have
Speaker 4: be satisfied that they have a quality of life that
Speaker 4: can be as safe as possible, maybe safe as other communities,
Speaker 4: you know, in the United States. And I know that
Speaker 4: nothing's perfect or there's no challenges, not wherever you go.
Speaker 4: But to get us to some level where our young
Speaker 4: people feel good about their future and feel good about themselves,
Speaker 4: to me, that would be the ultimate victory. So how
Speaker 4: does that relate to land. Well, again, our land and
Speaker 4: people are we view ourselves as interconnected to one another.
Speaker 4: So I think that the reflection in the land is
Speaker 4: also reflected in the condition of the land is also
Speaker 4: reflected in the condition of the people. But at the
Speaker 4: end of the day, Molly, I mean, yeah, I want
Speaker 4: land returned, I want sacred sites to be returned. I
Speaker 4: want try sovereignty to be acknowledged. For how sacred it
Speaker 4: is and how unique it is, but nothing else. I
Speaker 4: want kids to have a good future and I want
Speaker 4: them to have a better quality alife.
Speaker 1: So I want to talk to you about that because
Speaker 1: one of the things that I know that the reporting
Speaker 1: sort of bears out is that growing up on the reservation,
Speaker 1: that a lot of your young people are struggling and
Speaker 1: that they're not necessarily getting all of the advantages they
Speaker 1: should be.
Speaker 3: Would you say that's fair?
Speaker 1: And is there a way for the federal government to
Speaker 1: give indigenous people more?
Speaker 4: I think it's a mix. I worked in tribal government, Molly,
Speaker 4: and you know, I know that a lot of times
Speaker 4: you can throw money at things, right, Sometimes if it's
Speaker 4: a fire, it does no good.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 4: I do think that you look at the boarding school
Speaker 4: and brutal assimilation that our people went through, I think
Speaker 4: one of the things that need to happen, and I
Speaker 4: don't know how it can happen, but almost a reverse
Speaker 4: engineered sort of model that helps people undo a lot
Speaker 4: of the traumas that are stacked up on each other
Speaker 4: through the generations and still much very alive in people,
Speaker 4: whether or not it's their trauma or maybe their relatives
Speaker 4: trauma from generations back. That is the really big course
Speaker 4: of attack is helping people to feel good. And like
Speaker 4: you said, Molly, our young people know that things are wrong,
Speaker 4: they know that things aren't safe, they know that the
Speaker 4: world around them is hope is hard to find, and
Speaker 4: I think that there's a massive amount of responsibility on
Speaker 4: the shoulders of the government. How we work together to
Speaker 4: try and undo that, I'm not too sure how that
Speaker 4: can be done, but we do know that if we
Speaker 4: can take care of people helped them to feel good
Speaker 4: about themselves, I think that that can get us to
Speaker 4: a point where we can start to undo, you know,
Speaker 4: like the cycles that our parents, you know who went
Speaker 4: through the boarding school, and including my own father, who
Speaker 4: is a part of that generation, start to undo that
Speaker 4: and go into opposite direction.
Speaker 1: It's funny because I have a friend whose mother was
Speaker 1: Japanese and put in a tournament camp in California, and
Speaker 1: she told me the story of her grandmother burning down
Speaker 1: their house as they laughed. And I think a lot
Speaker 1: about this sort of collective generational trauma, right. I come
Speaker 1: from a family that came over in the eighteen hundreds
Speaker 1: during the programs for Indigenous people. They're living on the land,
Speaker 1: they were robbed sometimes and you know, you are living
Speaker 1: through this trauma again and again in a certain way.
Speaker 4: Yeah, you know a lot of the times we get
Speaker 4: the counter argument, you know, like, well, the people that
Speaker 4: done you guys wrong are gone, they're they don't live
Speaker 4: no more. And I didn't do anything to you know,
Speaker 4: exacerbate anything. We get that argument, you know, like it's
Speaker 4: in the past and you can't change the past. Well,
Speaker 4: here's the thing, of course, people come and go. Our
Speaker 4: lives are very short, and time goes by. It may
Speaker 4: seem like it goes by forever, but it goes by
Speaker 4: really fast. I think that something systemically started back in
Speaker 4: that time of war and deceit and bloodshed that is
Speaker 4: still very much active. It's not a person, but it
Speaker 4: still continues to this day. And our people are still
Speaker 4: under duress. And what is this faceless thing? You know,
Speaker 4: we know the ingredients trauma, we know racism, we know
Speaker 4: that we see it, but how do we see the
Speaker 4: whole thing? Expose it for what it is and then
Speaker 4: try to address it because it's not working. And I
Speaker 4: can take anybody, come come visit me, and I'll say,
Speaker 4: would you want to trade places? With anybody here, and
Speaker 4: I don't think the answer would be yes, because there's
Speaker 4: something wrong and we have to and I think too
Speaker 4: Mally that sometimes we become very numb to it. It
Speaker 4: becomes something that we got to really think that this
Speaker 4: isn't right. I'm not sure how to do it, but
Speaker 4: it has to be done right.
Speaker 1: No, no, I agree, and it's such an important thing.
Speaker 1: And I hope that Secretary Holland will be able to
Speaker 1: write this or to start, you know that the Biden
Speaker 1: administration will be able to start writing this wrong.
Speaker 3: Tell us about the movie, Molly.
Speaker 4: For Laura, my co director, and everybody that is involved,
Speaker 4: this movie is a superhero movie to us. And I
Speaker 4: say that because everybody that we feature, which is tribal
Speaker 4: members from throughout the different resermeations in South Dakota, I
Speaker 4: see them as superheroes. These are people, whether they or
Speaker 4: not they're involved in the day to day treating matters
Speaker 4: or just a regular person as anybody else is. They
Speaker 4: represent a cross section of the beauty of Lakota culture,
Speaker 4: the resilience of Lakota culture, and the wisdom of Lakota culture.
Speaker 4: And anybody can learn from these people. We all can
Speaker 4: learn from each other, and these people have something to
Speaker 4: say that can help anyone throughout the course of their
Speaker 4: day because they just they uphold a standard amongst themselves
Speaker 4: that is just really special. And they're superheroes to me.
Speaker 1: So everyone needs to see the movie. Thank you so much, Jesse,
Speaker 1: I hope you'll come back.
Speaker 2: Oh, thank you so much, Molly. It's been a pleasure.
Speaker 1: They're no momental fuck Rick Wilson, you are a special
Speaker 1: celebrity guest for Fuckeray. Only you ever get to stay
Speaker 1: and do with us, no one else, not even James Carvel.
Speaker 3: Okay, if we're going to talk about fuckery, do you
Speaker 3: have a moment of fuckery?
Speaker 2: I have a superb moment of fuckery.
Speaker 3: Good. Great, let's hear it.
Speaker 2: The greatest moment of fuckery this week was the re
Speaker 2: or two clever by half bullshit that came out of
Speaker 2: the DeSantis super pac this week where they leaked their
Speaker 2: debate prep strategy. In politics, we call it a red
Speaker 2: box where it's a way for a super pac to
Speaker 2: legally communicate with the campaign. Oh interesting, they released their
Speaker 2: debate prep memos. Now, the guy that wrote the memo
Speaker 2: named Jeff row He's DeSantis uber consultant.
Speaker 1: Okay, if you read Puck, you will know all about
Speaker 1: Jeff Row.
Speaker 2: Yes, yes, Anyway, Jeff Row's memo when it started circulating
Speaker 2: immediately inside the consulting community of those of us who
Speaker 2: have done debate prep at the at the highest levels,
Speaker 2: we're all reading it, going the fuck is this? It
Speaker 2: read like something I swear to you. If one of
Speaker 2: my minions had brought me this plan and said this
Speaker 2: is our debate prep memo for the state Assembly race
Speaker 2: in bumfuck Arkansas, I would have gone, you're fired. That's ridiculous,
Speaker 2: that's so amateurish. What are you doing? It was so
Speaker 2: bad and so amateurs And it just goes to show
Speaker 2: that Ron DeSantis, for all his reputations being a smart guy,
Speaker 2: is what I call a dumb smart guy. He's smart
Speaker 2: on paper, he's dome in reality. So that moment of
Speaker 2: fuckery cost them tens of millions of dollars from Jeff
Speaker 2: Row's beach house fund, as I call it.
Speaker 1: So let me ask you about that, because that's also
Speaker 1: my moment of fuckery, that leaked debate thing where it said,
Speaker 1: you know, attack the vac twice, attack right, I mean
Speaker 1: attack Joe Biden six times.
Speaker 3: I mean it had sort of numera.
Speaker 1: It had pieces of numerology in it too, was totally fascinating.
Speaker 1: My question was, so you think Jeff Road late to
Speaker 1: that and not someone like this is not Trump World
Speaker 1: just going.
Speaker 2: After these red box links. They're public but obscure, if
Speaker 2: that makes sense. Like nobody publicized it and said, hey,
Speaker 2: look here everyone in the world. Right, someone said to
Speaker 2: a cutout, hey, you know, we've got a lot of
Speaker 2: ins This might be really helpful to you at Axiomstrategies
Speaker 2: dot com, slash our fucking stupid debate plan dot org,
Speaker 2: dot mill dot ru. The stupidity of the way they
Speaker 2: did it is rivaled only by the weakness of the
Speaker 2: council they gave Ronda Santa. It's like, here's one of
Speaker 2: the tips they put in there that I just loved that.
Speaker 2: It just like two of the tips that killed me.
Speaker 2: The first one was show warmth.
Speaker 3: I'm like that, I'll do it.
Speaker 2: Show warmp what you're gonna roast him at four hundred
Speaker 2: for thirty minutes?
Speaker 3: I mean, also show warmth? What does that mean? Like
Speaker 3: go over?
Speaker 1: And I mean how Chris Christy right?
Speaker 2: And the and the other was take a sledgehammer to
Speaker 2: Vivic Ramaswami. This is a reflection of the reality where
Speaker 2: Rodnes Sennys's campaign is, is that he has now behind
Speaker 2: in both national and state polls in New Hampshire, Iowa,
Speaker 2: South Carolina behind Vi Swammy, right, who.
Speaker 3: Is basically running on it's not even clear.
Speaker 2: What no Vivick Ramaswami is running on the troll platform, right,
Speaker 2: you know, he's basically the candidate from you know, our
Speaker 2: four chan.
Speaker 1: Well, his whole his whole presidency is that he's gonna
Speaker 1: pardon Trump.
Speaker 2: Yeah, good luck, have fun storm in the castle. Although
Speaker 2: I just had a moment where I saw like and
Speaker 2: Trump was a vivic. I need to come to the
Speaker 2: White House over to thank you. And then he murders
Speaker 2: him and he sits at the desk. That's the end
Speaker 2: of this season of House of Cards.
Speaker 3: It's House of Cards if everyone was stupid.
Speaker 1: Well, yeah, that's it for this episode of Fast Politics.
Speaker 1: Tune in every Monday, Wednesday and Friday to hear the
Speaker 1: best minds in politics makes sense of all this chaos.
Speaker 1: If you enjoyed what you've heard, please send it to
Speaker 1: a friend and keep the conversation going. And again, thanks
Speaker 1: for listening,