Speaker 1: Hey, what's up everybody.
Speaker 2: I'm Jamel Hill and welcome to politics and I heard
Speaker 2: podcast and unbothered production. Time to get spolitical pop quiz,
Speaker 2: Boys and girls. How many WNBA head coaches are black women? Now,
Speaker 2: before you answer, here are a few things to consider.
Speaker 2: Seventy percent of the league is black. At the end
Speaker 2: of the twenty twenty two season, half of the league's
Speaker 2: twelve coaches were black, with three of those six coaches
Speaker 2: being black women, and there were eight head coach openings
Speaker 2: this last WNBA offseason. Ready for the answer to the
Speaker 2: question one, that's how many black women are head coaches
Speaker 2: in the WNBA. Now, that's a bizarre and to be honest,
Speaker 2: and embarrassing statistic for a league that is overrepresented with
Speaker 2: black women in terms of the players. But the league
Speaker 2: having just one black woman is far from a low,
Speaker 2: because as recently as twenty twenty there wasn't a single
Speaker 2: black woman serving as head coach in the league. But
Speaker 2: this isn't a new issue for women's basketball. But just
Speaker 2: to carry over from what we've seen at.
Speaker 1: The college level.
Speaker 3: Two.
Speaker 2: Now, I'm not calling anyone racist. I'm just taking a
Speaker 2: closer look at the systems and structures because they are
Speaker 2: often designed to be inequitable, even if we're talking about
Speaker 2: a women's sport, where there is often an assumption that
Speaker 2: equity is a natural byproduct. The WNBA has often received
Speaker 2: high praise for its diverse hiring. The Institute for Diversity
Speaker 2: in Ethics and Sports has given the league an A
Speaker 2: plus for its racial engender hiring practices every year the
Speaker 2: league has been in existence. Now full disclosure, Doctor Richard Lapchack,
Speaker 2: the director of the Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport,
Speaker 2: is someone I have a deep respect for. We've worked
Speaker 2: closely together many times, and he is internationally respected as
Speaker 2: a civil rights leader. But the numbers from his institute
Speaker 2: don't quite tell the story and certainly not the full history.
Speaker 3: People want to know, though, Will you ever be a
Speaker 3: head coach for a WNBA team?
Speaker 4: You know what I'm gonna say this, For the first time,
Speaker 4: I put my hat name in a hat to coach
Speaker 4: this year for two teams all the way down to
Speaker 4: the end. I won't say who those two teams are.
Speaker 4: But I did not get the jobs, and I felt
Speaker 4: like I would never make another attempt to.
Speaker 3: Go into coaching.
Speaker 4: Really in the WNBA yes, because you know, it's like
Speaker 4: you got to be ten times as great as a
Speaker 4: black woman in this industry. It's only one land when
Speaker 4: I tell you that who these people hired is not
Speaker 4: better than me and what I could do for these
Speaker 4: team and players. But it's okay because I again am
Speaker 4: a very much that what's for you is for you, yes,
Speaker 4: and that's not for me, and I'm okay with that.
Speaker 4: So I will never attempt to coach in the WNBA again.
Speaker 2: Now, if your counter argument to Lisa Leslie not getting
Speaker 2: a WNBA head coaching opportunity is that she lacks coaching experience,
Speaker 2: keep in mind that she did coach in the Big
Speaker 2: Three in twenty nineteen, and that same year she not
Speaker 2: only won a Big Three championship, but she was also named.
Speaker 1: Coach of the Year. Now, let's say you want to
Speaker 1: dismiss that too.
Speaker 2: Well, when it comes to mail coaches, the WNBA hasn't
Speaker 2: had a problem hiring them despite their lack of.
Speaker 1: Experience in coaching women.
Speaker 2: Now, sometimes it's worked out, as was the case with
Speaker 2: Bill Lambiert and Michael Cooper, who both brought their respective
Speaker 2: teams WNBA championships, and sometimes it's been disastrous, as was
Speaker 2: the case with Derek Fisher, who was hired to coach
Speaker 2: the LA Sparks despite a terrible coaching record with the
Speaker 2: New York Knicks. Fisher, who had never coached women before,
Speaker 2: finished with a fifty four to forty six record with
Speaker 2: the Sparks and infamously benched Candae Parker in a playoff
Speaker 2: Line Nation game, which ultimately became one of the reasons
Speaker 2: that Parker left the Sparks to play for the Chicago
Speaker 2: skuy Now some have questioned whether the hiring pool is
Speaker 2: deep enough and if the WNBA is in a position
Speaker 2: to attract solid WNBA coaches. But is it lack of
Speaker 2: candidates and money or lack of intention? Now there's a
Speaker 2: good pool of former players to choose from, including LaToya Sanders,
Speaker 2: Breon January, and Christy Tolliver, all of whom are currently
Speaker 2: WNBA assistants and have served in the league as assistants
Speaker 2: for multiple years, with Tolliver also having coached at the
Speaker 2: NBA level. As for money, that's also about intention too.
Speaker 2: The Phoenix Mercury hired Nate Tibbets in twenty twenty three
Speaker 2: and immediately made him the highest plaid coach in the
Speaker 2: WNBA with a reported salary of one point two million
Speaker 2: a year. Now, Tibbets was an NBA assistant for twelve years,
Speaker 2: but prior to the Mercury he never coached women's basketball.
Speaker 2: He came into the league making more money than Las
Speaker 2: Vegas Aces head coach Becky Hammond, who won back to
Speaker 2: back WNBA championships, played in the WNBA, and was an
Speaker 2: NBA assistant under Greg Popovich. Now, this is no shade
Speaker 2: to Tibbets, but he's somewhat of an example of the
Speaker 2: built in sexism that women coaches face.
Speaker 1: The WNBA has.
Speaker 2: This history of hiring men who have never coached women's
Speaker 2: basketball and giving them premium salaries and opportunities, and conversely,
Speaker 2: there also is a trend of being more impatient when
Speaker 2: it comes to black coaches in the offseason. The Chicago's
Speaker 2: Guy fired Teresa Withersfield, one of the league's most decorated
Speaker 2: and fiercest players, after just one season. The Atlanta Dream
Speaker 2: also fired Tanisha Wright after just three seasons. Now, there
Speaker 2: is understandable concern that now that there is more money
Speaker 2: in women's basketball and more substantive growth, the fear is
Speaker 2: that this will mean more opportunity for men and not
Speaker 2: for women. Before the NCAA included women's sports, more like
Speaker 2: they were forced to oversee women's sports because of a
Speaker 2: court order. Women's sports were governed by the assaul Llciation
Speaker 2: for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women. Now, when women were governing
Speaker 2: women's sports, over ninety percent of women's teams were coached
Speaker 2: by women. By the early nineteen eighties, after the NCAA
Speaker 2: took over, that number had declined to fifty one percent,
Speaker 2: and today roughly sixty percent of women's sports at the.
Speaker 1: College level are coached by men.
Speaker 2: Meanwhile, guess what percentage of men's college sports are coached
Speaker 2: by men?
Speaker 1: Ninety five percent.
Speaker 2: Black women account for twelve percent of head coaching positions in.
Speaker 1: College basketball across all divisions.
Speaker 2: Thirty percent of the players who play women's college basketball
Speaker 2: are black. But considering ninety percent of black women who
Speaker 2: play college basketball graduate with a degree, that right there
Speaker 2: should provide somewhat of a supply of coaching candidates. Now,
Speaker 2: the WNBA is writing a strong upward trajectory, and as
Speaker 2: the league grows, their standards shouldn't be to do things
Speaker 2: exactly as the men, it should be their goal to
Speaker 2: not only make money, but create a new standard of
Speaker 2: empowerment and opportunity for women, not just do the same
Speaker 2: things we've all read be seen before. I'm Jamel Hill,
Speaker 2: and I approve this message. Coming up next on politics,
Speaker 2: my guest on this episode is one of the most
Speaker 2: powerful people in politics. He's in a top leadership position
Speaker 2: as the Democrats are facing an identity crisis and still
Speaker 2: feeling the effects of losing last year's presidential election. Now
Speaker 2: a lot of people have been asking Democrats what's the plan.
Speaker 2: On this episode, he'll answer some of those questions. And
Speaker 2: since this is a sports.
Speaker 1: In Politics podcast, I had to.
Speaker 2: Ask him about his beloved New York Knicks firing head
Speaker 2: coach Tom Thibodeau after he got the Knicks to the
Speaker 2: Eastern Conference finals. Coming up next on his politics, Straight
Speaker 2: out of Brooklyn House, Minority leader a King Jefferies. Well,
Speaker 2: Representative Jefferyson, and thank you so much for joining me
Speaker 2: here on politics, and I'm going to start the podcast
Speaker 2: for the question I ask every guest that appears, and
Speaker 2: that is name an athlete or a moment that made
Speaker 2: you love sports.
Speaker 3: Well, it's great to be with you and thank you
Speaker 3: for everything and that you do in sports and politics,
Speaker 3: and probably I should say appropriately what up? Though, well
Speaker 3: look at you.
Speaker 2: I think, okay, somebody gave you some insight into all right,
Speaker 2: that's our Detroit Green, which, as I often say, can
Speaker 2: be a question or just a statement.
Speaker 3: But yeah, you know, I think I grew up. As
Speaker 3: you know, I rocked with the Yankees, the Knicks, the Jets,
Speaker 3: Saint John's and the Rangers. So really the first time
Speaker 3: that one of those teams that I rock with had
Speaker 3: a championship run at an age that I could appreciate, right,
Speaker 3: I was three years old the last time the Knicks
Speaker 3: won the championship. I didn't remember it in nineteen seventy three,
Speaker 3: but when I was seven, I was following baseball at
Speaker 3: the time, was beginning to play Little League, and that
Speaker 3: was the time that the Yankees and the Dodgers were
Speaker 3: in the first of two back to back World Series appearances,
Speaker 3: and of course famously saw a Yankees fan watching the
Speaker 3: World Series. It's great. I remember being in the living
Speaker 3: room and the apartment that we lived in. My dad
Speaker 3: was there, My grandfather, Papa Gomes was there. He lived
Speaker 3: in La so he was actually a Dodgers fan, and
Speaker 3: Game six, Reggie Jackson three home runs on three consecutive pitches.
Speaker 3: I think that's the date that we actually won the
Speaker 3: World Series. But that was of course a magical moment
Speaker 3: in baseball history and sports history, and certainly that's what
Speaker 3: got me hooked.
Speaker 1: Well, it is so.
Speaker 2: Ironic, Well maybe ironic is not the right word, but
Speaker 2: the timing is impeccable that we are recording this Pack
Speaker 2: podcast on the day that I guess, if you want
Speaker 2: to consider it is fort the Elon Musz versus Donald
Speaker 2: Trump back and forth that's taking place on social media.
Speaker 2: But before I get to that, there are pressing Knicks
Speaker 2: matters that I need to address with you first. You know,
Speaker 2: this week, the Knicks decided to fire Tom Thibodeau. What
Speaker 2: did you think about them making this move, doing this
Speaker 2: just three days after the Knicks were outsted from the
Speaker 2: Eastern Conference Finals.
Speaker 3: You know, it definitely caught me off guard, and I
Speaker 3: think it caught a lot of people off guard at
Speaker 3: home in New York and Knicks fans. He had a
Speaker 3: great run I think five seasons. For those seasons we
Speaker 3: were in the playoffs, of course, back to back fifty
Speaker 3: win games. Most successful series of runs in terms of
Speaker 3: season after season after season since the glory days for
Speaker 3: me in the nineties into the early parts of two thousand.
Speaker 3: First appearance, of course in twenty five years in the
Speaker 3: Eastern Conference Finals, and it's a lovable team. So that
Speaker 3: was shocking for me certainly and for a lot of folks.
Speaker 3: The question I think moving forward is, you know, had
Speaker 3: the team maxed out under tips Is leadership? And clearly
Speaker 3: there were adjustments that needed to be made that weren't
Speaker 3: necessarily made. Right to start in five played more minutes
Speaker 3: than any other starting five in the entire season. That
Speaker 3: can't continue, and there was no development of the bench
Speaker 3: during the season. You can't develop a bench in game four,
Speaker 3: Game five, or Game six of the Eastern Conference Finals.
Speaker 3: That's not going to work. So the question I think
Speaker 3: moving forward because what's done is done, and I think
Speaker 3: reasonable people could conclude that the Knicks did max out
Speaker 3: under Tips' leadership, notwithstanding you know the greatness of the
Speaker 3: run up until this point, in all the excitement, and
Speaker 3: you know that when the Knicks on fire, the is
Speaker 3: on fire and it was a great uh, it was
Speaker 3: a great run. But I think the question here is
Speaker 3: is this our Mark Jackson moment, Steve Kerr moment, because
Speaker 3: the firing of Mark Jackson caught a lot of us
Speaker 3: by surprise. He had three successful years if I recall correctly.
Speaker 3: But the Warriors concluded that the team had maxed out
Speaker 3: and decided to go in a different direction, and they
Speaker 3: obviously found the right person who went on, you know,
Speaker 3: to lead the team to I think four different championships
Speaker 3: as it relates to the Golden State Warriors. So hopefully
Speaker 3: we can just hit the jackpot in terms of whatever
Speaker 3: direction we go in next. And this current management has
Speaker 3: had a pretty successful track record in building the team
Speaker 3: up until this point, so.
Speaker 2: Would you consider and by the way, that's a very
Speaker 2: optimistic way to look at it. You know, I do
Speaker 2: think there may have been some concern among Knicks fans
Speaker 2: and suddenly, just me as an outside observer, is that
Speaker 2: typically you know, we don't know yet the details of
Speaker 2: how much James Dolan was involved, but it is his team,
Speaker 2: so of course he was involved.
Speaker 1: But he has made some decisions before and.
Speaker 2: People have wondered, what was this another rational decision or
Speaker 2: is this something like a little bit more calculated kind
Speaker 2: of what you were talking about when you just max
Speaker 2: out with a particular coach and you need somebody a
Speaker 2: new voice in the locker room. That being said, how
Speaker 2: would you characterize this season for the Knicks as successful?
Speaker 3: Yes, I would characterize it as successful. I think because
Speaker 3: we got the third seed and were lined up against
Speaker 3: the world champion Boston Celtics. Most people were of the
Speaker 3: view that we ain't getting out of the second round,
Speaker 3: and this is going to be the third consecutive year
Speaker 3: that we went out in the second round, very disappointing.
Speaker 3: I think we lost to Miami, then we lost to
Speaker 3: Indiana last year, and the expectation was Boston was going
Speaker 3: to run us out the gym, and we win game one.
Speaker 3: Then we win Game two. That was incredible, and then
Speaker 3: the Celtics come to the guard and they win Game three,
Speaker 3: and then we do our thing in game four. Had
Speaker 3: it won even before Tatum went out, and certainly our
Speaker 3: prayers that would Tatum for a full and speedy recovery.
Speaker 3: But it was a great series, and then we smoked
Speaker 3: the Celtics in Game six. At that point, I think
Speaker 3: for me, of course, a run to winning it all
Speaker 3: in the finals would have been ideal, but a competitive series,
Speaker 3: showing some heart going out, you know, in six is respectable.
Speaker 3: I think that's a very successful season. But Game one
Speaker 3: was rough. I was in Washington, had it on in
Speaker 3: the backdrop. We were actually debating the GLP tax, and
Speaker 3: it was kind of late at night, early in the morning,
Speaker 3: preparing to speak on the house floor, and I couldn't
Speaker 3: believe that it was falling apart in the last few
Speaker 3: minutes and that was unfortunate. And that may have been
Speaker 3: the point where the next management concluded, Ya, it's time
Speaker 3: to move in a different direction.
Speaker 1: Well, I'm a Pistons fan, so I was hating.
Speaker 2: We lost all our home games, so you all by
Speaker 2: combined six points, and that was tough. And of course,
Speaker 2: as fate would have it, over the course of the
Speaker 2: next week following that series, I spent a lot of
Speaker 2: time in New York doing some CNN stuff, so I
Speaker 2: had to have the New York fandom in my face
Speaker 2: after a salty, tough series.
Speaker 1: So after that, I have to say I was a
Speaker 1: bit bitter toward the Knicks.
Speaker 3: No I got you on that. Needless to say, I'm
Speaker 3: not rocking with Indiana in the finals. Go okay, See, as.
Speaker 1: I mentioned, at the top of our conversation.
Speaker 2: Right now, in real time, there is a back and
Speaker 2: forth playing out between Eli muh Donald Trump over social media,
Speaker 2: because of course it's twenty twenty five, and with these
Speaker 2: two individuals in particular. Now, the last tweet that Elon Musk,
Speaker 2: or one of the last tweets Sea drop was that, Yeah,
Speaker 2: that's right, Donald Trump, you were in the Epstein files. Okay,
Speaker 2: all right, So with this entire back and forth, given
Speaker 2: all the things that are happening in this country from
Speaker 2: the disaster's bill that you just mentioned, what is your
Speaker 2: perspective of this fight that is going on between Donald
Speaker 2: Trump and Elon Musk.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's definitely an intense situation, and of course people
Speaker 3: on the hill are following it. I'm on Washington, DC
Speaker 3: right now. People are following it with great interest. It
Speaker 3: has my colleagues on the Republican side shook right now
Speaker 3: because you got Donald Trump, who's one puppet master for them,
Speaker 3: and Elon Musk, who's the other puppet master for them,
Speaker 3: and they don't know whose side to be on in
Speaker 3: this fight, so they're kind of burying their heads in
Speaker 3: the sand. Largely interesting to me is that Elon Must's
Speaker 3: assessment of the GOP tax scam, what we believe is
Speaker 3: one big, ugly bill is correct when he calls it
Speaker 3: a disgusting abomination. It is now. Our view is that
Speaker 3: it's a disgusting abomination one because it takes healthcare away
Speaker 3: literally from more than fifteen million people. The largest cut
Speaker 3: to healthcare in American history. That's out of control. And
Speaker 3: then they're ripping food out of the mouths of children
Speaker 3: and veterans and seniors. Largest cut to nutritional assistance in
Speaker 3: American history. That's ridiculous. And this is all being done
Speaker 3: in order to provide their billionaire donors with a massive
Speaker 3: tax break that would be the largest tax break for
Speaker 3: the wealthy, the well off, and the well connected in
Speaker 3: American history. And then on top of that, they want
Speaker 3: our children, our grandchildren, the next generation of Americans to
Speaker 3: pay the bill because they would stick us with more
Speaker 3: than three trillion dollars in additional debt and explode the deficit.
Speaker 3: And so Elon Musk has said Republicans should be ashamed
Speaker 3: of themselves for voting for this bill. I agree with
Speaker 3: that position. Now, the fact that this is broken out
Speaker 3: into the public domain on social media in such an
Speaker 3: extraordinary way. And now it's been personalized like this, I
Speaker 3: think has caught a lot of people off guard. I
Speaker 3: mean when I saw that Epstein tweet or post, I'm like, whoa,
Speaker 3: he just went tupac hit him up? I mean, he
Speaker 3: just went there and I rock with Biggie, right, but
Speaker 3: hit him up was like a next level in terms
Speaker 3: of just the personal assault. And that's basically what Elon
Speaker 3: has done. And once you cross that the rubicon, I'm
Speaker 3: not sure how the two of them come back from it.
Speaker 3: And of course it continues to intensify throughout the day.
Speaker 2: I think just based off you know, of course on
Speaker 2: social media, there's a lot of jokes flying around, but
Speaker 2: beneath all that, I think there is because we have
Speaker 2: seen just so much chaos in this administration since they
Speaker 2: took over in January, that there's a part of the
Speaker 2: public that is wondering what is this distracting us from?
Speaker 2: You know, there's always sort of a watch what a
Speaker 2: hook is coming with this administration? And so from a
Speaker 2: strategy standpoint, is this something that is useful for the
Speaker 2: Democrats seeing two of you know, to.
Speaker 1: Kind of not likable people go at it in this way.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's interesting because you're absolutely correct. We've seen from
Speaker 3: this administration from day one, a flooding of the zone
Speaker 3: that daily outraigs, the parade of marbles, and a lot
Speaker 3: of it is designed to create confusion and to disillusion people,
Speaker 3: to project this sense that it's all inevitable and that
Speaker 3: it's hard to follow what you should be outraged about
Speaker 3: because it's so much that takes place that clearly part
Speaker 3: of the strategy is to try to distract you from
Speaker 3: the things that you really should be concerned about in
Speaker 3: any given situation. I think this is different because the
Speaker 3: feud exploded onto social media based on Elon's criticism of
Speaker 3: the One Big Ugly Bill and his criticism of the
Speaker 3: Republicans for trying to jam this down the throats to
Speaker 3: the American people. Some of the reasons why he disagrees
Speaker 3: with the bill are reasons why we as Democrats disagree
Speaker 3: with the bill. The attack on the effort to try
Speaker 3: to build the clean energy economy. He obviously has a
Speaker 3: problem with it. He's got business interests connected to that.
Speaker 3: We have a problem with it because we think standing
Speaker 3: up a clean energy economy actually will lower energy costs
Speaker 3: for everyday Americans. And we have to be focused on
Speaker 3: building an affordable economy, and that's part of the effort
Speaker 3: to do that. It also creates jobs in places all
Speaker 3: across the country, and it does something meaningful to address
Speaker 3: the climate crisis with the fierce urgency of now that's necessary.
Speaker 3: So the fact that this few the genesis of it
Speaker 3: relates to Elon Musk's effort to try to kill the
Speaker 3: billings he said, we agree every single House Democrat was
Speaker 3: strongly opposed to the GOP tax scam. We're working hard
Speaker 3: to kill a bill as we speak. It limped out
Speaker 3: of the House of Representatives barely by one vote, and
Speaker 3: it doesn't have a clear path towards success in the Senate.
Speaker 3: So it's interesting. I don't think this is a distraction
Speaker 3: because what they would be trying to distract you from,
Speaker 3: meaning Trump, is what they're trying to do and taking
Speaker 3: away healthcare, taking away nutritional assistance, hurting veterans, hurting everyday
Speaker 3: americans to reward their billionaire donors. They don't want us
Speaker 3: talking about that. But at the center of this fight,
Speaker 3: or at least how it began, was the criticism around
Speaker 3: the GOP tax scam and this reckless Republican budget.
Speaker 1: Let's talk about the tax scam bill or I did see.
Speaker 2: I think Chuck Schumer called it that well Everybody's going
Speaker 2: to die act after Congresswoman johny Ertz, who had some
Speaker 2: very callous comments about the damage that.
Speaker 1: This bill could do to the people who would lose
Speaker 1: health care.
Speaker 2: You know, at this point, I think a lot of
Speaker 2: people have obviously been very critical of the Democratic Party
Speaker 2: in this moment, even though you all are not in leadership,
Speaker 2: you don't have the majority in either chamber, but nevertheless,
Speaker 2: you are expected to do something. And I'm looking at
Speaker 2: the approval rate that you all have, and I know
Speaker 2: you've seen the poll about what the Democratic Party's approval
Speaker 2: rating has been despite all the chaos, despite the fact
Speaker 2: that Trump's approval ratings are falling, the fight, the fact
Speaker 2: that people are losing a lot of whatever faith they
Speaker 2: had and that he could fix this economy.
Speaker 1: Is that honeymoon periods over?
Speaker 2: Like nobody's kind of buying that he's going to be
Speaker 2: able to fix this economy. With all that being said,
Speaker 2: how is it that Democrats can better control this narrative
Speaker 2: in this chaotic moment.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's a great question, and it's a work in progress.
Speaker 3: For why variety of reasons. First of all, people are
Speaker 3: understandably disappointed and distressed and in many cases disillusion by
Speaker 3: the fact that we lost in November of twenty twenty four,
Speaker 3: and we've got to own that because we lost to
Speaker 3: this guy. And obviously, Kamala Harris and my view, did
Speaker 3: a tremendous job in the limited time that she had
Speaker 3: one hundred and seven day campaign, the best that she
Speaker 3: could under difficult circumstances after President Biden decided that he
Speaker 3: wasn't going to seek reelection, and those circumstances led to
Speaker 3: a situation where we lost to Donald Trump. We didn't
Speaker 3: get the House back, we felt just three seats short,
Speaker 3: and then of course lost control of the Senate. So
Speaker 3: from the standpoint of Democrats in this country being disappointed
Speaker 3: with the party, that's understandable, and so what we have
Speaker 3: to do to earn back their trust. One is to
Speaker 3: demonstrate that we are functioning as a principled opposition to
Speaker 3: stop as many bad things from happening as we can
Speaker 3: and pushing back aggressively against the parade of horribles that
Speaker 3: Donald Trump is unleashing on the American people. Because this
Speaker 3: is an un residented assault on the economy, and assault
Speaker 3: on healthcare and assault on social security, in assault on
Speaker 3: a democratic way of life, an assault on the rule
Speaker 3: of law, and an assault on democracy itself. So it
Speaker 3: does require us to engage in an all hands on
Speaker 3: deck effort. Now, I do think that what we have
Speaker 3: seen is some success in clarifying for the American people.
Speaker 3: As you pointed out, Jamail, that Donald Trump promised he
Speaker 3: was going to fix the economy, address inflation and lower costs.
Speaker 3: In fact, he said he's going to lower costs on
Speaker 3: day one. Dude was lying to the American people. He's
Speaker 3: not lowering costs. Costs are going up. He's crashing the economy.
Speaker 3: These Trump tariffs are going to add thousands of dollars
Speaker 3: an additional expense to hardworking American taxpayers, and he's probably
Speaker 3: driving us toward a recession. Despite the fact that the
Speaker 3: expectation was Donald Trump was going to be able to
Speaker 3: control the narrative. Republicans have complete control in Washington. He's
Speaker 3: got all these social media relationships and new media relationships,
Speaker 3: and Democrats would not be able to break through with
Speaker 3: any degree of clarity. Well, actually, Donald Trump was the
Speaker 3: most unpopular President at the one hundred day mark in
Speaker 3: modern American history. Somebody's paying attention to the things that
Speaker 3: are being said. The American people are locking in on
Speaker 3: the fact that he's actually not making life better for them,
Speaker 3: He's making life worse. So we have to continue to
Speaker 3: be the principled opposition stopping bad things from happening, and
Speaker 3: I think pivot to articulating our vision for making life
Speaker 3: better for the American people that committed to building an
Speaker 3: affordable economy. We know the deck has been stacked against
Speaker 3: everyday Americans for far too long. The system has been
Speaker 3: broken for decades, and we have to earn the confidence
Speaker 3: of the American people that were committed to fixing it,
Speaker 3: to improving their lives. And to be very clear to
Speaker 3: the American people that we hear you, we see you,
Speaker 3: we feel you, and we're committed to making life better
Speaker 3: for you.
Speaker 2: How can you be principal opposition against an unprincipled enemy.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think we're in a more is more environment,
Speaker 3: So I think the key is and we can learn
Speaker 3: from those upon whose shoulders we stand. I have the
Speaker 3: great honor of serving in Congress with John Lewis, an
Speaker 3: American hero who of course always inspired us to show
Speaker 3: up and stand up and speak up. And when you
Speaker 3: see something that's wrong, never give up, never give in,
Speaker 3: get into some good trouble, necessary trouble. As he would
Speaker 3: tell us, he was principled in his opposition, but strong
Speaker 3: and throughout his life, particularly in the Jim Crow South.
Speaker 3: I mean Donald Trump was battling, I mean John Lewis
Speaker 3: was battling in authoritarian situation that existed racial oppression enforced
Speaker 3: by violence in parts of the Jim Crow South. And
Speaker 3: yet they were able to both balance that principled opposition
Speaker 3: with the righteous indignation and the ferocity that was necessary
Speaker 3: to turn the situation around. And I think for us,
Speaker 3: that's what we have to do. We have to stretch.
Speaker 3: We're in a more is more environment, meaning more rallies,
Speaker 3: more press conferences, more speeches on the House, most speeches
Speaker 3: on the Senate floor, all night committee hearings, making sure
Speaker 3: that we're having town hall meetings in democratic districts, town
Speaker 3: hall meetings in Republican districts, as we're doing, convening democratic
Speaker 3: led hearings on Capitol Hill, which we've done democratic led
Speaker 3: hearings across the country, and taking our efforts on the road,
Speaker 3: which we're continuing to do, sit ins, and you know,
Speaker 3: a variety of things, site visits, more is more that's
Speaker 3: going to be necessary for us to continue to meet
Speaker 3: the moment.
Speaker 2: I've heard you use that terminology about flooding the zone,
Speaker 2: not in relationship to Donald Trump, but what you think
Speaker 2: Democrats should be doing being on TV more as you
Speaker 2: just mentioned hitting essentially the campaign trail, doing the rallies.
Speaker 2: People look at the rallies that you know, Alexandria Ocasio
Speaker 2: Cortez did, alc and Bernie Sanders, and those seem to
Speaker 2: be very successful. But you and I both know, especially
Speaker 2: in the time where social media is this prominent, American
Speaker 2: loves a good marketing campaign.
Speaker 1: MU is very clear.
Speaker 2: And what was interesting to me in watching the election
Speaker 2: was that in so many states you had people approving
Speaker 2: very popular Democratic policies that you all were the leaders
Speaker 2: on that you all used to try to reshape this country,
Speaker 2: and yet still voted for Republicans that were against everything
Speaker 2: that you were trying to do. So, how do you
Speaker 2: feel like in this time, considering how Republicans have been
Speaker 2: able to use social media to their benefit a lot
Speaker 2: through disinformation to be honest and misinformation. But nevertheless, they're
Speaker 2: still able to control so much of the narrative. So,
Speaker 2: how now, with the election fresh behind you, just for
Speaker 2: just six months or so, how are you going to
Speaker 2: make that connection between the marketing, the Democratic successes, and
Speaker 2: what you're talking about better so that people really can
Speaker 2: effectively see what you're doing. Like, what were the lessons
Speaker 2: learned from the election in terms of how you need
Speaker 2: to better connect with the American people.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's a great question. I think that what's important
Speaker 3: for all of us to internalize is that governing is
Speaker 3: one lane and communicating with the American people is a
Speaker 3: different lane, and they require two different types of skills.
Speaker 3: And the challenge that we have traditionally faced as Democrats
Speaker 3: in terms of communicating is that Republicans tend to communicate
Speaker 3: in headlines and Democrats communicate in fine print. Now, there's
Speaker 3: a reason why Democrats sometimes default to fine print. It's
Speaker 3: because in order to govern, you actually have to master
Speaker 3: the fine print. And as Democrats, we care about governing
Speaker 3: because we care about the American people and we care
Speaker 3: about getting things done. And when you look at the
Speaker 3: modern day Democratic Party, which really dates back to the
Speaker 3: presidency of FDR, and think about the things that we've
Speaker 3: worked hard to deliver to the American people's social security,
Speaker 3: rural electrification, the GI Bill, the Civil Rights Act, the
Speaker 3: Voting Rights Act, the Fair Housing Act, the Immigration and
Speaker 3: Nationality Act of nineteen sixty five, the Higher Education Act,
Speaker 3: the Elementary and Secondary School Act, Medicare, Medicaid, head Start,
Speaker 3: the Affordable Care Act, the American Rescue Plan, the Infrastructure
Speaker 3: Investment and Jobs Act, the Pact Act, and standing up
Speaker 3: for our veterans. And then, of course the Inflation Reduction Act,
Speaker 3: which helped to lower the high price of life saving
Speaker 3: prescription drugs, amongst doing other things, including the largest investment
Speaker 3: in combating the climate crisis in the history of the world.
Speaker 3: All of these things were brought to you by your
Speaker 3: friendly neighborhood Democratic Party. That's an amazing track record of success.
Speaker 3: Of course, much more needs to be done on behalf
Speaker 3: of the American people, particularly in terms of building an
Speaker 3: affordable economy and addressing the inflationary crisis that we are
Speaker 3: dealing with in this country. But that's a great track
Speaker 3: record of success to build upon. You don't produce all
Speaker 3: of those things unless you have committed to mastering the
Speaker 3: fine print of governing. But the challenge for us is
Speaker 3: that while you govern in fine print, you message, you persuade,
Speaker 3: you communicate and headlines, particularly in the era of social
Speaker 3: media and new media, and we just have to do
Speaker 3: a better job of making sure that we do what
Speaker 3: we need to do in the communications lane so that
Speaker 3: the American people actually give us the opportunity in the
Speaker 3: governing lane to build upon the progress that we've tried
Speaker 3: to make for everyday Americans over the last seventy five
Speaker 3: eighty plus years.
Speaker 2: I look at it as you all are the party
Speaker 2: of policy and they're the party of personality, And to
Speaker 2: be honest, a lot of times it feels like the
Speaker 2: personality part wins out just because of that communication gap
Speaker 2: that you're talking about.
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 2: With that being said, again, given how people feel so
Speaker 2: frustrated right now with the party, how much do you
Speaker 2: think the criticisms of the party, What do you think
Speaker 2: is fair criticism of the Democratic Party, and what do.
Speaker 1: You think is unfair?
Speaker 3: Well, I think it's fair that at the end of
Speaker 3: the day, notwithstanding all of the things that were accomplished
Speaker 3: under the prior administration, that there were a lot of
Speaker 3: Americans who believe that Donald Trump was better positioned to
Speaker 3: deal with inflation and to lower the high cost of
Speaker 3: living in the United States of America, and we did
Speaker 3: not do a good enough job overall as a party
Speaker 3: and communicating that one we understand that the cost of
Speaker 3: living is too high, that we actually have a plan
Speaker 3: to lower housing costs, lower grocery costs, lower energy costs,
Speaker 3: lower childcare costs, and lower insurance costs, and that we
Speaker 3: do actually believe with every fiber in our body that
Speaker 3: in the United States of America, the wealthiest country in
Speaker 3: the history of the world, no one should be living
Speaker 3: paycheck to paycheck. No one should be struggling when they
Speaker 3: work hard and play by the rules, but yet can't
Speaker 3: find a good paying job, or purchase a home, or
Speaker 3: live a comfortable life, or have access to healthcare, go
Speaker 3: on vacation every now and then, or be able to
Speaker 3: retire with grace and dignity. Everybody should have that opportunity
Speaker 3: in the country, but everybody does not. And I think
Speaker 3: that we have to do a better job of connecting
Speaker 3: how we actually feel with making sure that the American
Speaker 3: people feel us in terms of our commitment to making
Speaker 3: their lives better. So that. You know, we just need
Speaker 3: to do better in that area. And I think the
Speaker 3: other thing we've got to do is convince a greater
Speaker 3: number of Americans that we actually are fighting for them,
Speaker 3: because there's no circumstance where the Republican Party under Donald Trump,
Speaker 3: who is all about the wealthy, the well off, and
Speaker 3: the well connected. I mean, if you just looked at
Speaker 3: the inauguration, who was there. It wasn't everyday Americans, it
Speaker 3: wasn't working class Americans. It was the billionaire boys Club.
Speaker 3: It was a super villain convention, and it was wild.
Speaker 3: And this is who he chose to surround himself with
Speaker 3: because this is who he's fighting for. But yet Donald
Speaker 3: Trump has somehow managed to convince a significant number of Americans,
Speaker 3: or at least he did in connection with the election.
Speaker 3: As you pointed out to Mail, he's falling apart right
Speaker 3: now in terms of the perception that the American people
Speaker 3: have as it relates to his ability to actually deal
Speaker 3: with the economy. He lied not focused on lowering costs,
Speaker 3: but he did managed to convince a significant number of
Speaker 3: people that he would do that in connection with the election.
Speaker 3: So we have to do a better job there now
Speaker 3: in terms of the concern that Democrats on Capitol Hill
Speaker 3: and the House and the Senate aren't fighting and pushing
Speaker 3: back against Donald Trump and the administration aggressively, I think no,
Speaker 3: every single House Democrat and every single Senate Democrat is
Speaker 3: working hard to do the best that they can to
Speaker 3: aggressively push back at what we all believe is an
Speaker 3: unprecedented situation. And that's why I've acknowledged that all of
Speaker 3: us are going to continue to be called upon to
Speaker 3: do more, to engage with a level of intensity previously
Speaker 3: unseen at any time in a Congress in modern American history.
Speaker 3: And it requires extraordinary things to be done, including but
Speaker 3: not limited to what you know, our brother Corey Booker
Speaker 3: did when he delivered that historical speech on the floor
Speaker 3: of the Senate. They're trying to cancel our history, he
Speaker 3: canceled strom Therman.
Speaker 2: I want to ask you about that intensity, because I
Speaker 2: think there's been some questions there. Also want to ask
Speaker 2: you about I got a biggie question for you, since
Speaker 2: I know you're a biggie.
Speaker 1: Guy and being.
Speaker 2: In represent and being from Brooklyn and representing there, so
Speaker 2: this biggie question. I'm hoping this is the headline from
Speaker 2: this podcast, but we just got to take a very
Speaker 2: quick break and we'll be back with more with Representative
Speaker 2: I came, Jeff mister Minority House Leader. Okay, before we
Speaker 2: took a break, Representative Jefferies, you mentioned the intensity, and
Speaker 2: I think that is where a lot of people, a
Speaker 2: lot of people I talk to just in everyday life,
Speaker 2: and that's the part that I think has people the
Speaker 2: most frustrated. I don't think people doubt the effort. I
Speaker 2: think at this point people want to know what are
Speaker 2: the Democrats actually willing to do? And I say that
Speaker 2: because we see Trump define court orders, we see him
Speaker 2: like we're wondering. People are wondering, like, yes, you can
Speaker 2: fight this battle through the courts, but if he don't
Speaker 2: care what they say, where does that leave you. So this,
Speaker 2: I think this idea that you all aren't doing enough
Speaker 2: is coming from the fact that we don't know what
Speaker 2: the next level of accountability actually looks like.
Speaker 1: So can you.
Speaker 2: Explain if he is ignoring these court orders, he's not
Speaker 2: following the rules, his administration isn't following it. What is
Speaker 2: the next level of accountability that you have available?
Speaker 3: Well, there's a couple of things, right, So you've got
Speaker 3: congressional accountability, and ultimately, the clearest path to bring that
Speaker 3: about is to make sure that Democrats get the gavels
Speaker 3: back in November of twenty twenty six, that we take
Speaker 3: the House back, take the Senate back, that we can
Speaker 3: end this national nightmare legislatively. And but you know.
Speaker 1: That's a long way from now though.
Speaker 3: Listen, No, listen, that's I'm just saying. That's in terms
Speaker 3: of congressional accountability. We got to be real. Why Because
Speaker 3: unless a handful of Republicans in the House or handful
Speaker 3: of Republicans in the Senate decide to actually grow a
Speaker 3: spine and stop acting like rubber stamps for Donald Trump's
Speaker 3: extreme agenda and engaging in their cult like behavior, then
Speaker 3: it's going to be hard to get actual accountability on
Speaker 3: a sustained basis at the congressional level until we defeat
Speaker 3: the MAGA extremists next year in the midterm elections. That's
Speaker 3: not to say they aren't important elections that are already
Speaker 3: taking place. Every single special election that's been a high
Speaker 3: profile race since the Trump presidency, Democrats have won, including
Speaker 3: but not limited to the race in Wisconsin for the
Speaker 3: state Supreme Court seat that was expected to be hotly contested.
Speaker 3: Elon Musk spent twenty to twenty five million dollars trying
Speaker 3: to elect the conservative candidate the progressive candidate one by
Speaker 3: eleven points. But that's not the only high profile our
Speaker 3: special election that we've won. We've won others, and you'll
Speaker 3: have governors races that will be important in New Jersey
Speaker 3: and in Virginia in November. Now, that's not to say
Speaker 3: that we can't use the levels of authority and capacity
Speaker 3: that we have as members of Congress, even if the
Speaker 3: Republicans continue to be sick offense, and we continue to
Speaker 3: do that as it relates to our engagement and committees,
Speaker 3: our engagement on the House floor, our engagement across the country.
Speaker 3: Republicans refuse to have town hall meetings, and so we decided,
Speaker 3: you know what, We're going to have town hall meetings
Speaker 3: in your districts to engage with your constituents, to tell
Speaker 3: them what you are trying to hide, particularly as it
Speaker 3: relates to ripping healthcare and Medicaid from tens of millions
Speaker 3: of Americans, closing hospitals, shutting down nursing homes, and creating
Speaker 3: a situation where people are actually going to die because
Speaker 3: healthcare is being ripped away from them, and care in
Speaker 3: terms of these institutions is being ripped away from them.
Speaker 3: So I think again we're in a more is more environment.
Speaker 3: We just have to continue to do more. Now on
Speaker 3: the court side of things, right, it is important to
Speaker 3: recognize we got three branches of government. We all learn
Speaker 3: that in social studies as we have come up, and
Speaker 3: you've got the legislative branch, you've got the executive branch,
Speaker 3: and you've got the judicial branch. And we have seen
Speaker 3: an unprecedented number of lawsuits that have filed last time
Speaker 3: I checked, Because we work closely with a variety of
Speaker 3: different groups, civil rights groups, democracy protection groups, organized labor,
Speaker 3: civil liberties groups, democratic attorney generals. More than two hundred
Speaker 3: and fifty lawsuits have been filed against the Trump administration
Speaker 3: and the unconstitutional and unlawful executive orders, and I believe
Speaker 3: it's more than one hundred and eighty five different court
Speaker 3: orders have been issued halting these executive actions and orders.
Speaker 3: Now it has been the case literally in a handful
Speaker 3: of instances. All that just happened to relate to the
Speaker 3: immigration space where Donald Trump is pushing the envelope aggressively
Speaker 3: as it relates to defiance, and in those cases handful
Speaker 3: of cases, every single one of them in the immigration
Speaker 3: space related to deportations or potential deportations, where our view
Speaker 3: is that the courts need to be more aggressive in
Speaker 3: a its authority if they've concluded that the Trump administration
Speaker 3: is not complying with a court directive, and what they
Speaker 3: have available to them is both civil contempt they can
Speaker 3: find the heck out of whoever is not complying or
Speaker 3: criminal contempt, and I think the courts have generally been
Speaker 3: reluctant to use those tools against a sitting administration, but
Speaker 3: extraordinary times called for extraordinary measures, And if we see
Speaker 3: non compliance continue in different ways, then I think the
Speaker 3: courts are going to have to get more aggressive. But
Speaker 3: it's important for all your people to understand that in
Speaker 3: the overwhelming majority of cases, Donald Trump ain't winning, he's losing,
Speaker 3: and he's been forced to back down repeatedly.
Speaker 2: Well, I guess when you look at also the intimidation
Speaker 2: that judges are facing now, I think people probably feel
Speaker 2: a little a little less hopeful about that just because
Speaker 2: of how this administration has gone after judges and called
Speaker 2: them activists just because they even judges they appointed. The
Speaker 2: judge is that he appointed, they have put a bullseye
Speaker 2: on their back. You mentioned before about how really ultimately,
Speaker 2: when it comes to the congressional accountability, it's going to
Speaker 2: require Republicans who know better and theoretically should do better
Speaker 2: to have us fine, which is something they haven't shown.
Speaker 2: So I'm wondering from you, what do Republicans say to
Speaker 2: you privately that they won't say publicly.
Speaker 3: Well, a lot of them mcnow is that privately that
Speaker 3: some of the things that Donald Trump is the administration
Speaker 3: they're doing are out of control. And then our response,
Speaker 3: of course to them is well, why don't you step
Speaker 3: up and communicate that, either directly to your colleagues in
Speaker 3: the administration or forcefully publicly when necessary. And of course
Speaker 3: the answer in many cases is people are concerned that
Speaker 3: Donald Trump will end their political lives, that he will
Speaker 3: primary them and they will lose. And of course they
Speaker 3: point to the Liz Cheney situation where she actually demonstrated
Speaker 3: some principle and voted to impeach Donald Trump talked about
Speaker 3: his lack in her view of patriotism and the danger
Speaker 3: that he represented to democracy, and Liz Cheney at one
Speaker 3: point was the number three Republican in the House of Representatives,
Speaker 3: the daughter of Vice President Dick Cheney, and it didn't
Speaker 3: matter because she spoke out against them. Donald Trump targeted
Speaker 3: her electorally primary her and she lost. And the same
Speaker 3: thing happened to Adam Kinzinger, of course, particularly when those
Speaker 3: two decided to participate in the January sixth Commission, which
Speaker 3: exposed a lot of what took place in that violent
Speaker 3: assault on the Capitol. So I think many of them
Speaker 3: are in fear of their political lives, and that's been
Speaker 3: part of the challenge. But we continue to say to them,
Speaker 3: you were elected to defend your constituents, to stand up
Speaker 3: for your constituents, and there's life after Congress, and you
Speaker 3: should be willing to actually want to be able to
Speaker 3: look back on your time in the House of Representatives
Speaker 3: knowing that you can keep your head held high because
Speaker 3: you did the right thing. Donald Trump is gone in
Speaker 3: three and a half years, but their legacy, or their
Speaker 3: failure to stand up to the extremism and the unprecedented
Speaker 3: assault on America as we know it, will be with
Speaker 3: them forever. Unless just a handful of Republicans, all we
Speaker 3: need is four on the House side or four on
Speaker 3: the Senate side to do the right thing. They're two
Speaker 3: hundred and twenty Republicans in the House, we just need four.
Speaker 3: That's less than two percent. And if less than two
Speaker 3: percent of the Republicans in the House actually decide to
Speaker 3: do the right thing, we can stop a lot of
Speaker 3: the foolishness, the malignant foolishness, from taking place. And so
Speaker 3: over these next eighteen months, we just continue to work
Speaker 3: on that every day, every week, every month, privately, publicly.
Speaker 3: What are colleagues on the other side of the eut Uh?
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean I would.
Speaker 2: I guess it's hard for me to have any sympathy
Speaker 2: for them when they feel that way, because I'm like, well,
Speaker 2: what are you elected for? Yeah, you were elected to
Speaker 2: actually be a public servant. And this is part of
Speaker 2: the responsibility. I want to pivot quickly to an issue
Speaker 2: that became a very big issue for Democrats in this
Speaker 2: last election that Donald Trump has continued and the Republican
Speaker 2: Party has continued to use and weaponize against the Democratic Party,
Speaker 2: and that is trans athletes in sports, and let's be
Speaker 2: real specific, trans women in sports. You know, you saw
Speaker 2: the ads that you know, one campaign of Kamala Harris
Speaker 2: is for they them, not not you. And what was
Speaker 2: never said and I never saw any Democrats in a
Speaker 2: very you know, sort of a very bold or very
Speaker 2: aggressive way is say that policy where prisoners are able
Speaker 2: to get gender affirming care existed under Donald Trump, the
Speaker 2: first time it's been existing for quite a long time.
Speaker 2: It's a court order, so legally you are following the
Speaker 2: law by allowing gender affirming care. And they use that
Speaker 2: ad and you know another case in California where's a
Speaker 2: trans woman competing in volleyball. Nevertheless, it feels as if,
Speaker 2: rather than address this issue, that Democrats have chosen to
Speaker 2: shrink from it.
Speaker 1: Given everything that.
Speaker 2: Has happened, and even though what you had the NCAA
Speaker 2: president Charlie Baker, he was on the hill, he testified
Speaker 2: there are five hundred thousand college athletes, ten are trans,
Speaker 2: and he didn't say women or men. Nevertheless, this issue
Speaker 2: has become one for your party that it doesn't seem
Speaker 2: that has been addressed. How do you plan to strategize
Speaker 2: against these attacks using a very vulnerable group of people
Speaker 2: in a way where you don't abandon them and they
Speaker 2: still feel like there is room under your take for them,
Speaker 2: but also in a way that the American public can
Speaker 2: get behind.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well, the bullying of trans kids is unacceptable, and Republicans,
Speaker 3: of course have tried to weaponize this issue in many ways.
Speaker 3: As you've laid out, one of the first pieces of
Speaker 3: legislation that Republicans brought earlier this year in a new
Speaker 3: term was to try to jam Democrats up as it
Speaker 3: relates to trans women in sports and what they were
Speaker 3: seeking to do, and the way they framed it was
Speaker 3: a nationwide band and I think our explanation. We voted
Speaker 3: against the Republican bill in overwhelming numbers, and we were
Speaker 3: very clear that their effort actually was going to unleash
Speaker 3: bad behavior on girls in sports all across America. In fact,
Speaker 3: we framed their bill Child Predator Empowerment Act because they
Speaker 3: were calling for inspections of Genitalia in a circumstance where
Speaker 3: we know abuses have taken place. Abuses have taken place
Speaker 3: in football, abuses have taken place in gymnastics, abuses have
Speaker 3: taken place in wrestling, and instead of responsibly trying to
Speaker 3: deal with the issues of competition in sports and how
Speaker 3: do we work through that in a community based way
Speaker 3: that of course promotes the values of fairness, competitiveness, and participation.
Speaker 3: They want to just weaponize the issue politically and so legislatively.
Speaker 3: They tried to jam us up, and we didn't run
Speaker 3: away from the issue. We exposed their hypocrisy, and they're
Speaker 3: politicizing the issue in ways that would actually hurt the
Speaker 3: young girls that they were purporting to want to help. Now,
Speaker 3: I think my view at least is that these issues
Speaker 3: should be resolved locally, at the local level, with maximum
Speaker 3: parental involvement and maximum community involvement. And I think when
Speaker 3: it comes to the what happened on the campaign trail,
Speaker 3: you're absolutely right in terms of the policy that was
Speaker 3: used against Vice President Harris was a policy that had
Speaker 3: also been carried out by Donald Trump and the Trump
Speaker 3: Justice Department connection with the court order. And I think
Speaker 3: that if the campaign had it to do over again,
Speaker 3: I presume, given the outcome, it would have been a
Speaker 3: more forceful response to that add and the weaponization of
Speaker 3: the issue against Kamala Harris. I can tell you that
Speaker 3: moving forward, we will never allow Republicans to mischaracterize our
Speaker 3: views on the issue, and we will never allow them
Speaker 3: to run ads against our candidates that aren't forcefully responded
Speaker 3: to immediately, and often before.
Speaker 2: I get to the biggie question that we can wrap
Speaker 2: up the pod, I do have a question for you
Speaker 2: about Joe Biden. Obviously, there's a book out now, Jake Tapper,
Speaker 2: Original Sin, that essentially accuses the Democratic Party and those
Speaker 2: close to Joe Biden of covering up his declining mental health.
Speaker 2: And as somebody who was in close contact with Joe
Speaker 2: Biden quite a bit, what is your perspective or what
Speaker 2: are your thoughts about how this narrative has now played out.
Speaker 2: Did you see anything, were you aware of any kind
Speaker 2: of mental decline? What was your view as someone who
Speaker 2: had to work closely with the president?
Speaker 3: Yeah, listen, I mean I think it was very interesting
Speaker 3: because just a few months before that debate, Joe Biden
Speaker 3: had come to Capitol Hill and the most significant high
Speaker 3: profile appearance of his presidency, which is to deliver the
Speaker 3: Joint Addressed to Congress. In that instance, it was actually
Speaker 3: a State of the Union speaking of tens of millions
Speaker 3: of Americans, and as you may recall, he came out
Speaker 3: like smoking Joe Frazier and was getting at Republicans who
Speaker 3: in real time people like Marjorie Taylor Green and Lauren
Speaker 3: Bobot and others were trying to distract him and thw
Speaker 3: them off his game and what was a hostile work environment.
Speaker 3: Now at the same period of time, it's clear that
Speaker 3: Joe Biden, who did acknowledge this, was slowing down as
Speaker 3: he was getting older, and he made the right decision
Speaker 3: in terms of not seeking reelection.
Speaker 1: But did he make it at the right time.
Speaker 3: Well, it came late and Vice President Harris only had
Speaker 3: one hundred and seven days, and that clearly was a challenge.
Speaker 3: And so my view is the best thing we can
Speaker 3: do at this moment, as opposed to looking backward, is
Speaker 3: to look forward and create a situation where something like
Speaker 3: that never happens again, where we have an opportunity to
Speaker 3: make sure that decisions are made about whether someone's going
Speaker 3: to run or not, that we have next generation Democrats,
Speaker 3: which I believe will be the case in the context
Speaker 3: of both the candidates that we feel to take back
Speaker 3: the House in twenty twenty six. But perhaps most importantly,
Speaker 3: I think a competitive field of candidates who are going
Speaker 3: to step forward in January or the early part of
Speaker 3: twenty twenty seven to raise their hand and run for president,
Speaker 3: and they'll be governors, and they'll be senators and maybe
Speaker 3: some members of the House of Representatives and maybe former
Speaker 3: cabinet secretaries. But I believe each and every one of
Speaker 3: them are going to be next generation Democrats, the type
Speaker 3: of candidate that can potentially emerge from a field of
Speaker 3: great candidates and then excite the country in the way
Speaker 3: that Barack Obama or Bill Clinton, or even Jimmy Carter
Speaker 3: in the nineteen seventy six election, or certainly John F.
Speaker 3: Kennedy when he ran in nineteen sixty excited the country.
Speaker 2: All Right, we've reached the last question of the podcast,
Speaker 2: and I call the Messing question. This is where we
Speaker 2: make all the blogs and all the headlines representative Jeffries.
Speaker 2: As many people know who know you, and they're familiar,
Speaker 2: especially with your work when you're on the House floor.
Speaker 1: You are a unabashed notorious Big fan. Biggie's your guy.
Speaker 2: So how should jay Z feel about the fact that
Speaker 2: you called Biggie the King of New York?
Speaker 3: Well, listen, I mean, I think jay Z throughout his
Speaker 3: career has always paid the greatest degree of respect to
Speaker 3: the notorious Big He of course had the title meaning
Speaker 3: Biggie the King of New York as he emerged in
Speaker 3: nineteen ninety four and then in a few years there after.
Speaker 3: And part of the reason why he got that title
Speaker 3: is remember, right, you had run DMC and ll CUJ
Speaker 3: and then kras won and rock Him and Big Daddy
Speaker 3: Cain in Public Enemy and like New York hip hop
Speaker 3: was killing it in the nineteen eighties. And then you know,
Speaker 3: toward the end of the nineteen eighties, of course you
Speaker 3: had NWA emerge and Straight out of Compton was a
Speaker 3: big hit. But then Ice QB emerges when he breaks
Speaker 3: from NWA, and then Doctor Dre and Snoop and deth
Speaker 3: Row dropped the chronic and that's one of the greatest
Speaker 3: records of all time. And gangster rap was emerging in
Speaker 3: a way that was capturing large parts of the country.
Speaker 3: And so the question was, you know, is is the
Speaker 3: I mean, is the East Coast ever going to be
Speaker 3: able to come back right from being knocked down by
Speaker 3: the rise of Doctor Dre and Snoop ice Cube right,
Speaker 3: and all these artists are on fire the Dog Pound,
Speaker 3: and a lot of people credit Biggie Smalls Ready to
Speaker 3: Die nineteen ninety four though you also have to give
Speaker 3: credit to Wu Tang, You have to give credit to
Speaker 3: Nas when you drop Illmatic, the Fujis and others. There
Speaker 3: was a new generation hip hop artist that was emerging,
Speaker 3: you know, in ninety three, but that really culminated with
Speaker 3: Ready to Die in September ninety four, and then of
Speaker 3: course Biggie just capturing the country by storm King of
Speaker 3: New York. But I think he's given that title in
Speaker 3: part because a lot of people view him, amongst others,
Speaker 3: but first amongst equals in bringing the East back. And
Speaker 3: I think even jay Z would acknowledge that. Now, we
Speaker 3: never got to see what Biggie would become in terms
Speaker 3: of his body of work. We did get to see
Speaker 3: what jay Z would become, and it's been amazing, both
Speaker 3: his legendary hip hop career and then of course his
Speaker 3: legendary career as an entrepreneur. I'm not a business man.
Speaker 3: I'm a business man. Let me go handle my business. Damn.
Speaker 3: I mean, jay Z said it, he forecasted it, and
Speaker 3: then he went out and did it right. So you
Speaker 3: got to you gotta respect that.
Speaker 2: So that answer, Loan, I see why you're in politics.
Speaker 2: Well done, Well done, Representative Jeffrey's well done. Well listen,
Speaker 2: you know, I know right now this is a very
Speaker 2: perilous time in this country. But yeah, I mean there's
Speaker 2: a lot of frustration, as you know, if you as
Speaker 2: you have heard i'm sure from your constituents, from Democrats
Speaker 2: just nationally what that is. But I am super curious
Speaker 2: as to how, you know, moving forward, this party is
Speaker 2: able to pick itself off the ground after obviously going
Speaker 2: through a very very tough period.
Speaker 1: So we will see.
Speaker 2: I am fine to calling this Trump administration that whos
Speaker 2: gonna check me buo administration because right now they just
Speaker 2: they're just out here doing stuff. So we will see
Speaker 2: what comes of it. But I want to thank you
Speaker 2: for giving your time and more importantly for continuing to
Speaker 2: communicate messages that you feel like will be helpful to
Speaker 2: the American people.
Speaker 1: And good luck.
Speaker 3: Well, thank you. I appreciate you definitely wilding out in
Speaker 3: terms of the Trump administration. But we're gonna end this
Speaker 3: national nightmare. It's going to happen. Part of it will
Speaker 3: involve us taking back control of the House. But then
Speaker 3: we of course have to finish the job, and we will.
Speaker 3: We'll get past this and bring about a brighter day
Speaker 3: in the United States of America. All right, thank you,
Speaker 3: thank you.
Speaker 1: One more segment to go, coming up next, the Final Spin.
Speaker 1: All right, time for the Final Spin.
Speaker 2: This week's topic the riots, and I'm using air quotes
Speaker 2: there in Los Angeles the spin.
Speaker 1: According to some.
Speaker 2: In the right wing media, mostly the streets have been
Speaker 2: taken over by herdened criminals, and those of us who
Speaker 2: live here in Los Angeles are under sieged by roving
Speaker 2: bands of undocumented people who have committed a ton of primes.
Speaker 1: The truth. Let me tell you what I see right
Speaker 1: now as.
Speaker 2: I'm looking out my window of my office, which is
Speaker 2: in the heart of Los Angeles. It's eighty degrees. A
Speaker 2: few pedestrians are on the streets and parked cars. Nothing
Speaker 2: is on fire. They are not bands of undocumented criminals
Speaker 2: being out of control, nor any out of control protesters.
Speaker 2: The media often acts like Los Angeles is a small
Speaker 2: town in Georgia.
Speaker 1: There are over four million people who live here.
Speaker 2: These protests are taking place on a few blocks in
Speaker 2: downtown Los Angeles, which right now, if I got in
Speaker 2: my car tried to make it downtown, it take me
Speaker 2: probably about forty five minutes to get there. Because a
Speaker 2: track Los Angeles is not experiencing some crisis despite what
Speaker 2: is being said by the President and others who simply
Speaker 2: want to gaslight the public to justify them sending the
Speaker 2: military into an American city.
Speaker 1: Now, Donald Trump desperately wants to be the bull conner
Speaker 1: of this era.
Speaker 2: He wants to retaliate against Los Angeles because he didn't
Speaker 2: like the governor Gavin Newsom, he didn't like the mayor
Speaker 2: Karen Bass, and he doesn't like that this state was
Speaker 2: also very supportive of Kamala Harris. And it just bothers
Speaker 2: him that a city like Los Angeles just doesn't fuck
Speaker 2: with him like that. Now the President is petty, He's
Speaker 2: also petulant, and the sad thing is he's got the
Speaker 2: full force of the government behind him to support his
Speaker 2: worst instincts. Lucky ess all right, This concludes another episode
Speaker 2: Does Politics. Make sure that you get at me on
Speaker 2: social media or via email.
Speaker 1: I'm at Jamel Hill across all social media.
Speaker 2: Platforms Twitter, Instagram, fan base, Blue Sky and threads. Please
Speaker 2: use the hashtags politics. You also have the option of
Speaker 2: emailing me at spolitics twenty twenty for at gmail dot com.
Speaker 1: You can also send me a.
Speaker 2: Video if you have any questions, but please make sure
Speaker 2: the video is thirty seconds or less. Don't forget to
Speaker 2: follow Spolitics and to subscribe to Spolitics on iHeart and
Speaker 2: followspolitics pod on Instagram and TikTok.
Speaker 1: Politics is spelled SPO l I t i c s.
Speaker 2: A new episode of Politics drops every Thursday on iHeart
Speaker 2: podcast or wherever you get your podcasts. This is politics,
Speaker 2: where sports and politics don't just mix, they matter. Politics
Speaker 2: is the production of iHeart Podcasts and the Unbothered Network.
Speaker 2: I'm your host Jamel Hill. Executive producer is Taylor Schakoigne.
Speaker 2: Lucas Hymen is head of audio and executive producer. Original
Speaker 2: music for Spolitics provided by Kyle VISs from wiz Fx