Speaker 1: Well, good evening, everybody, and welcome to this Wednesday edition
Speaker 1: of The Warning. The great pleasure and a privilege tonight
Speaker 1: to be able to introduce all of you to Gary Kasparov,
Speaker 1: the world chess Champion, the strategic grand Master, one of
Speaker 1: humanity's great champions of freedom, freethinking, and apostle of human rights.
Speaker 1: And so it's said that in an average lifetime that
Speaker 1: each of us, on average will meet ten thousand people.
Speaker 1: And that's what an average person in an average lifetime
Speaker 1: will meet, ten thousand people. And so tonight a couple
Speaker 1: thousand of us will be together, and a great privilege
Speaker 1: to introduce one of the most exceptional people on the
Speaker 1: planet and for us to be able to have a
Speaker 1: discussion about this moment, about the crisis, about the nature
Speaker 1: of the crisis, and about the strategy of how to
Speaker 1: navigate through it. And so welcome Gary casper Off. And
Speaker 1: let me start out by just asking you to explain
Speaker 1: the mission of the next Move and to tell everybody
Speaker 1: who's listening where they can find you and what the
Speaker 1: mission of that publication is, which I think is essential reading.
Speaker 2: Steve, thank you very much for having me here and
Speaker 2: for mentioning the Next Move is a subsec album that
Speaker 2: I started with by organization the Renewed Democracy Initiative. The
Speaker 2: bottom line is very simple. Idea of the Next Move
Speaker 2: is to lay down the strategy, actually to discuss the strategy,
Speaker 2: and the motto of our publication is stop whining, start winning.
Speaker 2: It's time to understand the nature of the crisis, why
Speaker 2: we're in the midst of such a crisis, not just
Speaker 2: domestic but international, and how.
Speaker 3: We can get out of here.
Speaker 2: And it's not just, you know it simply criticizing Trump
Speaker 2: and Trump chronics, but understanding the nature of the threat,
Speaker 2: which I believe is an existential threat to the American.
Speaker 3: Republic and democracy worldwide.
Speaker 2: But also finding resources, I mean finding concepts and strategy,
Speaker 2: how to you know, build something more adequate, how to
Speaker 2: adjust American democracy, American Republic to the realities of the
Speaker 2: twenty first century.
Speaker 1: So let's get into it straight away and talk about strategy.
Speaker 1: Let's start with what is strategy.
Speaker 3: Uh, it's very easy to make strategy and tactics.
Speaker 2: So in one of my books How Life iMedia Chairs,
Speaker 2: I tried to come up with something, you know, quite
Speaker 2: unconventional as a tactics is knowing what to do when
Speaker 2: there's something to do.
Speaker 3: Strategy is knowing what to do when there's nothing to do.
Speaker 2: Of course, it's it's kind of an exaggeration, but basically,
Speaker 2: strategy is according to to to the thinkers, uh strategic thinkers,
Speaker 2: it's it's about the impact of your actions today, so
Speaker 2: how the future will respond to your actions today. And
Speaker 2: strategy is something that you know, you just have to
Speaker 2: you know, lay down and then to use tactical tools
Speaker 2: to support it. So again it's this from the times
Speaker 2: of Zuo Zoo, so this is this is ancient China.
Speaker 2: So the the the distinction between strategy and tactics was
Speaker 2: a fundamental element of a successful decision maker because it's
Speaker 2: so easy to call whatever you do strategy without actually
Speaker 2: laying down a proper strategy that could improve, dramatically improve
Speaker 2: your chance for success. And I think now we're at
Speaker 2: the point where just instead of these tactical scourishes and saying, okay,
Speaker 2: this is wrong, this is wrong, this is wrong. We
Speaker 2: have too many things that we can say, we concentrate
Speaker 2: on something which is more strategic, because it's again it's
Speaker 2: about winning, and winning doesn't mean that we can get
Speaker 2: everything we want. Winning is let me use the chess analogy.
Speaker 2: It's basically to solving the most important problem. And when
Speaker 2: you're king in game of chess, it's under the threat
Speaker 2: of being mated. You don't think about a long term impacts,
Speaker 2: you know, in the endgame. So it's right now you
Speaker 2: have to make sure that you defend your position and
Speaker 2: build the foundation of future attack.
Speaker 1: So let me lay out a couple of things. And
Speaker 1: if there's any premise garbage and garbage out, any garbage
Speaker 1: that I put into my premise, I want you to
Speaker 1: call call me out on it. But this is this
Speaker 1: is how I see the situation, and I think it
Speaker 1: starts with being able to observe and orient to the
Speaker 1: precise moment, this moment in time, in space, what's happening
Speaker 1: and what is the meaning of it and what is
Speaker 1: to be done about it? And so in any situation,
Speaker 1: the aggressor, by nature of being the aggressor has first
Speaker 1: move or advantage against the side of the proposition that
Speaker 1: does not want to be in a fight, but has
Speaker 1: had a fight brought to them that requires standing up
Speaker 1: lest something very valuable valuabill be law. So in this moment,
Speaker 1: how do you assess the strategic situation. Do you agree
Speaker 1: that Trump has the first mover advantage, has the aggressor
Speaker 1: advantage that the opposition, such as it is, if it
Speaker 1: exists at all, if it exists in a nascient state
Speaker 1: and unformed state, there's certainly a lot of organic protests
Speaker 1: going on out across the country. But on on Harness,
Speaker 1: how do you assess this moment in the status of
Speaker 1: Trump's aggression, which I imagine you consider to be increasing
Speaker 1: and building on a constant basis on a daily basis
Speaker 1: as we get deeper and deeper into this, that the
Speaker 1: situation on a constant basis isn't static, it's deteriorating.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I made differ with you here because I think
Speaker 2: the idea of Trump being an aggressor and making the
Speaker 2: first move again using just analogy, could apply to his
Speaker 2: first term. But he is back. So I think we
Speaker 2: should understand why the person with so many flaws and
Speaker 2: I'm trying to be diplomatic, with so many flaws that
Speaker 2: everybody was aware of, succeeded in rallying more than half
Speaker 2: of Americans behind him second time. And actually his second
Speaker 2: performance in elections wasn't even better than the first one,
Speaker 2: so that tells us that the conditions you know, were
Speaker 2: nearly perfect to him. And how come it means the
Speaker 2: opposition actually that at that time not opposition, but those
Speaker 2: who power created these conditions for him were a lot
Speaker 2: of people. And with no doubt that Trump's core support
Speaker 2: a maga support. I don't know you you are much
Speaker 2: better experts on this field, but I would be very
Speaker 2: surprised if with more than thirty percent, a lot of
Speaker 2: people voted for Trump, because the rest was worse. So
Speaker 2: we should take into the account that right now he's
Speaker 2: there because many policies that he advocated, not intending to
Speaker 2: carry through, but advocating for and being associated with, they
Speaker 2: have been neglected by Democrats, by by Biden administration, by
Speaker 2: by Harris's campaign, and by Democratic Party at large. So
Speaker 2: it's very important for us to actually to analyze the
Speaker 2: reasons of Trump's comeback and also to understand how we
Speaker 2: can fight back by creating a coalition, a big tent.
Speaker 2: So to recognize that we can't attack, you know, just
Speaker 2: on the whole front, so we have to pick up
Speaker 2: the directions. They ideal is just you know, you find
Speaker 2: the weakest spot in Trump's you know, called political armor,
Speaker 2: his shield and we attack there. And I think this
Speaker 2: is not about Trump's policies, though we may disagree with many.
Speaker 2: I think it's the bite more likely about the tools
Speaker 2: he has been using. That's where we can build a college,
Speaker 2: and that's of defending constitution. The tools that Trump has
Speaker 2: been using, the political machinations, they most of them are
Speaker 2: partly unconstitutioned. So it's not you know, wasting our energy
Speaker 2: or investing our energy, just apology debating what Dodge did
Speaker 2: here and there, cut these funds or abolished another agency. Yes,
Speaker 2: I disagree with many things they have been doing, but
Speaker 2: the key is that Dodge is unconstitutional. Let's not here
Speaker 2: where we are in the agreement. It's let's not them
Speaker 2: to dictate the narrative, because the moment you start debating
Speaker 2: the policies, we are in a very slippery ground.
Speaker 3: Because immigration, yes, a lot of people agree.
Speaker 2: With cutting the buttyt yes, blow the bureaucracy. So let's
Speaker 2: not debate things where we cannot build a coalition that
Speaker 2: will force many hesitant Republicans to shift their sides or
Speaker 2: to depart drump Let's consider on something where many people agree.
Speaker 2: The actions of this administration in many instances simply unconstitutional
Speaker 2: and defending constitution. I think we create a very powerful
Speaker 2: thrust that we'll penetrate Trump's defense shield.
Speaker 1: Okay, so I want to I want to kind of
Speaker 1: break apart the analysis. I want to play devil's advocate.
Speaker 1: So when I listen to you, I agree with you
Speaker 1: substantially and largely. But but if we're sitting around in
Speaker 1: a room, there are going to be two arguments that
Speaker 1: are put forward on the table, and I want you
Speaker 1: to take them spot on right and and the first
Speaker 1: one is that looking backwards and deeply understanding the reason
Speaker 1: why Donald Trump won.
Speaker 4: Is a waste of time.
Speaker 1: Is that we are where we are, and that for
Speaker 1: me write this notion that each day is a new
Speaker 1: episode of a reality show that's completely disconnected, severed from
Speaker 1: the day before, is both delusional and nonsensical and part
Speaker 1: of the reason we have arrived at this at this moment.
Speaker 1: But what do you say to the necessity of understanding
Speaker 1: the reason for the loss? And I can explain it
Speaker 1: in thirty seconds. And I have no hypocrisy on this
Speaker 1: issue because I called for Biden to be a one
Speaker 1: term president. I look clearly at what I saw and
Speaker 1: say he's not capable of doing this. That there's a disaster.
Speaker 1: I said in twenty twenty two a rematch between the
Speaker 1: two would be a national catastrophe. And what happened right
Speaker 1: at the core level is Joe Biden used the threat
Speaker 1: of Donald Trump to justify his candidacy at age seventy eight,
Speaker 1: saying I'm the only candidate who can beat him because
Speaker 1: I beat him once before. In any talk of me
Speaker 1: not running again is dangerous and it helps Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: when in fact, Donald Trump beat the only candidate who
Speaker 1: the Democrats nominated who could conceivably have lost to him,
Speaker 1: and the Democratic Party lost on fundamental questions of honesty
Speaker 1: to the most prolific liar in American history, honesty about
Speaker 1: the economy, honesty about the border, honesty about Biden's fitness,
Speaker 1: and everybody got in line with the lie rather than
Speaker 1: speak truth to power against the interest of American people.
Speaker 1: So I think it's essential to confront that because you
Speaker 1: have to sever that that baggage, right, that dishonesty, cast
Speaker 1: it into the deep dark ocean. Right, have a funeral
Speaker 1: for it and move forward into the sunlight of a
Speaker 1: new day. But you have to have the funeral first,
Speaker 1: and you have to acknowledge how it is you lost
Speaker 1: a campaign to the greatest liar in American history, and
Speaker 1: questions of honesty.
Speaker 4: So just a strategic matter.
Speaker 1: What do you say to the people who say we
Speaker 1: are wrong in looking back or right that say I'm
Speaker 1: crazy for saying that this has to be addressed as
Speaker 1: a fundamental issue moving forward.
Speaker 4: That requires, in the end, what's a character.
Speaker 1: Test for people who want to lead, to tell the
Speaker 1: America people the truth even if it indicts the self
Speaker 1: interest of their colleagues and friends.
Speaker 2: Here when in total agreement, because okay, chess player is speaking,
Speaker 2: you can't lay down the strategy. You can't work it
Speaker 2: out unless you understand why you lost, recognizing the your shortcomings,
Speaker 2: the wrong moves you made in our cases, not our moves,
Speaker 2: but the moves made by those who were leading on
Speaker 2: our side. So it's absolutely fundamental, it's paramount to move
Speaker 2: into the future. And again, it was Trump's second victory.
Speaker 2: He was coming back, and you're absolutely right, Trump was
Speaker 2: bidable And contrary to what Biden was trying to tell us,
Speaker 2: or actually the cohorts surrounding him trying to tell us,
Speaker 2: it was the opposite. Biden won because he was not Trump,
Speaker 2: and you know, as a one term president, his only president,
Speaker 2: the only real goal of his presidency was to save
Speaker 2: us from Donald Trump, so to offer us normalization. So instead,
Speaker 2: you know, I think he pushed too far to the left.
Speaker 2: But the worst thing he did, actually he didn't, is
Speaker 2: not to step down and let Democratic Party to have
Speaker 2: normal primaries. Because I think that's why Trump won the
Speaker 2: nomination because the best argument Nikki Haley could use against him,
Speaker 2: she tried that Trump was not unelectable and he was
Speaker 2: losing against any Democratic candidate but Biden and or just
Speaker 2: in this case was Kamala Harris, same same story. So
Speaker 2: he would have lost and he would be the very
Speaker 2: weak position against against any Democrat who would go through
Speaker 2: the normal primary process. But because of Biden's was standing there.
Speaker 2: So actually was sitting there just you know, taking this spot.
Speaker 2: Trump could you know, could resist this Ni Hayley's argument,
Speaker 2: and it didn't work out because for a lot of people,
Speaker 2: you know, so but Biden was batable. And then of
Speaker 2: course you know when Biden Biden, every knew Biden could run.
Speaker 2: I think there was another big mistake. I think Democrats
Speaker 2: had no other choice but to go for open convention
Speaker 2: because to fight Trump, they had to gain momentum, they
Speaker 2: had to rally energy. It's whoever wins open convention. I
Speaker 2: know it's a chaotic, it's you can't predict it, but
Speaker 2: that's how you show connections with American people. Trump was
Speaker 2: very successful by presenting his connections with American people, you know,
Speaker 2: as real, while the Democrats tried to do everything behind
Speaker 2: closed doors. Of course we knew Trump was lying, but
Speaker 2: unfortunately the alternatives to Trump's lies was something very so unpacked,
Speaker 2: so unconvincing that a lot of people scratch their heads
Speaker 2: holding their nose. Let's say, okay, let's see Trump, what
Speaker 2: could happen with Trump? Now, they are probably you know,
Speaker 2: sorry for their choice. But unfortunately, back then in in November,
Speaker 2: a lot of them, you know, so the Democrats in
Speaker 2: it's in the car shape or form were not not
Speaker 2: a good alternative Trump.
Speaker 1: Let's let's talk about the other issue, right that people
Speaker 1: would say around this table right about not really needing
Speaker 1: to look back and to really be accountable, right for
Speaker 1: what happened in twenty twenty four before, right about it
Speaker 1: to move forward and talk about the economy, and so
Speaker 1: the question of the economy, what what I believe is happening,
Speaker 1: and I'm convinced I'll be right, and you can dissuade
Speaker 1: me if you think I'm going to be wrong. But
Speaker 1: what what Donald Trump has set in motion can can
Speaker 1: no more be stopped than the slide down a California
Speaker 1: mountain or an avalanche down a Himalayan peak. That the
Speaker 1: consequences of everything have a gravity in a momentum, and
Speaker 1: they will have a crushing effect on the middle class
Speaker 1: American consumer. And so there will be this duality of
Speaker 1: the Katari four hundred million dollar jet. I have no
Speaker 1: doubt that somebody will will be donating a presidential yacht
Speaker 1: of some stupendous dimensions. But the but the gift doors
Speaker 1: or are open, the economy will be crushed. More and
Speaker 1: more people who are crushed will find themselves with an
Speaker 1: inability to even open a bank account. In America, the
Speaker 1: real estate markets are at a very very stagnant level,
Speaker 1: and so so across the broad dimensions of the economy,
Speaker 1: right where you see prices go up, where you see
Speaker 1: wages go down, and we're going to see a fundamentally
Speaker 1: broken promise that was the core of the Trump campaign
Speaker 1: which is that, hey, trust me, I'm competent, I'm successful,
Speaker 1: I know what I'm.
Speaker 4: Doing, and you're gonna have more, not less.
Speaker 1: And by lived experience, that's gonna become true, and it's
Speaker 1: gonna be felt beginning in an acute way, seven weeks,
Speaker 1: eight weeks, ten weeks out right. So there's any be
Speaker 1: a lot of long haul truck drivers with nothing to
Speaker 1: haul come to fall.
Speaker 4: There's gonna be.
Speaker 1: A lot of farmers with crops and nowhere to sell them.
Speaker 1: And there's gonna be broken supply chains up and down
Speaker 1: the broad breadth of the economy, and a tourism collapse
Speaker 1: that's epic, worth tens and tens of billions of dollars
Speaker 1: to the American economy. And so some people say, well,
Speaker 1: that's coming, and it is, and that all we have
Speaker 1: to do is just sit back and do nothing. And
Speaker 1: people will say us, not them, because they'll be responsible.
Speaker 1: And that's what the strategy should be. And you have
Speaker 1: all sorts of people that are on cable news stations
Speaker 1: right that have been affiliated with winning presidential campaigns from
Speaker 1: high to low levels, that are espousing this wisdom. What
Speaker 1: do you say to that.
Speaker 2: In theory, you're right but I think we're at a
Speaker 2: point where people will not be simply satisfied, you know,
Speaker 2: say oh that's bad. They're responsible for what's happening, and
Speaker 2: very likely the scenario could be quite you know negative.
Speaker 2: I'm not sure that diars you described, but definitely economy
Speaker 2: will not be transfriends ad in twenty twenty six. Is
Speaker 2: it enough for Democrats to win by default? I don't
Speaker 2: think so. I don't think so, because we still at
Speaker 2: the moment where the approval rating of Democrats is probably
Speaker 2: Lord and theratory Republicans. It's very low. There are too
Speaker 2: many mistakes being made. You know, there's no trust, there's
Speaker 2: no confidence. You have to come up with a new narrative.
Speaker 2: You have to abandon far left policies that alienated millions
Speaker 2: and millions of Americans, and just you know, look at
Speaker 2: the transpropaganda.
Speaker 3: They always look at these policies.
Speaker 2: They want to discuss something that gives Trump, you know,
Speaker 2: just it's a better rating, like immigration or adi or
Speaker 2: transgender issues. So it's time to stop, you know, concentrating
Speaker 2: on on cultural wars or on some other issues that
Speaker 2: we may you know believe, you know, that's that they
Speaker 2: had to be somewhere as you know, on the front line.
Speaker 3: But that's not what we need.
Speaker 2: Economy, absolutely, but I still believe the constitutional factors are
Speaker 2: very very important. Next year twenty fifth anniversary of of
Speaker 2: the the original independence, and it's very important for us
Speaker 2: to point out that many fundamental things, many pillars of
Speaker 2: American democracy, many pillars of this great republic, could be
Speaker 2: in dangered. And for those who say, oh, it's will
Speaker 2: still win it. Now, it's not just economy. It's not
Speaker 2: just you know, the news about the economy or or
Speaker 2: or foreign affairs or whatever. It's about the spin. And
Speaker 2: don't forget, you know, the social media is very much
Speaker 2: you know, just now on the Trump thumb and you
Speaker 2: have okay, Twitter x and and control by evil masks
Speaker 2: and and the I mean Fox is still the most
Speaker 2: powerful news generator in the country. And a side of these,
Speaker 2: you know, of these obvious factors and their and their
Speaker 2: ability to to to generate pro Trump energy, uh in
Speaker 2: social media. I mean, let's ask one question before all
Speaker 2: these pundits that you mentioned say, oh, it's automatic. One
Speaker 2: question I keep asking, if you know this is we
Speaker 2: are really facing, you know, this is the kind of
Speaker 2: existential moment, so faithful moment in the history of the Republic,
Speaker 2: and Trump knows it's about his survival. Palm Bondi, the
Speaker 2: DJ Cash Patel, the head of LBI, will there follow
Speaker 2: Donald Trump's orders or defend the Constitution.
Speaker 3: I'm afraid we all know the answer. We're just afraid
Speaker 3: to ask this question.
Speaker 2: And that may change all only equations. So that's why
Speaker 2: it's it's twenty twenty sixth. Election is not automatic. Yes,
Speaker 2: fundamentals be on the side of those who opposing Trump,
Speaker 2: but we need to to have our eyes wide open
Speaker 2: to understand the dangers. And also we need a strong
Speaker 2: narrative that will not help Trump to use the witnesses
Speaker 2: in the coalition and to portray this coalition as the
Speaker 2: promoters of the far left Marxist you know theories, which
Speaker 2: they do or they will do any time. But they
Speaker 2: can call your Mimi Marxists, but that will not work
Speaker 2: as effectively as if they call people who are promoting
Speaker 2: this value. Yes, and of course exposing Trump's corruption.
Speaker 3: Is it's again, it's it's.
Speaker 2: Uh, it's mandatory. We have to do it every day,
Speaker 2: and of course he will be doing you know things
Speaker 2: that will will will expose him. But again it's just
Speaker 2: not enough because Trump is bad, Trump is a threat
Speaker 2: of democracy, Trump is a villain, Trump is morn Is
Speaker 2: is not enough to bring back to our ransom files
Speaker 2: those who departed the opposition last November.
Speaker 1: So I agree that the constitutional issue is the core
Speaker 1: and fundamental issue, though all of these other things are
Speaker 1: happening at the same time, and at the core of everything, right,
Speaker 1: what we're talking about is fundamentally a question of right
Speaker 1: and wrong, and that is the divide between freedom and
Speaker 1: its opposite, which I do think is a question that
Speaker 1: we're going to be dealing with at the ballot in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty six. So we were talking earlier today and
Speaker 1: you said to me in a way that caught my
Speaker 1: attention that twenty twenty six, is it that this in
Speaker 1: a sense election for there to be a national repudiation,
Speaker 1: in a in a check on Trump. We have talked
Speaker 1: about some of the problems, the lack of coherency and
Speaker 1: a message, the lack of trust and credibility amongst the
Speaker 1: leadership of the Democratic Party. So there is no presidential nominee, uh,
Speaker 1: there is no sole point of leadership to gather around.
Speaker 1: So across a fragmented opposition, across a republic with an officious,
Speaker 1: aggressive regime that is asserting its antipathy towards the Constitution
Speaker 1: in big ways and small, or how should we think
Speaker 1: about the project of defense? And before we get into that, right,
Speaker 1: I want to talk about something very specific that happened
Speaker 1: today that you may or may not have seen, and
Speaker 1: that's Christine Noam appearing before the House Committee with Eric
Speaker 1: Swalwell and Eric Swalwell Congressman. Swalwell has a picture of
Speaker 1: Raoul Obrego and the airbrush MS thirteen that Donald Trump
Speaker 1: talked about in the Oval office, and he simply asked,
Speaker 1: Christine Noam, do you see the picture? Do you acknowledge
Speaker 1: this image as obviously airbrushed? And I think that this
Speaker 1: is an important question to ask. She's outrageously impertinent, disrespectful,
Speaker 1: refuses to answer the question, refuses like a child even
Speaker 1: to cast her gaze on the picture, but finally concedes
Speaker 1: after a farcical five minutes that yeah, the image is concocted.
Speaker 1: So when I look at that, my question is, well,
Speaker 1: the next congressman who goes after Swallowell, who's a Democrat,
Speaker 1: I never really see any of them, say well, let
Speaker 1: me pick up where he left off, right, is the
Speaker 1: picture on the knuckles airbrushed or not? And to dig
Speaker 1: in and to hold the line on something that's I
Speaker 1: think an existential question of reality, because something's got to
Speaker 1: give when the when the truth of the line meet
Speaker 1: in the meet in the ether.
Speaker 4: And so when you think about that exchange, and.
Speaker 1: You think about the farcical nature of it, how do
Speaker 1: you think about that as a political engagement where the
Speaker 1: truth and the lie need in the context of that
Speaker 1: broader question.
Speaker 2: Yeah, actually I saw it, and I think it's very
Speaker 2: important that you mentioned it because that's a clear demonstration
Speaker 2: how strategy and tactics can work together. Because what he
Speaker 2: did today it pushed Secretary nom it's to acknowledge this
Speaker 2: fake image used by President Trump. That's a good tactics,
Speaker 2: but it has an element of strategy using the levels
Speaker 2: of power that are still available to us, and that's
Speaker 2: the United States Congress, those houses in the Senate. Yes,
Speaker 2: Republicans are in charge there, but we cannot abandon them.
Speaker 2: And that's why the goal is to take at least
Speaker 2: one of them, most likely the House, back into the
Speaker 2: hands of those who will use these mechanisms before they
Speaker 2: become redundant, a very very precarious moment in American history
Speaker 2: where the true oligar in in I said, true, it's
Speaker 2: in the real meaning of this world, when there's no
Speaker 2: distinction anymore between power and money. Rockefeller was not an
Speaker 2: oligard in it cures a term of this world, or
Speaker 2: or JP Morgan or Carnegie, or even Vessels or.
Speaker 3: Zuckerberg, elol Musk is Donald Trump is.
Speaker 2: So that's those who controlled both the money and directly directly,
Speaker 2: not through buying influence, but directly controls levels of power.
Speaker 3: We have to make sure that some of these levels
Speaker 3: of power will be taken away from them.
Speaker 2: And the one the first one is the United States Congress,
Speaker 2: the House, and it's not not much so we have
Speaker 2: three need three Republicans to shift site, or you need
Speaker 2: win these three or more or more seats. It's doable,
Speaker 2: and I think it's very important to to to raise
Speaker 2: the temperature to put more pressure on Republicans. They have
Speaker 2: to feel that, you know, that's eventually they will have
Speaker 2: to make a choice between loyal to Trump and their voters.
Speaker 2: That's why everything that is happening on the floor of
Speaker 2: the House or on the floor of the Senate. It's
Speaker 2: absolutely it's it's the most important action now. And that's
Speaker 2: why I'm very reluctant.
Speaker 4: How to.
Speaker 2: Suggest that the Democrats should look for a new for
Speaker 2: a candidate for twenty twenty eight. You cannot jump over
Speaker 2: because looking for a leader for twenty twenty eight means division.
Speaker 2: Now we need unity because we have to again take
Speaker 2: the levels of power in twenty twenty six. If Donald
Speaker 2: Trump controls the House after twenty twenty six elections, mitermal elections,
Speaker 2: I think we can forget about twenty twenty eight. They
Speaker 2: will never ratify whatever result is. So keys twenty twenty six.
Speaker 2: This is our project, and it's a project of guaranteeing
Speaker 2: that America will enjoy, will have a privilege of having
Speaker 2: free and fare elections. And I can tell you that
Speaker 2: they will do absolutely everything to control the process in
Speaker 2: twenty twenty six. That's why now we have to build
Speaker 2: the momentum. And every time the Democrats, like Congressans Law
Speaker 2: or others expose these lies, demonstrate that the members of
Speaker 2: Trump administration is a nominees prefer loyalty, you know, blund
Speaker 2: loyalty to Trump, to facts, to truths, to the interest
Speaker 2: of American people that's gold.
Speaker 1: Do you think it's really important that there be an
Speaker 1: organization that lifts up what I would say, or the
Speaker 1: fighting Democrats. And I'll give you a couple of names
Speaker 1: of people that I think are are important in this moment.
Speaker 1: Chris Murphy from Connecticut in the United States in it Uh,
Speaker 1: Cory Booker uh from the United States Senate. There's a
Speaker 1: governor candidate in New Jersey who I think will be elected,
Speaker 1: Mikey Sheryl Abigail Spanberger in Virginia, Joscelyn Benson in Michigan.
Speaker 4: You have Jason Crow born to Colorado.
Speaker 1: You have Jake Auchincloss from the state of Massachusetts. Uh.
Speaker 4: You have a wide.
Speaker 1: Range of younger candidates and members of Congress. AOC is
Speaker 1: out there, but right you know to what you were
Speaker 1: saying earlier, you know, to I see a person saying AOC, yes,
Speaker 1: a leader. But if you have a huge rally where
Speaker 1: there's huge cheers that go up when the Palestinian flag
Speaker 1: is thrown over the American flag, I'm not on board
Speaker 1: with that, everybody, and I'm not getting in line. And
Speaker 1: you can have ten thousand people or one hundred and
Speaker 1: fifty thousand people at that rally, shouting me down and
Speaker 1: shouting a lot of people in the country down, which
Speaker 1: is one of the lessons from four years ago, when
Speaker 1: people tried to talk about the obvious but got shouted down,
Speaker 1: shouted down on the cable news show, shouted down in
Speaker 1: the congressional caucuses, shouted down everywhere. So all the people
Speaker 1: who were great at shouting down, I would suggest that
Speaker 1: Gary Kasparov is right about that that listening right is
Speaker 1: an important skill in politics. More listening, less talking. And
Speaker 1: so in a coalition right that's gonna come together in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty six, it means winning seats in places like
Speaker 1: Montana that may not be up for the agenda of
Speaker 1: the Democratic Socialists who were popular in Brookes.
Speaker 4: In the Bronx.
Speaker 1: And the problem is that you have a fair number
Speaker 1: of people that want to impose what is someone's belief
Speaker 1: here but doesn't really fit over here. And there's a
Speaker 1: word for that, and the word is intolerance.
Speaker 4: And so the.
Speaker 1: Democratic Party has an intolerance problem for a broad perspective
Speaker 1: of American opinion that can agree that we want to
Speaker 1: live in a free country under the US Constitution. And
Speaker 1: so that's the coalition that's got to come together. But
Speaker 1: my question is, how do you give expression to the
Speaker 1: voices of millions? Right when the leadership of the Democratic Party,
Speaker 1: with all of their power, walks into a room and
Speaker 1: points at Chuck Schumer and it says, that's our guy, because
Speaker 1: for example, he doesn't inspire me, and I don't want
Speaker 1: to follow him anywhere, and I don't want to burn
Speaker 1: any money giving him more more of it to misspend
Speaker 1: on an election. So what what do we do? What's
Speaker 1: the nature of the problem is we think about in
Speaker 1: opposition that can be meaningful in twenty six.
Speaker 2: Look, one of the Trump's problems is is age. How
Speaker 2: can you go after Trump with his age if you
Speaker 2: have Schumer and Pelosia around. So, for God's sake, I
Speaker 2: grew up in the Soviet Union, and we had so
Speaker 2: many jokes about our Polyburo, But the average age of
Speaker 2: Brezlu's Polyburo.
Speaker 3: Was under sixty eight years.
Speaker 2: When Gorricho was was elected Polyburo, he was just forty nine.
Speaker 2: So Breziev died, you know, at seventy five. And it says,
Speaker 2: so it's it's and we again we were making jokes,
Speaker 2: you know, that says, look at these people. That's ald.
Speaker 2: So yeah, of course medicine is better now it's American
Speaker 2: and Soviet Union. But still, you know, it's just if
Speaker 2: we want to expose Trump, so we have to bring
Speaker 2: new people in. So yes, we Chack Schumer and Nancy Pilosi,
Speaker 2: you know, just just okay now for us is not
Speaker 2: officially a leader, but we know who's calling the show.
Speaker 2: So we need new names, new faces, fresh blood. You
Speaker 2: mentioned many of them, they're just you know, just some
Speaker 2: of them under fifty. Some of them does over fifty.
Speaker 2: But that's what's needed. The Democratic Party has to go
Speaker 2: through also renewal. And it's it's too slow. It says
Speaker 2: they don't want to go away. So it's this, it's wrong.
Speaker 2: It is wrong. And again it's it's you can't convince people,
Speaker 2: but if you have the same faces around, you have
Speaker 2: to show that it's a new party, whether this two
Speaker 2: party system is still functioning properly. It's it's a big
Speaker 2: open question or right now, we don't have time to
Speaker 2: build a third party. But Democrats must recognize that, you know,
Speaker 2: just it's it's their last chance to rebuild. It's you know,
Speaker 2: it's the whole structure and to and to come up
Speaker 2: with a big coalition. And also just if you look
Speaker 2: at the most successful Democratic presidents, so just you know,
Speaker 2: uh back, so that's in the twentieth century. You have
Speaker 2: two governors, Okay, Obama is a separate story, but Clinton
Speaker 2: and Corto, so there's two two Democrats who are who
Speaker 2: are governors in the Red States. So you just have
Speaker 2: to look for different kind of a candidate. And again
Speaker 2: is it possible. Yes, absolutely. You can mention Shapiro, you
Speaker 2: can mention Bishar. I mean you have a lot of people.
Speaker 2: You can look for, some top you know, military brass
Speaker 2: so like Admiral mccraven, some great people that could inspire confidence.
Speaker 2: And also to be patriotic, we should not let Donald
Speaker 2: Trump and and and his chron is to run on
Speaker 2: the campaign of American patrioges. It's not America first, it's
Speaker 2: Donald Trump first. But in order to expose it, just
Speaker 2: to show that it's it's it's just words and nothing
Speaker 2: behind it, we need to offer a proper alternative that
Speaker 2: will inspire people and will make Trump look bad.
Speaker 4: So there are.
Speaker 1: Two institutions right that have outsized impoortance that the American
Speaker 1: people get a vote on. One is in the US Senate,
Speaker 1: one is the US House, and in a perfect world,
Speaker 1: both of them are held by Democratic control. Part of
Speaker 1: the problem is that in the US Senate, Democrats have
Speaker 1: disinvested over forty years from eighty percent of the landmass
Speaker 1: of the country. And the consequence of that is that
Speaker 1: we have states that the Democratic Party relates to as
Speaker 1: if they're not part of the United States, like, for example, Iowa,
Speaker 1: where Jony Ernst, for one hundred and fifty seven different reasons,
Speaker 1: should be a very eminently beatable candidate because of her
Speaker 1: many hypocrisies. But put her aside for a second. That
Speaker 1: as a strategic matter, right, if there's one lifeboat and
Speaker 1: you can only save the House or the Senate, all.
Speaker 4: The senators are going to drown. And we're going to.
Speaker 1: Try to save the House because that is the more
Speaker 1: inviting hill to climb and to take and to seize.
Speaker 1: And the House right, which has a very narrow MAGA majority,
Speaker 1: is vulnerable to falling. And so when you look at
Speaker 1: the when you look at the House right in taking
Speaker 1: it in twenty twenty six, the campaign committee that will
Speaker 1: control the majority of the funding and the strategy is
Speaker 1: run by the same people who've run it every year
Speaker 1: and are the architects at a disaster in Washington, DC.
Speaker 1: So when you think about the strategy, the moment which
Speaker 1: seems to me is that you need people right to
Speaker 1: run in these districts. Is either Democrats right or independence right?
Speaker 1: And I say Democrats because we have a two party system,
Speaker 1: and that's a vehicle, like a car.
Speaker 4: It's better to be in the car than the horse
Speaker 4: and buggy.
Speaker 1: But could run as an independent in some of them
Speaker 1: as well, but that there has to be a grassroots
Speaker 1: movement that gives weight and support or creates a counterweight
Speaker 1: to these Washington DC committees to support ordinary people who
Speaker 1: will go to Washington to set things right. Because if
Speaker 1: you can't do that, I don't know how you create
Speaker 1: the critical mass right to have an alternative that offers
Speaker 1: better because in the end, right the election of two
Speaker 1: rival gangs in a competitive cycle of retribution against one another,
Speaker 1: only it creates to the benefit of the fascist in
Speaker 1: this case, which is the stronger and dominant genetic side
Speaker 1: of the American character in this debate. We'll never have
Speaker 1: a dictatorship of the far left in the United States.
Speaker 1: We'll have a fascist government, right in response to the
Speaker 1: fear of a far left dictatorship, which is part of
Speaker 1: the understanding of Trump's propaganda that's probably missing in a
Speaker 1: lot of the media.
Speaker 2: Okay, let's let you said many things and I just
Speaker 2: let you start, you know, just taking one by one,
Speaker 2: because some of the things are very, very important, and
Speaker 2: they're strategically important, they're historically important. Let's start with what
Speaker 2: you said about Magia majority. There is no Magi majority.
Speaker 2: Maga never never has majority of the country have I
Speaker 2: don't know, thirty thirty five percent. But the arrest of
Speaker 2: the majority for GOP comes from people who believe this
Speaker 2: is a lesser evil because if we look at the
Speaker 2: history and again.
Speaker 3: You made historical reference.
Speaker 2: So Maga fascism, I mean far right populism, authoritarianism always
Speaker 2: came after the left as the.
Speaker 3: Response to this threat from the latter.
Speaker 2: First communists, then fast but historically the fastest.
Speaker 3: Fraction of the society was always bigger. It's easier for people.
Speaker 2: They say, law in order so that the communism is
Speaker 2: too many fantasies. So Maga Vogue is about the same
Speaker 2: the same correlations as Nazi communists in the Environment Republic.
Speaker 2: So Maggie is thirty percent, Vocu is fifteen percent. Mad
Speaker 2: always wins bits vog, but Maddy is not a majority.
Speaker 2: It's very important for us not to let Mother.
Speaker 3: Use vogue to get to majority.
Speaker 2: So when we look at at the composition of the
Speaker 2: House or the Senate, Mody is not there, just dominating.
Speaker 2: Maggie is terrorizing the rest. And they, okay, they're covers.
Speaker 2: They don't know how to grow the spine. But senators
Speaker 2: that you mentioned, I mean, I'm sure Errands she tried
Speaker 2: to or she said she would maybe vote against hexas,
Speaker 2: but they're terrorized. When Elon Mask says I would spend
Speaker 2: ten million dollars for the primary, and because of Jerrymindering,
Speaker 2: we know that primary in many states, in many congressional districts,
Speaker 2: they simply decide the outcome of the elections. So they're terrorists.
Speaker 2: They don't know how to fight against. So we have
Speaker 2: various options, actually two strategies here. What is we could say, okay, fine,
Speaker 2: so let's you know, let's create you know, an organization
Speaker 2: that could protect the vulnerable Republicans, saying if Mask raises
Speaker 2: ten million, we can match it with and we'll bring money.
Speaker 2: But you have to But On one condition. You vote
Speaker 2: for a conscience, not for the country, not for the part.
Speaker 2: Again that's questionable. Second Onaleleage, make sure that they own it.
Speaker 2: You go after them. Yes, Iowa is not a.
Speaker 3: Blue state, it's not even a purple state.
Speaker 2: But Erranst is vulnerable and of course, you know the economy,
Speaker 2: as you mentioned, could be a factor. But make sure
Speaker 2: that people in the states, whether it's Iowa Ernst she
Speaker 2: is running for.
Speaker 3: The actions twenty twenty sixth, whether.
Speaker 2: It is still is North Carolina, that's much closer that purpose.
Speaker 2: What is cornin in Texas? It's also not to one side.
Speaker 2: It's fifty three forty seven. Typically they split there. It's
Speaker 2: not red state yet. So make sure that people know
Speaker 2: that those are not Trump tariffs, but airth stariffs, kill
Speaker 2: Is stariffs, Hornon tariffs. Every time you have a scandal,
Speaker 2: it's not oh Donald Trump nominated and a point and
Speaker 2: pushed through hexcess who are just you know, as a
Speaker 2: joke as ahead of the od Errs voted for him,
Speaker 2: kill Is voted for him, Hordon voted for him. Let
Speaker 2: make them own it. And of course you can do
Speaker 2: the same with members of the House. And then maybe
Speaker 2: at one point they'll start scratching their heads and just thinking, oh,
Speaker 2: God knows, you have little mask and Trump on one side,
Speaker 2: but you have voters on the other side. So it's
Speaker 2: about combined pressure. As of today, I don't see any
Speaker 2: any any strategy that could lead to to forcing these Republicans,
Speaker 2: vulnerable Republicans to reconsider their bland load to Trump, which
Speaker 2: is very much based on on on terror and and
Speaker 2: and their fear and lack of you know, of civil
Speaker 2: pacific courage to defend the country against the narrow party interest.
Speaker 1: So I think that there's two lines that that matter
Speaker 1: in this to be right, and most of the attention
Speaker 1: is on the line to the front, which is that
Speaker 1: place where Maga meets the rest of us and and
Speaker 1: and in front of us right is the Democratic Congress
Speaker 1: led by led by Chuck Schumer, And I think there
Speaker 1: has to be a line drawn behind them that is
Speaker 1: reminiscent of Marshall Stylin's order uh as Stalingrad, which is
Speaker 1: not one more step backwards or nine two. Yes, there's
Speaker 1: and so I mean this in the sense that there's
Speaker 1: a lack of fear of Democrats by the Democratic leaders
Speaker 1: at the expense of the fear they feel towards MAGA
Speaker 1: and and that's how to be inversed and the expectation
Speaker 1: reset that there's an expectation that you don't give an
Speaker 1: inch here. And so from a strategic perspective, right, Wait,
Speaker 1: if you were to walk in a room and talk
Speaker 1: to these people, I think the first thing to express.
Speaker 4: To them, right and I want to talk about how it?
Speaker 4: How it?
Speaker 1: What's the best way to communicate this? Right, because there's
Speaker 1: there's platforms that can aggregate many millions of us.
Speaker 4: This yours, and it's and it's and it's.
Speaker 1: This is that the moment requires a maximalist response in
Speaker 1: the use of the Article one paw hours of the Constitution,
Speaker 1: which is a coequal branch of government to say no.
Speaker 4: And to stop and.
Speaker 1: To assert all powers twenty four hours a day, seven
Speaker 1: days a week, make every second of every minute of
Speaker 1: every hour as painful as it is possible to make
Speaker 1: it to get anything done, while simultaneously demanding demanding the
Speaker 1: immediate accounting for all of our data which has been seized, stolen, hijacked,
Speaker 1: and sold to whom and where God knows, but a
Speaker 1: demand that this happened and the use of power righteously asserted,
Speaker 1: to demand that these things happen, and to put it
Speaker 1: before the voters, and to put everything under a frame
Speaker 1: of right and wrong, and to insist that in this
Speaker 1: country then we follow the constitution right. And I think
Speaker 1: you can't make that argument without accompanying it with the
Speaker 1: maximalist approach, because Trump is heading to a place where
Speaker 1: he will assert the powers of the state against the
Speaker 1: right of dissent before very much longer.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, but you have to understand that this is an
Speaker 2: existential threat. The existential threat. And I think a lot
Speaker 2: of people we just just talked about it thirty minutes ago,
Speaker 2: they think that, okay, twenty twenty six will somehow they
Speaker 2: will regulate the balance and the voters will see it
Speaker 2: and they will shift, you know, from Drum back to Democrats. Ah,
Speaker 2: it's not going to be automatic. So we have to
Speaker 2: fight every day. And unfortunately, you know, looking at Schumer
Speaker 2: or just other Democrats, they don't inspire confidence. So they're
Speaker 2: not fighting there. They just play the same games. This
Speaker 2: is not the same game. This is not about you know,
Speaker 2: making concessions here negotiating. You don't negotiate with those who
Speaker 2: want to abandon the Constitution and whatever the hiding gigs is.
Speaker 2: The Congress now just under definitely the House under leadership
Speaker 2: of Johnson, I don't know, cannot call leadership. So it's
Speaker 2: now turned into just into an extension of executive office
Speaker 2: and Center Tune also shows very little sign of independence.
Speaker 2: So we just have to demand that you know, it's
Speaker 2: an equal branch of power of the government. Actually it's
Speaker 2: a it's an Article one of the Constitution. You have
Speaker 2: to remind them every day. Just made them feel uncomfortable.
Speaker 2: That's what Trump has been doing. And he was very
Speaker 2: good at that. He's still good at that. And they
Speaker 2: put pressure all the time, all the time. And the
Speaker 2: another side again it says, yeah, maybe it's thought wrongs forget,
Speaker 2: maybe it's THEMN wrong. You know, it's a corruption, it's
Speaker 2: a blatant corruption. Yes, absolutely, it's very important to find
Speaker 2: courage to say yes. Unfortunately, we had previous administration that
Speaker 2: was not clear on these issues, neither on moral issues
Speaker 2: nor on con corruption. But again it's it's it's in
Speaker 2: the past, yes, guilty, as has charged, but look at
Speaker 2: here and what's happening those who are shouting about hunter.
Speaker 2: Biden received fifty thousand dollars a months from Ukrainian company. Okay, fine,
Speaker 2: you got it. How about Jared Kushta receiving two billion dollars.
Speaker 2: So let's talk about those who are in power today. Yeah, absolutely,
Speaker 2: as it says, yes, I see him by a big
Speaker 2: r now going around. Now, how about you know the
Speaker 2: what's wrong you know with Trump receiving this this mega jet,
Speaker 2: you know of one hundred million dollars, while many American
Speaker 2: universities who are known for their aunt Israeli, you know,
Speaker 2: Proma's position, received tons of money from Qatar. The answer
Speaker 2: is the institute. These institutions, these colleges, they're private. I
Speaker 2: disagree with what they're doing. I think it's wrong to
Speaker 2: one of Qatar, but they cannot tax me, you me others.
Speaker 2: They cannot you know, subsidize, They cannot, you know, interfere
Speaker 2: with our lives. If I don't want my kid to
Speaker 2: go there, just to Harvard, it can go to Colombia
Speaker 2: or whatever. So we still have a choice in this country.
Speaker 2: But we don't have a choice if we have a
Speaker 2: government that is openly receiving bribes from foreign powers, and
Speaker 2: it is this government has power over our lives, whether
Speaker 2: it's taxes, whether it's a lot, I mean just it's
Speaker 2: a very long list, especially with those like Pambondi and
Speaker 2: cash Ptel are very prevalent with with with the law
Speaker 2: and application of the one.
Speaker 1: The most egregious person who appears before the Congress is Christy.
Speaker 4: Know and i've i've i've h I'm an alumni of
Speaker 4: the staff.
Speaker 3: But I think this is a very tough competition.
Speaker 5: Right right, There's there's a bunch of them right that
Speaker 5: are all competing for the podium and and I and
Speaker 5: I wanted to conclude this last couple of minutes to
Speaker 5: role play with.
Speaker 1: You a little bit and imagine this scenario, uh that
Speaker 1: we are special government employees of the Committee's staff, and
Speaker 1: we're we're walking back into the chambers in the back
Speaker 1: of the committee room, right in the privates space is
Speaker 1: to talk about what's just just went on. And honestly,
Speaker 1: I've been there, I've I've had these experiences in my
Speaker 1: in my career, and typically I don't find myself at
Speaker 1: a at a loss of words to say, but when
Speaker 1: it when it comes to Christy Nome, I'm genuinely at
Speaker 1: a loss of words. And I and I would begin
Speaker 1: the conversation. I said, well, Gary, what what do we
Speaker 1: what do we ask her on the next round here?
Speaker 4: Right?
Speaker 1: Because obviously right, I asked her what the color blue
Speaker 1: looks like? Right? And I hold up right blue dot,
Speaker 1: red dot. She's gonna tell me to go fuck myself
Speaker 1: in in so many words, and Trump loves it. And right,
Speaker 1: I have a uh statuary responsibility, constitutional responsibility, right, and
Speaker 1: and I have the power to to over cite her.
Speaker 1: And she refuses, right to answer a question, refuses to
Speaker 1: show any respect to the elected representatives of the American people,
Speaker 1: just full on uh impersonator right of of either a
Speaker 1: cult follower or think of her as what what do
Speaker 1: you do?
Speaker 3: Right?
Speaker 1: And the next questioning with somebody who brings in the
Speaker 1: attitude of a cash patel, who brings in the attitude
Speaker 1: of a of a Christie numb I mean, she's involved
Speaker 1: romantically with Corey Lewandowski.
Speaker 4: It's an open affair. It's an open secret.
Speaker 1: It's been reported in dozens of media around the world.
Speaker 1: They live across from each other, of course, taxpayers or
Speaker 1: subsidizing that. I would ask her about that, right for
Speaker 1: five minutes. But but there has to be an approach, right,
Speaker 1: that confronts the animus with the appropriate level of reciprocal something.
Speaker 1: How do you think about that confrontation, Because the meaning
Speaker 1: of these confrontations is going to increase as the level
Speaker 1: of confrontation and aggression of the administration increases, right, so
Speaker 1: she will only be strengthened right in the service of
Speaker 1: the lie as this as this goes, as this goes forward.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm yeah.
Speaker 3: The let's say that the Steve.
Speaker 2: Every administration before Trump also could be caught on a
Speaker 2: line whether a lies and lies. But this it's not
Speaker 2: just about lies, about contempt. They just you know, they lie,
Speaker 2: They know that we know they're lying, and they take
Speaker 2: prid of it because it's not about responding to American people.
Speaker 2: So in this case to representsive American people, which means
Speaker 2: talking to the nation that elected uh uh uh uh
Speaker 2: this representatives. But it's it's it's a show for one
Speaker 2: man only to show loyalty and is arrogant. So they
Speaker 2: also want to be very arrogant. So and they believe
Speaker 2: they can stop answering questions, they can show the contempt,
Speaker 2: they can just you know, laugh, you know, just at
Speaker 2: our faces. Even if they've been caught with with with
Speaker 2: with their lies. I mean, for instance, Cash Pattel, I
Speaker 2: mean we know he was a special consultant for Qatar,
Speaker 2: for the governor of Qatar. We still don't know how
Speaker 2: much money he got from Qatar and what he has
Speaker 2: been doing with Katar. So it's this is it's an
Speaker 2: every director is it's it's known for being a consultant
Speaker 2: for mainsponts of terrorism and we don't.
Speaker 3: Agent somehow everything goes to Qatar.
Speaker 2: So but you know, it's this.
Speaker 3: We don't have power to force them to answer.
Speaker 2: And again it's about levers of power the Republicans, they
Speaker 2: control the House. Yes, it's only three three three votes,
Speaker 2: but so far I don't see we're going to get
Speaker 2: three votes. I believe that psychologically, knowing these kind of people,
Speaker 2: there will be no three Republican shifting sites. They will
Speaker 2: be thirty or or none. So's it's not three four.
Speaker 2: They should be a big bunch of them. And now,
Speaker 2: following what you have you just said ten minutes ago,
Speaker 2: you have to put pressure on them. They have to
Speaker 2: know that the oldest that every lie that is being
Speaker 2: said there it's part of them and and them you know,
Speaker 2: being covers not you know, not fulfilling their responsibilities, escaping,
Speaker 2: you know, or just running away from the town halls,
Speaker 2: it will harm them. They'll pay the price for it.
Speaker 2: So they have to know that not far away, very soon,
Speaker 2: they have to make a choice between blind loaded to
Speaker 2: Donald Trump and American voters that will remember them. But
Speaker 2: it has to be campaigned, should be on a daily basis.
Speaker 2: It should have energy. Energy is very important. That's that's
Speaker 2: how Trump and Advance fan because they had energy, and
Speaker 2: looking at Harris and Voltz there was no energy. So
Speaker 2: it's very important that we show that this energy to
Speaker 2: fight for what is right, and you don't get it
Speaker 2: with Sugar Colossi and the rest.
Speaker 1: So I think that when you look ahead, how do
Speaker 1: you see the summer unfurling? Take us into the future here,
Speaker 1: you know, there's always that day.
Speaker 4: In the fall.
Speaker 1: Comes in late September October, where you know, summer is
Speaker 1: over right, the autumn here we be in autumn as
Speaker 1: a country.
Speaker 2: Look, Trump is in office for less than four months,
Speaker 2: less than four months, so that's why we are not
Speaker 2: talking about years.
Speaker 3: We're not talking about months.
Speaker 2: We're talking about every week, if not every day, that
Speaker 2: can change the uh, the evaluations and Donald Trump shows
Speaker 2: no sign of slowing down. So's let's he's doubling down
Speaker 2: every day, every week. So what do I expect is
Speaker 2: that it's very likely that Supreme Court will tell hard
Speaker 2: now to Trump on one of the issues. I guess
Speaker 2: there are many cases, dozens and dozens of casesrey there.
Speaker 2: They will not look at all of them, but lay'll
Speaker 2: take a few of them, and maybe on the burths
Speaker 2: rights citizens burst rights. Maybe on some other cases there
Speaker 2: will be no Now the moment Trump faces Supreme Court
Speaker 2: an quivocable no he what he will do. Likely he'll
Speaker 2: tell go to hell. It's again, it's maybe. But if
Speaker 2: the moment comes when Trump defies open Supreme Court, which
Speaker 2: I think it's I don't know likely, call it fifty
Speaker 2: to fifty, then we are going just straight into the
Speaker 2: depths of the constitutional crisis, because Supreme Court has to
Speaker 2: ask Congress, the House, and the Senate to respond. And
Speaker 2: I believe in this case, Johnson and June will run
Speaker 2: to the White House begging Trump to reconsider, and there's
Speaker 2: a good chance Trump will tell and also go to help,
Speaker 2: and then we are, you know, just it's digging deeper
Speaker 2: and deeper in the constitutional Crisis Insurrection Act. Trump contemplated
Speaker 2: it back in twenty nineteen, twenty twenty. I mean, it's
Speaker 2: with sexes in charge, Cash, Battel, and Bondy, So I
Speaker 2: don't know or no him who will stop him from
Speaker 2: doing such things. And don't forget Trump has few international
Speaker 2: claims Greenland, Panama, maybe in Mexico. He already mentioned that
Speaker 2: you could go off the Cortels. Uh, okay, let's set
Speaker 2: aside Canada for a moment. Greenland, Panama and potential person
Speaker 2: as Cortels, those things that might be very much on
Speaker 2: Trump's agenda in the next three four months. So that's
Speaker 2: why I think the summer could be very, very hot.
Speaker 2: And if economy is not improving, though I don't think
Speaker 2: it will be as as tragic as you describe. So
Speaker 2: we may see some serious clashes. And again I think
Speaker 2: this year might be you know, a very a very
Speaker 2: important one, not decisive one, but definitely next year, next year,
Speaker 2: that's that should be all goal we have to have.
Speaker 2: An our aim is to make sure that by the
Speaker 2: beginning of next year they will be powerful coalition that
Speaker 2: will send a clear message, a very distinct message to.
Speaker 3: Every Republican in the House.
Speaker 2: Uh in a in the Senate, I said, every GP member,
Speaker 2: not not the sell the mugget, but those who still
Speaker 2: you know, have roomful when you that they have to choose,
Speaker 2: and if they make a wrong choice, they will be
Speaker 2: kicked out, not by Master Donald Trump, but American voters.
Speaker 4: I couldn't agree more.
Speaker 1: There's going to have to be a powerful coalition that
Speaker 1: comes together that can project real strength, real power, raise
Speaker 1: one hundred million dollars with low dollar donations, where people
Speaker 1: can come together, draw a hard line and reach across
Speaker 1: the country and elect people to put a stop to
Speaker 1: the to the insanity. I just want to thank you
Speaker 1: so much for joining to having a conversation that just
Speaker 1: reading the comments, I think so many people fascinated to
Speaker 1: hear you talk and really get to see how you
Speaker 1: see the world, such an honest voice and experienced and
Speaker 1: having seen this before. One of the things that I'll
Speaker 1: conclude is that we are in the two hundred and
Speaker 1: fiftieth anniversary year of the founding of the United States
Speaker 1: of America, and it's an extraordinary story. There is no
Speaker 1: day that passes between this and July fourth of twenty
Speaker 1: twenty six that does not have meaning. Right that was
Speaker 1: not existential, when everything that was to come after wasn't
Speaker 1: just really moments away from being extinguished, when what they
Speaker 1: called the cause is hopeless. And one of the one
Speaker 1: of the stories that is commensurate to this moment is
Speaker 1: the two hundredth anniversary of the Mark Key. The Lafayette's
Speaker 1: farewell tour of the United States is he travels the
Speaker 1: country and there's a real crisis in the country. Andrew
Speaker 1: Jackson may or may not concede the election, which he
Speaker 1: does in front of Lafayette. In New York City, Lafayette
Speaker 1: visits the Harlem Free School, where his friend Alexander Hamilton
Speaker 1: has played a key role in the founding. He execrates slavery,
Speaker 1: and Lafayette travels the country. He really reawakens a spirit
Speaker 1: in the people of gratitude, and he sails home and
Speaker 1: the ship is re christened the Brandywine after the battle
Speaker 1: that he bled at for America's independence, and off to
Speaker 1: France Lafayette goes and on the two hundred and fiftieth
Speaker 1: anniversary of the country will be two hundred years away
Speaker 1: right from this moment. On the fiftieth anniversary of the
Speaker 1: country that Adams and Jefferson who were the best of
Speaker 1: friends and closest to partners in the cause, whose relationship
Speaker 1: is torn apart by politics and difference, are reconciled in
Speaker 1: the end, and they die hours apart on July fourth,
Speaker 1: twenty twenty six, eighteen twenty six. In the aftermath, right,
Speaker 1: two hundred years on will be twenty twenty six. And
Speaker 1: the American people look at this event with alle right
Speaker 1: that this can't conceivably be a coincidence. And so when
Speaker 1: you look at the country and you look at the
Speaker 1: two hundred and fiftieth anniversary, we have to consider, right,
Speaker 1: the possibility that a new king has not appeared suddenly
Speaker 1: and without accident.
Speaker 4: Right, A proposition that's.
Speaker 1: Not a new one is being tested again, right, And
Speaker 1: this is this is what happens when when people get power. Right,
Speaker 1: and so all of this is academic, and then one
Speaker 1: day you get a Carolyn Levitt who gets a taste
Speaker 1: of power, and you see the zealotry in the eyes,
Speaker 1: and you see the gleam. Right, you see it in
Speaker 1: all of their eyes, and you see the arrogance, and
Speaker 1: you see the taking, and you can appreciate a new
Speaker 1: All of the warnings that have been passed down and
Speaker 1: all of the wisdom that's been accumulated, as we see
Speaker 1: clearly what's clearly in front of us, and and what's
Speaker 1: in in front of us is certainly very clear. And
Speaker 1: Gary kaspar Off helped make it clearer tonight, and I
Speaker 1: appreciate it. And Gary, I just want to hand it
Speaker 1: over you to take us home and say good night
Speaker 1: to everybody, and close it out with any wisdom you
Speaker 1: might have as we move forward into another day in America,
Speaker 1: as the sun breaks over the Cadillac Mountain off the
Speaker 1: coast of Maine, and we have a new day ahead.
Speaker 2: Look, you mentioned the great experiment started two hudred and
Speaker 2: fifty years ago. And it's not only in this country
Speaker 2: that people kept this day. Or I grew up on
Speaker 2: the other side of arm courtin and always looked at
Speaker 2: America as a beacon of hope and a fortress of freedom.
Speaker 2: And still even was Donald from and all the wrongdoings
Speaker 2: here in America today, still hundreds of millions, likely billions
Speaker 2: of people still viewing America as the best hope for freedom.
Speaker 2: So as a defender is the guardian of freedom against
Speaker 2: tyranny in this never ending battle. And so we just
Speaker 2: you know we have responsibility of defending it, and so
Speaker 2: I can remind listeners about the motto of my substack,
Speaker 2: the next move. Stop whinning, start winning, and the winning
Speaker 2: starts with strategy. Let's discuss it, let's find it the
Speaker 2: best optimal strategy, and let's implement it.
Speaker 3: And to make sure that we'll be with victorious next year.
Speaker 1: The next move, Gary casper Off, thank you very much,
Speaker 1: and thank you to all of you for joining. I'm
Speaker 1: Steve Schmidt. This is the morning I invite you to
Speaker 1: join this community where I promise to be honest, blunt
Speaker 1: and direct about what is happening in this country. America
Speaker 1: is in crisis. Follow and subscribe to this channel and
Speaker 1: on substack.
Speaker 4: Thank you