« Pod Save America

“Owned in the Oval.”

2018-12-13

Trump throws a tantrum over the wall in the Oval Office, Michael Cohen is sentenced to three years in prison, and more Democrats throw their support behind a Green New Deal. Then Stacey Abrams talks to Jon about her race for governor in Georgia, her new lawsuit to uphold voting rights, and her future plans.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
The present exports are pod. Save America is zip recruiter if your business, looking to higher quality people. Here's a few dozen don't from zip recruiter. The smartest way to hire do have a clear the skills, you're looking for, don't be afraid to consider some with more experience than education include key co workers in the interview process. Don't discount fit within your company culture here is one more thing to do. Good is implicated. Our comes out crooked. To try super critter today for free, unlike job words that overwhelm me with tons of the wrong resume. Zip recruiter has powerful matching technology that skins thousands of residents to help identify the right people for your job and then actually invite them to apply its That's it recruiters rated number one by employers in the? U s: that's from hiring sites. Untrustworthy there were one thousand reduce zip recruiters. Are we to higher so go to sip recruiter for free zipper could accomplish crooked, we even credit. When you do that zebra could overcome crooked neighbourhood or dotcom flash crooked
yeah. I welcome the pod, save America, I'm John February Ambient Pfeiffer today and the pod my interview with Stacy Abrams, whose part of a new law suit uphold voting rights in Georgia. We also, but the oval office showdown over the shut down the latest in the Trump family crimes syndicate and politics around a green new deal Also, while we're talking voting rights, we should say it's absolutely worth checking out the new episode of cricket conversations, which features and interview by
Ray Mc Essen with reporter are a burden who's been all over. This issue is written a lot about voting rights to great interview check it out also go to crooked dot com. And check out the new lover or leave it toward its love. It is going The road it is the funniest political show. You'll ever see, you should go, buy tickets help get him out of the office, it's great check it out crooked. Active enough. I guess it's a grey areas, etc for us to buy tickets out. Nobody when it is time is sound. We just otherwise. By like six hundred tickets were showing like green barriers. That's right! Wasn't you sought out another one go to radio city in September is gonna DC, show all kinds of great chose out, go check it out
ACA reminder the deadline for sign up for the affordable care ACT is December 15th. It is almost here, go to healthcare, DOT, Gov tell your friends. Donald Trump doesn't want you to know about the fact that you can buy a very affordable health insurance plans, so I piss him off and go buy one Ok, let's get to the news. In just eight days, the federal government will run out of money to fund about a dozen agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security. The department of Justice and the State Department Democrats have offered to keep the government opened by passing a continuing resolution that would simply fund those agencies at last year's levels, but Donald Trump threatening to shut down the government unless he receives five billion dollars to build a wall. This led to a meeting Tuesday in the oval office between Trump. My pants checks, humor and Nancy policy that ended with the president, taking full ownership of a potential shut down ranting in front of a bunch of television.
Cameras, and I believe we have a clip of this that will play you not I'll, say yes, if we don't get where we want one way or the other, whether its through you through a military through anything, you want to call. I will. Down the girl going up there now and I am proud and all the lottery. I am proud to shut down the government for border security check because the people of this country don't want criminals and people that have lots of problems and drugs pouring into our country. So I will take the mantle. I will be the one to shut it down. I'm not gonna. Blame you for the last time you shouted down it didn't work. I will take the mantle of shutting down. First of all, I would
I will take the mantle. What the fuck are you talking about dad? Why? Why do you think the this us spun out of control so quickly? What what did? What do you think about this? This little interaction in the oval peak as the president is a short tempered toddler with no sense of to be present or even the issues he cares most about. Maybe he threw a temper tantrum that had a lot more to do with Michael Cohen, Michael fled in bawler than Chuckie Nancy. If you well yeah I mean We should tell me where the way this started is policy and humor. They were going to the overall to engage in private negotiations over the government shut down
they didn't know that they're gonna be cameras and press there until they literally walked into the oval office. So then it was pretty great. You know they start talking to the press and policies like look we're here, because we wanted to negotiate in good faith to avoid a trump shut down and assume it. She said that you just see Trump card companies like what did you say? What did you call it trumps, shutdown and from there it was just like all hell broke this. How do you think that Chuck, humor and Nancy Policy handled the whole situation before I say that I have to say I do respect tromp for throwing of a surprise press conference. In hindsight, I wish to God we had done that with banner and Mcconnell, because America good choice, see their combination of evil idiocy it full ah display. So like it's, it's bad form is not great negotiate etiquette, but it would have been probably a net benefit for democracy had been dead, that to your call,
Nancy Pelosi dominated the meeting as you. Does, and I have actually been in a handful of these meetings over the years when Obama was president with Nancy Policy at the rest to end the bipartisan rational leadership. Add she always crush? some like she is playing chess and they are like figuring out where to put the checkers on the board on a daily basis, and she did it in this meeting. She did great, I think there are two ways to look at how humor and policy approaches there is the objects in the room which are less consequential, but They matter some and then there is the sort of longer term view of how it sets up this fight if you? the latter part first, they he did everything perfectly they basically- in that meeting and walked out with tromp claim.
Ex excepting blame for a shot down. That has not yet happened, and that is exactly what you want, because the power the text of a shot down are always centred around, who is to blame and in haste, Firstly, it has always been the congressional leadership. Whether was the Republicans when Clint was present. Their publicans onawandah was pressed, and then the Democrats in the Van a brief. You might miss it. If you blinked shutdown of two thousand and eighteen and here you have trumped declaring repeatedly that he is the one showed in government down, so that is a huge went and they stuck they set out set forward both in the meeting in the press, afterwards, very reasonable positions and put trump in a very, if, like basically in a box, and so that was very good in the room. Why it's hard like trot, makes everyone act like tromp in have check. You were yelling North Dakota ads, Deanna added like this. It's not it's not
all that our work also another, just like classic You know example of people who just can't get out of Washington DC in their head. Space is chuck. Sumer kicking it off by talking about how Donald Trump got so many fucking Pinocchio from the Washington Pussyfoots leg good he's your go. Take a pole of how many cause you like really go. Take a pole of how many people in the country I know what the FUCK Pinocchio is from. The watch I will say, like I agree with you there, I will say that the. Waiving the Washington Post fact, checker demerit system around the around the term Pinocchio is very effective because I bet I bet they don't know like what the Washington Post fact is, but I bet they do know what it means. If someone gets forbidden. Yes,
it's true and of course, as we all know, the Washington Post recently added an extra level to their rating system, and so now you, yet for Pinocchio. But if you continue to tell a lie, you will get what's known as the bottomless Pinocchio, that's the more clever the biggest so tortured. You should also known, if you tell the truth, and it is a factual for everything you get. A courtship had a check Mark
the latest bottomless pit. I am, I am sad. They were not more clever about what a something better than bottomless Pinocchio, which sounds like like an add on to a branch and inaccurate restaurant. I will say to like it's easy to over exaggerated, like shimmer did fine right, I mean, like you, said the most important thing. Is they both get out of there with the upper hand in these negotiations, and they got trump to admit the. He owns the shutdown, no matter what, but you you're right like I think shimmer was more easily it'd into sort of trumps bullshit, then policy was and that you know Trump says well, I did when the Senate. I won Deanna and North Dakota, and then shimmers like it looks at the press, looks outward Americans as when the president, bragging about winning Indiana North Dakota, you know he's in trouble, is kind of like smiling laughing about it. It's like, I dont think this little fight really benefits every
anyone at all, but Pelosi was there and she's just sort of she seemed like because she was the most reasonable person in the room, she's town, the present, if you have both for the world call the votes for the wall. This is article one. We are congresses, how we legislate. We put out a position. You tell us what's wrong with the position. I mean she just like very calmly kept, laying out the facts of the case and the facts, negotiation and and also was able to piss trump off without sort of going down to his level. Also by the way, I think it's funny that might pence was there the whole time, because he didn't you MRS Malone. Looking back and forth his views watching tennis match it was its views he's like looking around the oval office thing like how will I replace those drapes when I'm also my pants? All always, in every situation, looks like. He has no idea how we got there. He probably does it
he sure looks like he woke up from a nap at like like oftentimes with our daughter, like she falls asleep in one place and wakes up in another place and she wakes up being like I fell asleep in my room. Why am I a car right now? I feel like by TAT is like one day he was governor of Indiana and about those reelection. They like wakes up from an app and is like in the oval office, watching some absurd display from Trump hoping he's not ensnared in a criminal investigation. So here's the here's, the Washington Post description of the meeting, the three leaders pointed fingers raised voices and interrupted one another repeatedly. They fought over policy in politics laying bare their differences for all to see and then the analysis for some of the deceased civility police was about how this was a preview of divided government. Both sides are to blame for all the fighting in shouldn't. Everyone be thrown back a cocktail like Ronald Reagan, Tipple Neil blah blah blah Dan was that your general take on the situation. Whoa whoa is politics pox on both their houses
have so much to say about this absurd when you got this first Ladys is better than a millionaire. Romp got an introduction to the next two years of his life, because, in a meeting with the leader of the House under republican leadership. He would have gotten in agreement on his wall and Paul Ryan probably would have such to shoes while we were there so like this is gonna be different. Because he's not going to do what you say, she's not going to say how high, when you talk to jump so that its very different, but have you watched tromp, throw in absurd temper tantrum er? He did not even have the basic understanding of food. Acts on the his signature policy initiative on the issue that he says is the greatest threat to the country, and
You watch that in your like. Ah both sides, then you are terrible. It you're fucking job. You should turn in your punted card. You should leave town in go right recap for the real housewives of New York, as that is the only thing your qualified to do. I have bad. As for you didn't, I don't think we'll be doing live. I actually Inverness. I hope they dont, because I sometimes enjoyed my rehash. Vice recap of activities could be polluted. By put by. I don't really cynical political aphorism request. No, I mean you can see even the Pandit sitting go so far as to say. Both sides are to blame here. Just that the general framing of this fight is like a preview of divided government. Both parties budding heads and rancor about, like you, can't paint a picture of, like you know, bitter partisanship and
anger. When the present aid states is yelling and lying in the oval office, and then the other party is just sort of responding to his lies in trying to correct the record, like that's, not fucking, both sides, but this is this. If I may, I do. I do worry about this for the next two years. Is that, like the press, only has a few like frames, a political frames to put various situations in and right now they are in the Divine government frame right where one party is in charge of one house of Congress. Neither party has the White House and the other House of Congress, and so therefore everything's. I, too government, so everything's gonna be seen through the prism of divided government. Both parties bitterly fighting each other all the time and even though Trump is an extraordinarily different president and that he lies and tells conspiracy theories and know what the fuck is talking about on. Anything in his is extreme right as they come that still lock and a factor into
analysis is just it's. It's not great. Also divided government is good in this situation because we had one party rule government for two years and it was a fucking cesspool of corruption and incompetence, and this is what Nancy Policy and Chuck shimmers job is for the next four years, which is stop this dangerously unfit man from ruining this country. That is their job Nancy Policy, too every country, one that Roma on Tuesday. You do this to get its call out his bullshit. You don't do not give make him fight for everything. Do not give him what he once do. Not compromise with him do state be a Czech against this man look. If the two parties are in the oval office, arguing for some infrastructure bill, and you know they're like ten bill in part, and there still fighting and yelling about their yeah, then you can write about how its divided go. As usual, and both parties can come to an agreement which it that that's fine, but this isn't that you know this is like the government,
easily be open here, say for five billion dollars for fucking wall that nobody wants, except for Donald Trump in his very, is shrinking base. So there a lot of takes by the way that sounded like this. Headline from crystallise the reality tv president just got, beat it his own game. Do you find this analysis about reality, tv to be a bit stale at this point. I hate this so much and every, I ve been doing this for four years, since Trump decided to run for president, and I recognise that he is a reality tv star in. It is true that he does view the world through television it like. That is an important point, its tiresome sometimes but he's a way.
But he does pick his cabinet nominees bay somewhat on how he thinks they would look on tv, no accounting for taste, but he does do that and he thinks about Optics a lot, and that is an important aspect of a discussion of how trumps thinks about things. But when you compare everything to reality, Tv you're one are just just drew ploughing over used ground just over and over again like have a fucking original thought, your life. But there is something more important than that, which is You can call it reality tv and compare to reality tv if you have no skin in the game right, if you like it There are states the stakes for these earth for real people like real things matter here like this is some of these policy choices are life or death for people. They are the difference between having healthcare, not having healthcare, having babies, indicative cautious in your critical at all,
of these things, and when you compare it to reality, tv ATV genre, whose entire premise is that it is fluff that it is brain candy that you can enjoy it without having to deal with it with a real emotional stakes of real life or You know we're even more. You know complex drama. It is the idea that you can watch it without having it without having there be consequences. When you compare politics to that, it is just as bad as compared. Impala is comparing politics to sports all the time, but you have to understand and talk about the steaks- and I say this as someone who really enjoys a lot of reality tv and thinks the below deck the best shows on television right now as other three damn yes, whereas a bold tweet about blood, a lie that really surprised alot of people really Apparently there's a very aggressive inner pump rules hive on Twitter, who were offended by my choice or you get into that. Ok, so the question
hours. Where do we go from here? Republicans in the house are planning to vote on a government funding bill that includes trumps five billion dollars for them. All they may not have the votes, although Now, some of them are basically saying Wilson. Policy said that we don't have the votes now we have to vote for it just to prove wrong, because that's the best way to make policy decisions. So if they do pass this in the house, the bill goes to the Senate, where it definitely doesn't have the sixty votes it needs need, Surpass dies in this and then, if nothing else changes and no one else budgets, the government will shut down on December. Twenty first always will partially shut down a bunch. Different agencies will shut down so question can anything be done to avoid this and how do you think this ends, I think it's highly likely. There is going to be a shut down at some point cancer is only so long. You can kick the can down there. I do think there is a chance that there could be a short Extension here too, just because people wanna go home for the holidays rides.
This is constantly our old friend Peter Ass to what the hook clinical hunted for senator who work for Obama, chief of staff in the centre, what does with em. I wish you to say when it comes to the Senate, there's nothing stronger than the smell of jet fumes. Soda comes time to go home, people will compromise, and so how begins do not, if there's a story, the paucity of about problems are not super excited about trumps plan shut down so you can see a world where maybe they're like we'll come back and have had this battle later, and it seems that the Republicans powers are probably betting on trumped up forgetting about it and moving on, because anything they want to have this fight in any way shape or form in the question is whether Trump and trumps base. Will, drag him to the fight, but there's a chance that we could see some sort of short term continue resolution to get us to a later date. Yeah, I mean also win if we, if that happens by the way and we
come back, then we'll have a new Congress. With a new house Pelosi controls the house. The house will pass. The democratic house will then pass a continuing resolution to fund the government of current levels. It will go to the Senate. They're, probably will be the votes in the Senate to pass what policy pass, which has just funding the government at current levels that a lot of people can agree with, and then it goes to Trump and so then just Trump just continue to veto bills, bipartisan bills that came to him from the Senate and the House from Congress and leave the government shut down as a bunch of federal workers, don't get their paychecks and don't come to work in a bunch of services for the federal government just shut down because he wants his fucking wall I mean- I don't know- maybe he does. But how long can you keep that up?. There is a plus it a minus the tramp of kicking this down the road, The minuses, as you point out as it Nancy Pelosi, controls the floor January so no bill with the wall and it will ever be brought before the house. That's the minus. The plus is also that Nancy Policy controls
war and no bill with a wall in it will come to the fore. The house. The sense that now. If you want to have a shot down, it is easier for trying to have a shot down in a time of divided government, not at a time which Republicans control all the levers, which is what would happen. Yo be complete, Republicans control of government if they shut down next week they shut down a month from now. He is more ready, foil in a democratic house. Ethical Mokanna will be unaware position as Nancy policy will pass the new resolution, so the cows come home and the question is: will Mcconnell take those operate? Will he refused to bring those to the floor and try to force some sort of negotiation? Were Trump can get a fig leaf like that will be yeah? You know where this probably, as I don't think there is no world, I think where he gets five billion dollars for the wall or anything similar b. Is there something that he can convince? The mega base is a victory on the wall and he's already claiming previously built fence to be a sign that he has one so
Then he will not be street. He will not be restrained by credible arguments right, which would Might, in this scenario, be the positive here. He could basic Emmy There is already like one point: three billion four billion on the table, which is just how much the the day chess d, the departmental insecurity, would get for border security in general, not for the wall it under are continuing. Pollution and so the difference being that in the five billion he wants for an actual concrete wall like you could see it end up somewhere in the middle and the government stay open and it still a fucking complete waste of money. But then we don't have a government shut down, but I Alex, I think, like the important point. His ears like Democrats, have all the leverage because like if Trump wants to keep a government shut down and policy, says yeah. Well we're trying open it by just passing a bill to keep the government open and he saying no.
Was he gets his way? I think is a very strong argument. Yet it is a strong position, as a rational being has ever been made in a shut down, for you are now so so something I just think interesting about this whole argument: that sort of reveals the game to everyone about how Trump to use politics, because Trump takes credit for everything right. He takes credit for the economy. I mean everyone took credit for planes Washington the Obama presidency. You think he like it is natural instinct to take credit for everything, and there is a different world where he could say. I am now president look at
Yet this attest x on border apprehensions, deportations, border crossing all these statistics and say I solved the problem or I made this huge progress on the question of undocumented people. Come into this country right. I stopped the caravan like. He could just take credit for that and say he fix the problem, but instead he needs the fear of a quota quote invasion of brown people coming to the country to get his based going, which is why he needs to keep having this. Given his opponent just doing what he does on every other thing, which is take credit, whether he deserves it or not, and in almost every case he doesn't well that yeah Ezra Climate, this point, the other day is it in a trump doesn't want the wall he wants to fight over the wall. If you after all. If we wanted an actual border security, there's a way to work with Democrats to make sure the border is secure. We do it all the time we did during the about restriction. We did it for every administration preceding the about footmen
patient and where there are holes we can fill them with more borders. We could do that. We keep the board secure. He doesn't give a shit about keeping the borders secure. He gives a shit about making sure that his base is scared of an invasion. Like you said, Anne So there there's no no scenario where he's happy over this, because if he doesn't have that issue, if he can't do election year or whenever he wants go, tell people there's an invasion of immigrants coming into this country. Then he doesn't have anything to get US base excited about the accused member. He could have had the wall, a year ago, when shimmer offered him the deal of Dhaka, fur broadening and he didn't take it. That's right. Do you think so he obviously things as a great politics for him. Do you think that good politics for Trump and maybe demanding the wall and threatening to shut down the government over. It is not good politics. At least you know. We can see that in Poland.
How NPR, PBS Maris had a pull out yesterday by twenty one point margin. Fifty seven percent to thirty six percent Americans think the president should compromise on the wall to avoid a government shut down rather than stand firm and more than two thirds I do not believe building wall should even be an immediate priority for Congress. Half don't believe it should be a priority at all. Trump, of course thinks this is good politics. Do you think, there's a case to be made that border security in general is good politics for trot? It depends on how you view politics and tromp views politics very differently than everyone else, and I think important to understand, is that when you see as a pole that says two thirds dont like this one third fucking loves, it Trump sees that and says I want them
third rail his goal- is to keep the one third of voters who love tromp in love with tromp and kiss. He needs that he needs that for hit to fill the own. Ravenous hole of insecurity himself, but he also needs if that is what protects him for being tossed overboard by the Republicans who wish you'd never been elected in right. It is a thing that protects him. A impeachment trial in the Senate is a thing that protects him from Republicans walking away from on every issue. In so lay we tend to think about politics. Have how do you get to fifty point one how do you get to a majority so that you can win elections Trump thinks about it in a short, more short term way, which is how do I keep one? Thirty people fired up about me and enable run through walls. For me, and in that sense this is good politics for him. It's not good twenty twenty politics, but it is good. Politics do get
to twenty slash twenty, and I think we have to understand that he's not insane when he thinks about this. He just thinks about politics differently. It may be a battle like a not the right approach. If you want to be re elected, but it is based on his or the strategic framework, he is a chief We want to do and you- and I have spent approximately thirty minutes now and we have barely touched on the rampant amount of crime. News is come out about Trump, and that is also to his benefit. Will let's get there that on that? No good subway? Let's move on to today's edition of hot tub crime machine former Trump returning Michael COIN was sentenced to three years in prison on Wednesday, four would judge William Polly called quote a veritable smorgasbord of criminal conduct, including the judge, including tax fraud, bank fraud and conspiracy to defraud the United States by hiding hush money payments to trumps mistresses that should have been disclosed campaign contributions, payments that
by everyone's account Cohen, the prosecutors. The judge Trump himself directed comin, to make at his sentencing coincide, he's been living quote. A personal mental incarceration. Ever since the day he started working for trouble to whom, was blindly loyal. Cohen said that he felt it was his duty to cover up for trumps quote dirty deeds dandy. We learn anything new from the sentencing hearing. I dont know that we learned anything new of consequence, but what we learned, what we have been reminded of is very importantly, which is worth Donald Trump, not president. Today he would be indicted for crimes unlikely headed to the same place, Michael Communists, headed, and that is such a monumental think that it's almost too big to truly fathom in the constraints of actual of how we think about politics right, it is the president- is a criminal and the only
thing that is keeping him from going to prison is being president, and that is fucking. Weird yeah, I mean that's, that's one thing we learned at the big one January who works for smaller, and the special Council office also said common, provided, quote credible information regarding any links between a campaign in a foreign government. So that's the second conspiracy that also from might be, should be possibly indicted for that. Well, maybe find out more from Mahler as the months on here. Meanwhile, since it, U S, attorney Nicholas Ruse, part of the New York prosecutor, ill team from Sdn. Why said, the coins could charges portray a pattern of deception, brazenness and greed, and he added most importantly that these crimes harmed free and transparent elections in committing these crimes Cohen, has eroded faith in the electoral process. Now,
as the prosecutors are saying all this about Cohen, there also saying that Trump directed him to commit these crimes. So by association here the idea is the Trump has undermined faith in the electoral process and undermine free and transparent elections, which I think is probably going to be a theme of the indictment they come down here, both in the Kohen hush money case and the Russia case. Importantly them in the one of the many incredible things about Mahler here in the special council investigation is, he is weaving together a very cohesive narrative about trumps crimes. They are not random here. They all go to the central point that Trump and his campaign his associates have undermined our electoral system with their crimes get
a great it's not like it's it's our great in the other thing is important by the way is like this is not every agency. This causes trumps defence here this is not Cohen's word against trumps. The prosecutors would not have brought this case. The judge would not have accepted the sentencing Mona sensing recommendation if had not been hard evidence. They know the Cohen doesn't always tell the truth, and so there is evidence of this too, which is also the more much more credible because trumpets just like tweeting up a storm this morning about like all these defenses, that sort of fall apart, on closer look, and I don't think he realizes, or maybe he doesn't doesn't care that there is evidence here. You know id like there something interesting that has happened over the last week, which is for the people who have paid close attention to what is happening, been happening related to all of the various trump crimes, whether its related to these payments or Russia, or very feeble. Why, before Congress align the FBI like we have sort of
known there like. There has just been this lag between what the evident says it's or of the general view of the press and political world about the legal and political peril, the trumpets in because of these investigations. Right. I think up until this past week, this or if you are What truth, Sarah into a bunch of DC reporters, their sort of would be yet from probably did some things by the campaign, and here too dumb to actually engage any real criminal conspiracy and it doesn't really matter because his base won't care and promise. Congress won't do anything and you feel a little bed? Maybe it's the rounding, the court to the twenty twenty election cycle, or it's just just that all these things tat It happens slowly and then suddenly, but they like in the last week- and I think the Kohen sentencing memos like we're the sort of honour the tipping point here they were like. Oh, there is a lot of real
criminal AL, real real, credible allegations against Trump and real. SK very serious legal jeopardy for everyone involved here, and I think that is different in that. Does affect his ability trend politics in Washington between now the presidential election year, and one more piece of evidence that came out this week to that regard, prosecutors also announce on Wednesday. The parent company of the national inquirer is cooperating in their investigation of the payments and evolved Cohen, from the New York Times quote. According to prosecutors, american media company admitted that it's one hundred and fifty thousand dollars payment in August of twenty sixteen to Karen Mcdougal, a former playboy model, who said she had a ten month affair with Trump had been made in coordination with the Trump campaign and was intended to suppress allegation
about the candidate under the agreement with I dated in September, but previously kept private federal prosecutors in Manhattan agreed not to charge the company in return for its cooperation. Amides chief executive, David Packer, provided testimony is prosecutors investigated. Calling the sheer in exchange for unity. How big a deal is this? This is actually the biggest deal of the things we ve learned over the last two weeks and mighty yeah, because what you have liked the trot. The argument that tromp has made is that the meat What is the fact that he lied to the country about these payments for a very long time, which is in the lead week or so he has shifted a story to say these payments were not campaign finance, waited right, so is essentially saying I made these payments because I didn't want the public and my family to know about these things I had done without regard to the present.
Campaign that was happening. That is essentially, as I understand it, the defence the John Edwards used to avoid criminal penalties As for a very complicated scheme to pay off the his the woman, he had an affair with and had a child with during the tutor the new presidential campaign- but here you have David Packer one of trumps best friends. You have saying that this was very explicitly done, coronation with trumps personal journey, but with the term campaign and was done for the experts. Purpose of to use a term about these days. Defrauding the american people is in action is that is it deal and will be if and when, goes to trial either in the Senate or some other point in time. It will. This will be very important. I think in by the
granting, am I an packer immunity? Here is no small thing, because the crimes committed was an illegal corporate campaign contribution rate like again is allowed to donate as much as he wants to his own campaign. His crime and Collins crime is not disclosing that contribution its it. It's a violation of disclosure was a miser crime. Here. Is you can't pay a hunt fifty thousand dollars, if you're a corporation, to influence a campaign like that, you just can't you just can't donate that it's like an in kind contribution. So is it to not prosecute an illegal corporate campaign contribution means that they must have their packer and am. I must have given prosecutors quite a bit here and they must have gone up the food chain, and that means further implicating tromp or giving evidence to implicate Trump or trumps family in the of organisation, and that means one of his kids, because Alan Wise,
who's, the CFO was the only other executive at the Trump Organization has also been granted immunity by prosecutor that than the it also work thing, is really important and I wish I'd brought it up. Last week we were talking about one of the things that knows that we want to know which is what is allowed. Yes ever tell people guess he is, he is run the books at this red criminal syndicate. For years, and so he knows, everything is like the suffer, get us how occupant down, as when his account and turned out I'm, We think that was everything has historic, oppressive. That should be alarming and it is also worth noting that the Am I a national choir has been the closet. Workshop has been story, his skeletons for a very long time, so there could be a whole host of things that happen that we don't yet know about that that prosecutors know about because of the steel
so less. I, with the question of indictment, the for Acting solicitor general of the United States, NEO Cudgel tweeted on Wednesday, that the only things keeping trump from criminal prosecution or the Department of Justice guidelines that say a sitting president can't be indicted. Neil things that there may be some exceptions to this rule, but he also argues that those guidelines could ultimately hurt Trump, because quote if indictment is off, the table. Impeachment has to be done What what? What does he mean by that can Trumpery indicted and should he be indicted evil? I think It is I put on my foe attorney cap edges really rely on a couple of come across, as I took it in college. But is it. This is Justice Department guidance. There is no. This is an interpretation of the law on the constitution. It there's no wall on the books somewhere. There's no amendment the constitution. There is no provision that says a president cannot be indicted. Is the opinion of the legal analysts at that this department, many many years ago in his room,
and as such, for a very long time. So it is an opinion. Opinions can change and it is, and it makes it does point. If you believe this to be the case and mother believes this to be the case as the, and why believes this to be the case, it does put some pressure on Democrats. You have to eventually move on opening up impeachment proceedings at some point because you have these clients, these very obvious crimes that word not committed. Perhaps trump, would not be president. You whole host, whether that is collusion, whether that is he's payments, you have a whole host of other things that may be revealed in the Mulder Report or earned. Their sancy memos or indictments in the southern district in New York investigation and if the only recourse the only way to hold trump council. For these crimes are to have a proceeding for that active
he is in Congress. Then the pressure Rob Democrats increase the likelihood that tromp will be one of our few president's. Who has a scarlet? I buy their name yeah. I mean two things from wood meal was treating one. He said he believed the guidelines, don't necessarily apply to crimes that go towards obtaining the presidencies, now that you mention this, because basically you want to avoid incentivize in a world where the prize of winning the presidency is it get out of jail, free card for crimes committed to get there, so that makes sense like the other- the reason that the Deirdre guidelines say that a sitting president Indeed it is okay. Well, the president can't begun this trial, while he's gotta, run the country there's important duties here it could hurt. The american people in the country at the president has, to you know, be distracted by this lengthy trial. Of course, we know the trump in doesn't even get up and go to work until three o clock, which is what happened on third on Wednesday. So it's not like he's that busy.
Two I deal at the trial but in inner usual case, that's the deal, but the idea that you can commit a crime. In order to obtain the presidency, and then once you win the presidency, you can't be touched, you can't be indicted. Has it incentivize his people to commit crimes to get the presidency in its clearly not what the founders intended. That's clearly not with your J guidelines intended the other boy that Neil made it a meal by the way wrote the special council regulations back a ninety. Ninety nine or set up a special councils office Mahler can seek a departure from D o J policy and ask for permission to indict Trump. He the acting attorney general. The acting attorney general either says yes, which, with these guys
and there seems unlikely unless it is rod, Rosen Stein, which we don't know who the acting attorney general oaks overseeing the case. Right now is because they won't tell us, but if the acting attorney general says no, you cannot invite the president, then it triggers this Mahler must report all the information he has to Congress both the majority and minority parties, so in a way mauler asking for an indictment of trump if he so chooses, and if he has the evidence to do so, could trigger making sure that the public
knows what Mahler knows, and you know the report doesn't get quashed by some trump totally in the attorney general's office, which I think is a pretty big deal. It is there a couple their elements of this, which is you like Niels Point, is very interesting, both as it relates to crimes committed to get the presidency, but also what about crimes committed before the presidency right like not, let's put trump aside for research not but like. If you have a present like under the way. This is currently interpret it right. If you will act a president and then that present a suspected of committing a murder Pino within the stature of limitations. That president could not be indicted for said crime right, and so that I mean that there is just it as creators very perverse set of circumstance, swear whereby the president is
president has a special privilege that makes them immune from the legal accountability that everyday citizens face. Add that is interesting, which is crazy, because the president's not the law, you know now. I sitting there very good reasons for this policy right where like? I keep reading it instead, thinking like yeah, it makes It's because what you don't want is to be aid. To have a political effort? You too, to undo an election through the criminal justice system right like that the designated way in which our President faces legal repercussions is through right, so that there is a political issue that essentially the people have a voice in that right, which is they elected these additives, and they will have you re, elect them or send them home if they abuse that privilege, as essentially happened with Republicans who impeach cling and so it makes sense if you like, but Trump, but this present
The situation is different and then, when you start saying this present, the situations differ kind of explains why the policy is there to be lying with, because some other time down the road it'll be died in a way which you don't agree with the exception, and so I tend to side with the fact that this is the right thing to do yeah well mean we are only talking about this, because we don't. We see that there's like a broken remote, in party that will refuse to impeach this president, no matter what crime he commits, but they were. The reason that it set up the way it is because an indictment is a way to take care of everyone in the country, except for the president. Where impeachment is the remedy, that's like an indictment right and then so you haven't PETE from proceedings in the house. If the president commits a crime and the impeachment proceedings in the house and voting to start impeachment, proceedings isn't necessarily
spelling the president from office. It's not convicting him. It's merely saying this is gonna, be our version of a trial that every other American gets when they are indicted and an that's supposed to be the process so, whilst even happens, POD save America's you buy com? Twenty eighteen was an exhausting year. It really As between the uncertainty of the mid term elections, the president's late night, twitter, ants and slow arose and of political norms. We were really tested emotional. Were with the long road ahead to twenty slash. Twenty. We need to stay calm, cool and collected if we're going to get there with a winning strategy. Chill man, that's why we're partnering with come the app to Hell. Sleep, better, relieve anxiety and not think about which reality star will put in their presidential bit man if it had to combat coms live crooked. You get twenty percent off a calm subscription, giving you access to hundreds of hours of content like guided meditations. That feeling
coming blue wave washing over you helping you easier stress and anxiety. Do you think that the person who does pr for their website works on a computer? That's their conduct. Com coms come And you were a kid when you don't know anything about politics, and Donald Trump was just a guy with weird here and home alone You do when you were a kid. When you don't know anything about politics and Donald Trump was just a guy with weird here and home alone. To have had double job was like hey little boy. I run off on your own, fearsome directions in Manhattan. Maybe that was a fuckin sign. You know one of many further, time. Friends the park at twenty five percent off a calm premium subscription come dot com such crooked that see a l m dot com. Such crooked get unlimited since the olive comes content. Today it comes out come such cricket because, as we are on November third, twenty twenty we're going to need all the calm. We can get put them Amerika is brought to you by square space. The future coming make a brighter squares base. Turn your cool idea into a new website showcase. Your work, blogger, publish content
announced an upcoming vendor special project and more squares bathe, revive beautiful templates created world class designers powerfully commerce functionality lets you sell anything online and the ability to customize look and feel settings products and more was just a few clicks. I can't rediscover space Edna without thinking about Jacob Wall on his website. Want you guys, tuna, I wish I was yesterday. Everything is optimized for mobile right out of the box. Make it yourself easily create a website by yourself. Could scarce based our complex cricket for free trial and when you ready to launch use the Africa crooked to save ten percent off you first purchase of a website or domain keep dreaming, but make that dream a reality with website squares, Ok, I want to talk about climate change before we get to our Stacy Abrams Interview. Over the weekend. Political ran, a story about how climate activists are reconsidering where their carbon taxes are the best tool to use to combat climate change. This comes after protests in France over a fuel tax
and after a carbon related ballot measure in Washington state that was just defeated. That would have charge fifteen dollars per tonne on greenhouse gases and use the revenue to help community suffering from the effects of climate change or the closure of fossil fuel industries. So Dan is a carbon tax politically viable end. I guess more importantly, is it necessary? I am not enough of an expert in climate policy to know whether it is necessary whether it is the only solution or so much more so much better a solution, everything else is what we should do. What I do know is that basically, no one has made a political argument for it ever right. The process always begin Let's run up, let's have a poor and we see it in a test terribly, and so, let's put to the side and not do it and why you have like Al Gore and Tom Friedman and people who write near times our beds and speak at Davos, arguing for no one very few people, if not no one who has been running
campaigns in facing the wall. The voters has made a strong and consisted case for which a sort of like no shit. No wonder it's! It's not proper, because you only have people making negative arguments and no one making positive arguments. I was sort of hard to make no argument for it for a decade and then try to put in place like that. Never works when you do that, you will always faces serious backlash, so a bunch of proposals around a carbon tax. You can design a carbon tax, a million different ways so hard to talk about. It is one specific policy, but, for example, you could institute a carbon tax so that people you know. The idea here is that of gas. The price of gasoline is a little bit. Higher. People will be incentivize to buy fuel efficient vehicles so that their not paying as much at the pump right. So you could institute a carbon tax where, in order to make people hole and who are paying higher taxes at the pump, you cut their payroll taxes,
So he gave a big peril tax got to working class people to middle class people and therefore their in in some there really not paying any more at all. So there's all kinds of ways to design this but there is also by the way it awaited designers. Were you say this is a tax on corporate polluters right because war with them source of dirty. Energy here are like coal plants and cynical, felicity- and it's not like that, and so you, you mainly placed the tax on corporate polluters, and I bet if you pull, that it's gonna pull out better than on average people who are driving around have to pay more at the pump and
The money that they're paying is getting co towards reducing the deficit, but there's a whole bunch of em. A carbon tax is one way to do this as a whole, bunch of other ways too, to regulate the emission of greenhouse gases, and you can all the way up and down the chain here, and you can start with the companies that are polluting and I do think, that's probably more politically viable solution which brings us to the green new deal. There are now thirty five has Democrats signed onto a green new deal, which is a series of investments that would get us to a hundred percent renewable electricity by twenty thirty five in zero. Now
carbon emissions by two thousand and fifty while creating ten million jobs over the decade, and that includes by the way, a green job guarantee for anyone who's transitioning. Out of a dirty energy job now, they're also been activists protesting outside of Pelosi's office. Who's now promise to re establish a select committee on climate change in the house, which was last there in two thousand and seven, and we also know a full sixty nine percent of Americans think the US should work with other nations climate change, that numbers up a little bit. So what do you think of the green new deal is a more politically viable the carbon tax and how hard for Democrats be pushing this. Either it is certainly seems to be more viable than a carbon tax. It is it like there is not it is, and it seems to me to be put aside- the politics It is substantively a morally the right thing to do right. It is a bold roads to two huge problems facing this country on the planet,
My change being one of them in OZ, the transition and our economy from a man you actually ring fossil fuel based economy to something new which, if we don't have a big, bold new deal, ask plan for work. End up with a bunch of low paying service jobs with no benefits, while all of the manufacturing is happening in countries other the United States and so what you need. Bolts, since we have to get behind the just a simple way: sound bite, e tax our tax incentives for acts or attacks cut. For while we need a bold holistic solution to address these problems- and you know with the dead will be in the details of all of these are facing very. How does the green jobs guarantee work? How does the like? What does it look like to? Actually This issue out of fossil fuels, to fully renewal by twenty thirty five, all of that matters, but it seemed like this,
is a bold solution to a huge problem that people should get behind, and I am curious about some of the politics here that have made some Democrats not jump on right away. Yeah I mean look. I think this has been the. This has been the challenge with climate politics. For a very long time, most people do believe in climate change. Most people are not in the camp of the climate deniers, but when he asked them what to do about it, most people in the country dont want to be paying a bunch more. For you know, would pay more tax is paying less money for some, they're like they can't see the tangible effects of at least in their lifetime. This is this is just a problem. We ve seen this in pulling for a long time. Even that. But what we do know is people want clean,
and clean water. They want a clean environment. They like that kind of stuff that that that's all that's incredibly important to a lot of people, especially when you talk about you know: protecting the the earth for the next generation protecting environment for people's children like that is all very, very popular. I think I think smart aspect of this green new deal. Here is tying climate change in climate policy to economic policy. In a way this telling people we can create good, paying jobs we're saying we can transition from the economy were in now or we have you a lot of low paying jobs and jobs are getting automated out of existence to this economy, with a lot of good paying jobs you're worried if you're in the coal industry- we're not going to isn't like. Oh, don't worry, we'll give you some training for an extra we're gonna guarantee that one of these that there's there's a green agree. New job for you that a green job for you and what that could mean is retrofitting buildings. That's construction jobs
That's you know, working in a revitalized, auto industry, that's making fuel efficient cars right, there's the Ets everything from like cleaning community gardens to examine their there's a million different kinds of jobs here that you can guarantee people, and so, if use, if you present this plan to people as a way to protect the environment, save the planet and also by the way, build this new economy with me means of good paying jobs. Then that's going to be a popular that can be a popular agenda item. I'm guessing some of somebody hesitancy from some Democrats rights around the price tag, but whatever it is, is be quite high in the short sighted church, no way in which we think are spending right, where we think of it as money out the door and not as investments if you did it if you measured spending as an investment view, measure
spending like you, measure, investments and construction investments in the stock market. Where you calculate return in the end, then this would be a great thing to do and I think we should not be scared by the by the heat of Serbia or wherever else offering. You know dire budget predictions on this for two reasons: one Republicans just passed a trillion dollar tax cuts fat in the pockets of the COPE brothers and help solve the national crisis of apples tax burden. And so it seems like giving people jobs in making efforts to save the planet a better use of money. Frankly, what are we going to do if we have a balanced budget and everyone is living on homemade? Why? But also- and it is one of the dire predictions that is being made by people who study this by climate scientists and others- is a dire economic situation
where climate change is already climate. Devastation already is hurting economic growth. It's gonna put people out of work, It's going to cost us more money like so where either gonna pay were either can appear. Smaller price now to transition, is economy from a dirty energy economy to a clean. Gee economy and save the planet created jobs, so either pay a smaller price now for a lot of benefits or gonna to pay a devastatingly large price, both in the environment being destroyed, the plant being destroyed, and by the way, a whole bunch of people being out of work. A lot of economic output disappearing, because there's climate devastation all over the planet. So we play now we can pay later and if we pay now we save the planet. We create a lot of jobs, so I think, but you but you're right that I don't think enough. Democrats assertive at least the last couple years we used to talk about this all the time we talked about in the above administration, the clear administration talked about, but like we, talked about in a way that made the case for a green new deal yet, and we haven't made it
big way- and I think Democrats would be wise to to make their case two points on this one is, I think it is important to do this in the context of a moral argument for addressing climate change, I think one of the things that Democrat ourselves included had been guilty about at times is trying to get climate friendly policies passed on the political cheap right by our. We simply framing entirely around clean air and clean water, which is true and very important and pulls well or try It is simply talk about only green jobs. Right like we're doing this thing, we're gonna ignore some of the harder parts of it. I'm gonna tell you going to create new jobs as opposed to making a broader moral argument about climate change, because people are smart and they get it and we do have to move the politics on climate in this country in a big direction, and we have to do it very quickly and so
I think that that isn't it you can't you simply say this is only about the economy. This is a blank, have to just be transparent and honest about what you're doing and make a forceful case for climate change, and you have to be honest about like these: are the costs of transitions there are gonna, be some people were some industries that hurt and here's how we're going to help those people and help those industries right? I think you need an answer for the people who say. Okay. Well, am I out of a job now I work in the college. Do what why do you need an answer for those people and its it's gonna, be there will be pain here? It will be messy, but it is a hundred per cent necessary and you're gonna have to like in any big policy transition, whether its health care or green new deal or whatever else it is it's. There are winners and losers and you're gonna have to talk about explained who those are and talk about. What policy and myself the losers? The other party thing is important, as I hope there is not one green new deal. I hope that their that every cow
It running for president is articulating some vit, some their version of a vision like this yeah right. So it's like what it, what will be dumb is- and I think a disservice. Innovators was like here. Is officially sanctioned green new deal, get on specific green new deal or you are a traitor to the party in the planet. I that is not the way to approach it. We should have a big debate around climate policy, economic policy and how we address this. If the framework is within a green new deal, and if all these we have come. A Harris has one version that does this and as this and then Bernie Sanders has a different version that maybe there's something differently or move things forward. A bit like that is the conversation have in like we talk less
think about healthcare, specific debate. If there is not a climate energy specific debate in this democratic primary, it is such a missed opportunity for the voters, the public in everyone involved, and so I hope that we have a debate like this, where really smart people who know climate policy who can call bullshit odd problem in talking points, ah conduct that debate and vote in people have to articulate their plan for how they do this. It will be better in the debate that is happening and where we know that for sure climate twitters pretty get everyone's while you dip in like, if you check out like Dave Roberts, is measures other, like is a pretty smart earlier, like little niches of two where there like really smart conversations. We're just are rarely exposed to them the jet, Can the general political, Twitter Slack Channel and it's pretty terrible, it's pretty garbage. Ok, when we come back my interview with
Stacy Abrams Party work has brought by Tommy John, listen up folks, this holiday season, there's a lotta gift options out there, but trust me when I say: there's nothing Giving the gift of mind blowing comfort with underwear from Tommy John, don't by relatives junk by somebody further junk in the trunk Tommy John as those comfortable underwear on the planet, keeping men neat nestled in, in penny line and which free nestling. What John. Both their men's and women's underwear. Sport, a no where'd guarantee John Comfortable Staple, ways: bands and arrange fabrics that are luxuriously soft, feather light, moisture, winking, breathable and designed to move with you not against you. That means no bunching rolling riding up. Tommy. John is constantly thinking of new ways to embarrass us. During this red:
can you even more comfortable like their luxuriously soft hibernation approve men's and women's lounge, wherein the first ever stay tucked her shirt remain points that moisture Khatami John. So if go on events wondering if Tommy Joan will be a memorable gift. I am not think about all the agenda and tugging you'll never have to endure or see again, women in addition holiday, gives them daily deals with something for everyone on your list. Naughty or nice, give them if the mind blown comfort, this holiday season with Limited Edition holiday gifts from Tommy John save twenty percent on your first order time agenda complex crooked, that's Tommy, now come such crooked for twenty percent off, don't sweat this myself. But if you do get off your but Patsy
Erika is broadly by Robin Hood. Robin hood isn't investing out that lets. You buy and sell stocks Adsl options encrypted, all commission free. They strive to make financial services work for everyone, not just fuckin, rich people. I gotta say if you're just gettin into the stock game, not given financial investors and qualified to do that on much of illegality around it, but don't trumps currently tanking the market, so you must be bad. Don't try to time the market Dolly Tommy knows better than to try to convince. You will attend the Marquis. Look at this Bernie made of goes the GMO free, we're going long and strong on the use of condoms. Better America and go these Robin Hood people, because what they do is they break into the rich people ass? They take the money it take it. I think where they would prefer us how they would prefer to describe their best is it not intimidating way for stock market newcomers to invest, for the first time, withdrew, coffin and other brokerage discharge up to ten dollars for every trade, but Robin Hood Discharge, commission fees, trade stocks and keep all of your prophetstown from Israel Prince John
Robin Hood, web blood form also lets you view start collections, a hundred most popular sectors like entertainments media and carried it categories like female ceos and again they break into the houses of the wealthy. They take the money and analyse rating David, I hold sell for every star, they spread the wealth around on learn. Break Obama, learn how to invest as you build your portfolio discover new stocks and track favorite companies with personalize newspeak. Robin hood is giving listeners a free sock like apple, afford or sprint, to help build your portfolio but save America DOT Robin hood dot com. Save America DOT Robin Hood Dotcom go for it, Public works pretty well the cash modulated cash up. It's the easiest way to pay people, be that it's a great product. You, one of the top absent twenty eighteen. I learned a really good for them. Download wise do yourself a favor pick up your phone look at their Europe's if the cash option at their go to the app store.
Download it putting the cord pod safe or manage their answer. Five dollars goes to you. Five dollars goes to the organisations helping people who ve been devastated by the fires in California, Spencer gets haste. He denies it was better to get you to know what the beak Senator Jesse fifteen percent of everything we do here. My eyes gets nothing Spencer gets nothing. Get a lot of recognition, get us nothing, he gets sledging gets. Nothing. Would be clear out, there are right at least they would immediately so scared and earlier save as the code here is our offer Spencer are offers nothing where's, my per Diem on the pod. Today we have the democratic candidate for governor of Georgia this year. She previously served as minority leader of the Georgia has representatives Stacy. Abrams welcome back to the pod thanking me, so you gave the best non concessions: Beach, I've ever
Third, and- and in that speech you said, pundits and Hyper Parsons will hear my words as a rejection of the normal order. I'm supposed to say nice things and accept my fate, but stoicism is a luxury in silence is a weapon for those who had quiet the voices of the people, and I will not concede because the erosion of our democracy is not right. While how did you make the decision to say that? Was it hard or your advisers freaking out, It was not hard. I think the difficulty was just making sure I found the right words, but I'm the daughter of two people who are involved in the civil rights movement as teenagers. I was raised to reveal the right to vote and to respect it. And not only through my campaign, but watching and the ten days after the campaign? The forty thousand phone calls we received from
people who were thwarted in their ability to fully exercise their right to vote reading through the narratives and affidavit said we'd perceived in ten days, but also my experience in this campaign. I said that I was going to fight for voters. I said I was going to fight for democracy, and part of fighting is doing so when it's not just difficult in a campaign when its difficult for your future, and they certainly are those who advised me to not continue to fight or worse to just except the consequences and- and what I said is this- I knowledge the legal and to the campaign, but the responsibility for democracy is an ongoing obligation and for me there was no. Question, but that I was responsible for doing so so you're you're now leading a lawsuit to force changes.
Georgia's election system? What specifically does this suit target and what are your hopes for? What will change in the case scenario. So in Georgia we have a number of laws that were passed by Democrats and Republicans that sensibly designed to maintain good working order in your campaign and our and your election system, the problem is, those were best but I and hopefully misused for the last eight years. We argue is that what has happened is that there is a systemic erosion of access to the right to vote individually purging voters because of non voting as a generic ideas, not a bad thing you, if there are people, have left, state of their dad. They shouldn't be on the roles. But what happened is that people unlawfully removed or I simply removed to the point of absurdity: having lines when you got a vote that happened, but in
we're just for our lines that could have been anticipated and stopped were not not having power courts for machines that are sixteen years old. Having pulling This is shut down communities where people don't have access to public transit, each of those people and then I'm only listing a few of them when they are Malcolm made it they constitute a systemic erosion of the right to vote and in fact, disenfranchisement, because when you have to jump so many hurdles to exercise it basic freedom. Then it is no longer a freedom and so on, argument. Is that, while individually any of those one, things could be permissible tied together as a tourist them. They are in and violate the constitution. Fourteenth and amendments voting rights, ACT, the help Amerika Vote ACT and the Georgia constitution do? What do you think the Democrats should do on a national level about some of these problems that were seen? Obviously you know states run their own elections by
you know- and you know, you have a lawsuit going to but like a there, do you think it's time sort of men have anew Voting Rights act nationally or what you think Democrats should be doing on a national level. Here. I think it's ratings number one. We have to talk about a Republicans, have weapon Ized the myth of voter fraud, and we have been complicit in the eggs mention of voter suppression- and when I say we I mean all Americans regardless of party, often because odor suppression affects communities, are the least likely expected to exercise their right to vote, and typically that suppression cannot be directly linked to the victory or loss of an election, but what we have seen happen over time It is becoming more and more evident that the very communities that are asserting right to vote, are the ones who being suppressed and we got a hidden, inflection point where that suppression really does fundamentally altered democracy. So now, when we have to talk about it, and we have to talk about it, as was as the Republicans talk
voter fraud. We know fraud is a myth. We know now electoral fraud register, but voter fraud is a myth. We do know that by and large voter suppression is true and yes there, a couple of examples of voter cried every few years, but not enough, not to the extent that in front of listener, who is about to send an angry tweet saying I don't understand what number to we have to pass. A new voting rights ACT, recognize that protecting the right to vote is necessary because there always gonna be those who see. To narrow the electorate, especially those who are at risk of losing a lot. Because they are not liked by expanding electorate that that could change depending on partisan stances, but we have to actually pass laws and three we have to stop. Assuming that, because Each state has the right to run their elections, that they're doing it correctly and that means
legal official responsible, regardless of their state, because the erosion of democracy, North Dakota, affects me as much as the erosion of democracy in Georgia, and we cannot allow this to be so was of their state because the erosion of democracy, North Dakota, affects me as much as the erosion of democracy in Georgia, and we cannot allow this to be seen as a disparate set of conversations you through your now. The top democratic vote get her, Georgia's history. What can other Democrats running in Georgia learn from the campaign you built John Bear the Democrat running for sectors state just lost his run off by a greater large and than you did so lookin other Democrats run in Georgia, learn about your campaign. Your organization number one talk to everyone. We have the largest and most intensive grass roots campaign in modern Georgia, history we went everywhere and, as a result, I outperformed democratic
not simply in burgeoning communities and emerging electorates, but actually I had the highest total for the percentage of the white vote since two thousand and four and so we have to go everywhere. We have to talk to everyone, but too we have to be authentic and are messaging. I did not run different campaign and the primary than I ran in the general. I was unequivocal from beginning to end about who I was and what I want to see happen, my job was to make sure everyone understood that anti convent then that they wanted. What I was offering, as opposed to trying to mould myself into, would ever seem to be the flavour of the month and three you have to start early, our campaign started and twenty seventeen and if you look at my work, I actually been. I've been working on. Building outdoor just electorates inside minority leader in two thousand and ten We cannot run elections up two months or six months before a victory You should be running for two thousand and twenty two. Now we should be running for two thousand and twenty now, even if we don't have a candidate
We know who we are. We know what we want and we need to be working on it right now. One message that you took everywhere: you can't and was about medicate expansion. Democrats across the country focus their campaigns on protecting the affordable, correct. Looking ahead to twenty twenty, we now have a good number of has Democrats and democratic presidential candidates were proposing some form of medical care for all. What are you about that proposal? I think mother care for all is an important conversation. We have to have a. Continuation of moving the Healthcare Conversation Board America. It is difficult for individual individual state outside the California to solve this problem on their own, and I dont think I don't think they should, because your health care should not be contingent upon which state you live in where the United States of America. Therefore this is a Earl, responsibility and I think many care for all is an important part of that conversation. I think that
need to be having that that debate that conversation, I think we have to be practical in the sense that we have yet to actually achieve the basics of the affordable care act in every single state, and so yes, there's more to be done, and certainly given the composition of the White House and Congress. It's an important debate that need to be had, but not to the exclusion of making sure we can teach, protect and expand for those You are currently even looked out of that system, but I do think that is a that's. An important narrative in an important idea for us to flesh out weak campaigns are an opportunity to debate ideas that the problem is when those ideas become so sacrosanct that we or can't talk about them or who, when asked to say the same thing and that's the problem, what would other issues do you think democratic you re talking about? at the twenty twenty that will specifically bring out non voters. You know bring our voters who might not have voted
in a long time Mordred what which would be the centre of the platform. We talk about voting rights for what health care, but there are other issues you think should be frightened centre. Poverty is continues to be a dominant issue for those communities it up and in speaking about and not just the abject poverty that we try to address through our social welfare system. Although we have to, I think, fully restore the responsibilities we have there, but we have this class of people who are considered working class, and these are people who are working every single day. They are just above a technical point, line, but for real purposes and practical purposes. They do not exist in the economy in a real way. You shouldn't have to work two or three jobs to barely cling to the economic ladder, and so we frame it sometimes income inequality. But though the question is it and my equal to the next person, the question is: can I do the base
that I should be able to do, and the country's wealth is America, when I am doing what I'm asked to do, which is contribute my labor and work hard, and yet, while further and further behind addressing the income challenges and the economic challenges in America. That is fundamental to me, and I think that than speaks to why it so important to address not only voting rights but health care. What do you think's over the big proposals? Are there could really address poverty and sort of a systemic way? I look at what Michael tubs didn't Michael stems doing out
California think Michael as a mayor has just done extraordinary work experimenting there, their questions about whether you be I works, and I dont know that that something that is scalable but we have to. We want to think about it. Childcare is a transformative issue for women in particular, who are shift workers having access to childcare, having a child care tax credit having pay parental leave being able to take care of your family is essential, and it is one of the biggest economic We talk about me. I I don't pay for child care, but part of my economic challenges. The fact that I am responsible in large part for supporting my parents and my niece and my grandmother, and that makes a difference. It makes a difference in the decision to make and how you can live a compliment to that is
having a real conversation in America, about not just the minimum wage but a living wage that is calibrated to the economic capacity of a community, but also to the expectations of the work they do and right now we ve become very comfortable the pain, the people we rely on the most to keep our country running, paying them the least amount we can get away with, knowing that it is far below the cost of actually living in this country, and that, I think, be able to address that conversation in a practical way is very important you gonna decide for yourself. What's next, you ve said running for governor or senator in Georgia could interest you is. There is an area where you'd get into the conversation about the presidential race iron focused on their height George, at making sure that we are fighting for hair election.
And the state of Georgia and making sure that anyone running for president understands that Georgia has to be top of mind. I appreciate the Congress That out there about me, and you know it's it's nice to be included it. It's a bit frustrating sometimes to hear yourself bandied about. There's proof points her just about everything adventure, but me, and my my responsibility is to think about what I want to do next. When I've gotten past? What's just happened to look, I'm still varying? and not know you're mad black woman way. But in a this was not a fair fight and there are one point: nine million people who invested and were not given full access to their democracy. And I believe that that there is certainly a rage, that can be directed into fixing that for us, because whether
my election or the election of the Republican who is denied to do over election for him? We should all be. We angry about anyone's ability to under democracy and so for me, It has been a bad idea to make decisions when I'm not a better frame of mind don't get myself a few weeks, the decompress and process and then I'll make a decision about. What's next Is it using? You talked about rage, obviously, there's a lot of anger, out there, There's this debate now we're looking towards twenty twenty. You know what what kind of a democratic candidate can go? the way in the presidential race? Is it about sort of channeling? This anger against Donald Trump? Is it about this inspiring vision for the country. I do think that in your ray, so is from what I saw. You do a very good job of both annulling the anger, but then channeling and into action and channeling into a positive, inspiring vision. What are
What are you looking for what it? What do you think? A successful democratic presidential candidate should sound like? I pressed all thank you for the comments and I try to do that. I type a channel outrage, anger. Disappointment. Despondency are best served when they become action items. When you are trying to solve problems and not simply talking about them or wallowing, then or accepting them, and I think any of those responses are problematic. I think any candidate for president who is going to be successful cannot run as the Anti sat a coal tromp, because at that point, which part of Henry responding to there's too much there right, but it's off its also, not a clear sign of who you are and what you're going to be. My campaign did not rely on a conversation with about or referring to,
I'll trump, except in very specific policy oriented ways in part, because people don't care about that, they know who he is. They know whether he is supportive of their needs or whether he is new ignominious. With they care about is, do you have a vision for how their wives can get better and that's the person who needs to be the next president, someone who understands how to make life better and that's realising that the president can only do so much and, as we have discovered in the last two and a half years, the present can be very responsible for making things worse. But we have to remember that the president can also make things better concrete. The space for better can make it easier for governors to do better and can make it harder for people to do bad. I want someone who understands that who believes in that it was not just a positive vision, but has a clear and articulate vision, her, how that happens, but who recognizes that
going to be different for each person and that what makes a miracle work that we understand that not everyone has the same experiences, but everyone has the right to set their own course. Will that sounds good to me Stacy Abrams? Thank you so much for joining us. Please come back again soon and and keep updated on on everything Europe to Don. Thank you. So, please tell the guys. I appreciated thanks me, I beg you Stacy Abrams, for joining us. Everyone have a good weekend and we will talk to next week by everyone
Transcript generated on 2020-04-01.