Interview Only w/ Joel Willett - How Democrats Can Win In Appalachia - The Chuck ToddCast

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Do you hate hangovers, We'll say goodbye to hangovers. Out
of Office gives you the social buzz without the next
day regret. Their best selling out of Office gummies were
designed to provide a mild, relaxing buzz, boost your mood,
and enhance creativity and relaxation. With five different strengths, you
can tailor the dose to fit your vibe, from a
gentle one point five milligram micro dose to their newest

(00:20):
fifteen milligram gummy for a more elevated experience. Their THHC
beverages and gummies are a modern, mindful alternative to a
glass of wine or a cocktail. And I'll tell you this,
I've given up booze. I don't like the hangovers. I
prefer the gummy experience. Soul is a wellness brand that
believes feeling good should be fun and easy. Soul specializes

(00:41):
in delicious HEMP derived THHC and CBD products, all designed
to boost your mood and simply help you unwine so
if you struggle to switch off at night, Soul also
has a variety of products specifically designed to just simply
help you get a better night's sleep, including their top
selling Sleepy gummies. It's a fan favorite for deep restorative sleep.
So bring on the good vibes and treat yourself to

(01:02):
Soul today. Right now, Soul is offering my audience thirty
percent off your entire order. So go to getsold dot
Com use the promo code toodcast. Don't forget that code.
That's getsold dot Com promo code toodcast for thirty percent off. Well,
joining me now is a I guess you could argue

(01:25):
a new politician to the scene. His name's Joel Willett.
He's running for the US Senate in Kentucky. He got
on my radar. He's kind of out of nowhere where
Telsea Gabbert took away a whole bunch of people's national
security clearances, even folks who were had served in the
intelligence community were in the private sector but still had some,

(01:45):
you know, some clearances, because that is a normal thing
we've done in our government for decades. And there appeared
to be some sort of connection. The minute mister Willett
agreed to think about running for office, Suddenly it seemed
as if the government decided to give him another headline.

(02:06):
In some ways, I think they may have even given
him an assistance with getting more attention in some ways
for his candidacy, but he's also you know, we want
to highlight interesting first time candidates who are not coming
from sort of a typical place, hard left, hard right,
things like that, And Joe Willett got on my radar

(02:27):
and he agreed to sit down.

Speaker 2 (02:28):
Mister Willett, nice to meet you. Yeah, thank you, Chuck.

Speaker 1 (02:31):
So let's start with how you got in a service. Look,
we're taping just before Veterans Day. You're a veteran. I'm
a huge advocate that feels as if that the people
best equipped to what I call to I'm looking for
more pastors for patriotism in this country right that. I
think the military community and the intelligence community, where you

(02:54):
have to be Team America before your Team Red or
Team Blue, is probably as good of a place to
find these pastors for patriotism as you can find.

Speaker 2 (03:01):
But tell me how you got what got you into service? Yeah?
I love that term. Atn't heard it before, so I'm
probably gonna steal.

Speaker 1 (03:09):
Well, I'm using it over and over. I'm obviously a
little proud of it, so I'm going to use it
probably too much.

Speaker 3 (03:14):
But you know, well, my grandmother took me to church
every weekend growing up and was heavily involved with my
church for a long time. So it resonates. So yeah,
thank you for the opportunity to tell my story. I
am Joel Willett running for the US and in Kentucky.
Your listeners can catch all the parts of the story
at Joelferkentucky dot com if I miss something here. But

(03:37):
I grew up in Louisville, Kentucky, and my path to
service was perhaps common in some ways and uncommon in others.
My dad was a Union iron worker. He was a
Golden Gloves boxer. My mom worked in hospitals taking care
of people. But we had some Kentucky struggles growing up.
The lights didn't always come on when I got home
from school. I learned, you know, early in my adolescence

(03:58):
that both of my parents were struggling with addictions to opioids,
and I would eventually lose my father to a fenteral
overdose in twenty nineteen. It wasn't just my family, It
was tens of thousands of Kentucky families over the past
couple of decades. But I was one of the lucky
ones because I had incredible grandparents on both sides of
my family. I had my grandmother's church, but I also

(04:18):
had the institutions of this country, public education, our military,
our civil service, some of these things that I believed
to be some of the greatest tools for achievement and
economic mobility in the world. And when the attacks of
nine to eleven happened, I was a senior in high
school and a few months after that, after months of
begging my mom to sign the paperwork, she relented and did,

(04:40):
and I joined the Army National Guard when I was
seventeen years old, and I served in the Military Police Corps.
I was able to graduate from the University of Louisville
and from the University of Kentucky, and that launched a
career once I left the Army in the intelligence community,
I spent some time with the FBI working on canterterrorism
and then was recruited into Essentral Intelligence Agency into the

(05:01):
Director to Operations, where I represented this country here at
home and abroad in the Balkans, Baltic, Southeast Asia, Western
European capitals.

Speaker 2 (05:09):
I speak Russian. Do with that which you will, and
you know.

Speaker 3 (05:15):
Finished my last year in government in the White House
Situation Room as a nonpartisan civil servant, there to provide
intelligence and crisis management support to the president who was
then President Obama and Vice President Biden. There to serve
the presidency, not the president, and the true spirit of
our civil service. I left government twenty fifteen in part
to be able to take care of a lot of

(05:36):
my family that remained in Kentucky, went into the private sector,
have since been running businesses that have put hundreds of
people to work every day. So, Chuck, I truly got
to live my American dream and have been, you know,
living that life as a private citizen for some time now,
and it's been increasingly hard to sit on the sidelines
and watch working families across this country, working families like

(05:58):
the one that I grew up in, eating steamrolled by
a political and economic system that I think continues to
treat them as acceptable losses. So, as you said, I
started exploring a run for the Senate. This administration found
out about it, and, as it is wont to do,
began trying to act revenge on people, no matter how
long they had served, no matter what they had served,
but because they had said mean things about Donald Trump.

(06:21):
And we're thinking about standing up against some of what
we're saying today, and they revoked a security clearance and
you know, came after me the way they've come after
so many others.

Speaker 1 (06:31):
What made your democrat? Why'd you pick a party? Yeah?

Speaker 2 (06:36):
When did you pick a party?

Speaker 1 (06:37):
Do you remember when you've said, you know what I think,
I am a Democrat? Or and this is why I'm
doing it? What give me your reasoning for?

Speaker 2 (06:44):
Yeah, it was a.

Speaker 3 (06:46):
It was a long, maybe a short evolution out of
being a conservative, which is, you know, I would freely
admit to holding some conservative views as a as an
interested teenager or even in high school. But my journey
away from that came, perhaps shockingly to some people, through
military service. The military exposed me to people from all

(07:08):
walks of life, nationalities, sexual orientations, all of that, and
I began seeing, you know, what I have since come
to believe is, you know, this source of strength in
our military and in our country, which is the diversity
that we have. But it was also seeing the lies
of the Iraq War.

Speaker 2 (07:28):
I you know, I.

Speaker 3 (07:29):
Could see something very different than what the George W.
Bush administration was saying publicly, you know about this status
or the state of our military, our readiness to fight
such a war, and then you know, we we we
later come to learn that much of the rationale for
going to war in Iraq was a house of cards,
and I continue to see that, you know, some twenty

(07:51):
years later, as one of the most disastrous foreign policy
decisions we've made, certainly in my lifetime. So that began,
you know, a of reassessment for me away from you know,
what was the Republican Party or conservative viewpoints. And I
would say that the journey into being, you know, a
Democrat is something that happened much later.

Speaker 2 (08:13):
You know.

Speaker 3 (08:14):
I'm sure somebody will fact check me on this, but
if my memory serves me, the first time I registered
as a Democrat to vote was in twenty sixteen, and
it was in response to what I saw as the
clear and present.

Speaker 2 (08:24):
Danger of Donald Trump.

Speaker 3 (08:25):
And I have been proudly a Democrat since that time
because that is the party that I see standing up
for a strong America, for an America that works for
everybody and not just the wealthiest.

Speaker 1 (08:37):
You know, hearing your story talking about your personal story,
your parents struggles with opoioid's, the tragedy of your father,
the strength of your grandparents, I'm sure I'm not the
only person who they start to think. I wonder what
he thought of Hillbill the book Hillbilly Elegy by a
gentleman by the name of JD.

Speaker 2 (08:56):
Vance.

Speaker 1 (08:57):
Some people may recognize him as the current Vice president,
and some people may wonder if the same person wrote
that book. And I'll set that aside. I'm curious what
you made of that book and how much of what
Jdvan shared in that book resonated with you.

Speaker 2 (09:16):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (09:17):
I first became aware of that book in twenty nineteen
when I lost my father, and you know, an attempt
to process my own emotions around that, because Chuck, it was,
you know, one of the most debilitating things that had
ever happened to me, because no matter how long I
had expected that phone call, nothing really prepares you for it.
And I would say, my life for six years has
been a project and trying to understand how this country could,

(09:39):
you know, create my life, which I see as a
truly uniquely American life, coming from Valley Station, Kentucky, to
the halls of the West Wing in twelve years, to
leadership and business. If my life is uniquely American, so
too was my father's death because people do not die
from fentyl overdoses in a statistically significant way in other
parts of the world, yet it's the leading cause of death,

(10:00):
I believe in the United States for people ages eighteen
to forty four. So I became aware of he'llbiliology during
that time, and I would say, there are a lot
of similarities between my story and JD.

Speaker 2 (10:10):
Vance's.

Speaker 3 (10:11):
I my heart aches for, you know, the life that
he describes, you know, living growing up, and so much
of it resonates with me. And I understand that, you know,
he similarly felt a need to serve his country, and
you know, I will have to transition now to say
that there are major differences between my story and JD. Vance's,

(10:32):
and that being that I didn't turn into a giant
asshole at the end of it.

Speaker 1 (10:39):
Boy, I didn't see that landing. I didn't see the
play landing that abruptly.

Speaker 4 (10:42):
That was may have crashed it a little bit, but
I was just going to say I had one of
those landings yesterday actually, while flying back from Miami, where
it was the first I think a runway that he
wasn't used to using it.

Speaker 1 (10:53):
It was like Boa, like we all hit the ground
road WHOA, that was an early morning flight, so it
woke me up. No. I mean, look, it is very
hard to square jd Vance, the author jd Vance, the
conservative pundit of twenty sixteen, right with the person that

(11:15):
ended up in the United States Senate, you know, sort
of making a what appears to be a political deal, right,
And look, that's yeah. I've always slightly hesitant on motive,
in assuming motive because none of us can crawl inside
anybody's head right on motive. But he just looks from
the outside. O. This stuff doesn't doesn't compute. But what

(11:36):
does compute, frankly, is the fact that these so many
of these stories exist and why politicians have had a
hard time figuring out how to use government to fix this.
So let's talk about that. Like I would assume for you,
if you get elected that a priority is going to
be okay, how do we deal with it? I mean,

(11:58):
take the issue a fentyl. You got a president who's
manufacturing is using the fentyl crisis, which is real, and
ascribing it to the Venezuelans, which has nothing to do
with this, right, and getting us potentially to screw up
yet another Latin American country. With interventions that will only
cost us cause this country problems for decades to come,

(12:22):
and our distrust in that region of the country. And
it's like, how many times do we have to screw
up our relationships with Latin America with this? But what
is you know, you've you've it sounds like for the
last six years in particular, you've really wanted to understand
both the struggles people have with fentanyl, how it gets

(12:44):
into this country. What should we be doing differently to
stop fentanyl from getting into this country? And is it
Is it possible? You know, are we trying to like
stop the weather right Like is this impossible? And instead
we've got to go about this another way.

Speaker 3 (13:03):
Yeah, I think we certainly have to go about it
in a different way than we've attacked this problem or
any other of the drug crises that we've had in
this country.

Speaker 2 (13:13):
Over the years.

Speaker 3 (13:14):
But you know, let me start with kind of the
supply side of this, where we you know, that's where
Donald Trump's conversation around it seems to end. And unfortunately
for many Americans, he's not the only president that has
stopped the conversation.

Speaker 1 (13:29):
There.

Speaker 2 (13:31):
We talk about, you.

Speaker 3 (13:32):
Know, a drug war, and usually what we mean there
is attacking the supply and where the stuff is coming from.

Speaker 2 (13:38):
Yes, we have to secure our borders.

Speaker 3 (13:40):
Yes we have to go after and chase to the
ends of the earth the supply of this stuff, whether
we find it in a factory in Beijing or whether
we find it being pushed from boardrooms in some of
the largest companies and richest families.

Speaker 2 (13:54):
In this country. And you know, we've had many, many.

Speaker 3 (13:57):
Kentuckians lose a father or a brother because of unregulated
capitalism and doctors who had very perverse incentives to continue
pushing highly addictive opioids and poison uh into our community.
So I think we've we've got to pursue the supply
of this in many different directions.

Speaker 2 (14:14):
We've made some progress on that and uh.

Speaker 3 (14:17):
But but it's the demand side of it. Why are
people turning to these drugs? Why do people want to
use them? And I think it is that that we
need to that there is so much more that this
country could do. When I talk to you know, friends
in Europe about you know, what's going on with with
with drugs and addiction here, and they're like, wait a minute,

(14:39):
drug addicts, you know, they often not because they're terrible people,
but because they're literally out of their minds while using
do some destructive things, whether they steal or or a
public nuisance or wrecked cars and all these things. These
are stories that are just so vivid, vividly remembered in
my life and in my family's life.

Speaker 2 (14:59):
In European friends are like, wait, you send those people
to jail.

Speaker 3 (15:02):
Why don't you send them to the hospital, because it
sounds like that's probably what they need. In Kentucky, we've
had three years of declining overdose deaths from synthetic opioids.
We've got down to like fourteen hundred and ten.

Speaker 2 (15:16):
This past year.

Speaker 3 (15:17):
A lot of that progress was made because we invested
heavily in this state and medicaid expansion, and it was
access to medicaid that paid for treatment that helped people,
paid for some NARCAN community awareness, and also paid for
treatment for addicts. And I do think that is just
something we have to invest more in because you know,

(15:40):
we want people to have good lives and good opportunity
in this country. And you know, young men, especially account
for I think eighty percent of what we call deaths
of despair, which are deaths from overdoses of some form
or another, or from suicide. And I think this can
all be tied back to people see their prospects of deming,

(16:02):
who see that no matter how hard they work, they're
not going to be able to get ahead. And that's
something that has to change. And I think that once
we have a seen economic policy in this country for
the working class upon whose backs all of this prosperity
was built, only then we be able to truly address
these problems with addiction.

Speaker 1 (16:22):
So when you think about the things that could have
helped your father, you know, what's an intervention that we're
doing now? I mean, you know, I lost my father
at sixteen. I'm sorry alcoholism and hepatitis C in the
late eighties when we didn't have a pill to take
to sol hepatitis CE.

Speaker 2 (16:42):
You just died.

Speaker 1 (16:45):
So you know, I've got it's always what of?

Speaker 3 (16:47):
For me?

Speaker 1 (16:47):
The what if is, oh, my goodness, if you just
lived ten years longer than there'd have been a cure
and he would have survived. When you think about the
things that we're doing now, if they had been available
even ten years ago, do you think your father there
would still be a lot? Well?

Speaker 3 (17:02):
I know that as a civil servant, you know, living
on an okay salary, but in a very expensive city
in Washington, d C. It was very tough to get
access to resources. And so I always say, you know,
we confronted my father and checked him into you know,
dollar store rehab and Elizabethtown, Kentucky. You know it was

(17:23):
there were professionals there were doing the best they can,
but it wasn't the most well resourced facility, and a
lot of desperate people showed up there. But even that
bought us some valuable years with my dad. He was
able to see his granddaughter, you know, grow up in
his best moments, you know, in my in my recollection
were always when he was a heavily involved father, and
it was as my you know, my life and his

(17:46):
started going in very different directions when I was a teenager.
And this is because you know, there was a free
fall that happens in this country. You know, you grow up,
you have some roof over your head or some access
to basics, You get good public education, and you've got
some opportunities if you make just even marginally okay choices
in this country.

Speaker 2 (18:05):
And my dad's path, you know, wound through a.

Speaker 3 (18:08):
Union and I got him jobs that were relatively you know,
well paying when he could work. But you know, obviously
there were mornings in the union hall where he didn't
have work in the you know, earlier mid nineties. But
it was it was you know, surgeries and things like
that that started to get these pain pills into his system.
And then as his economic prospects dimmed, those that became
a way to medicate away some of what I'm sure
was existential pain for him. I was going to provide

(18:29):
for his family. I was going to provide for his kids,
for son and his daughter, my sister. So to answer
a question specifically, yeah, we are doing a lot more today.
There's a lot more awareness about it than there was before.
This is an uncomfortable thing to talk about, as I'm
sure it has been for you, you know, opening up.

Speaker 1 (18:47):
And and it takes Look, you're never going to get
over it. I you know, my wife and I both
lost parents at different times of our life, and we
always say, you know, the thing, the thing that you
learn when you lose body like that, no matter when
you lose it, it doesn't matter, it's always painful in it.
You never get over it. You just sort of you

(19:07):
live with it. Right, right, that's what we do. You
just learn to live with it, and then you wonder
what can how do you learn from it? Right? How
do you how do you try to try to try
to move on? You know, you brought up Medicaid. I
mean you feel you're I take it your concerned that
these Medicaid cuts are just going to make it that
much harder. You know, do you feel like Kentucky needs
more facilities that do rehab or they have enough facilities,

(19:32):
they need more resources to staff those facilities.

Speaker 3 (19:36):
I think it's both, and I'll just zoom out to
healthcare large. We need more doctors, we need more health
care facilities. Uh. This administration passed an unconscionable four trillion
dollar tax cut to put money back in the pockets
of the already ultra wealthy, like the ten billionaires that
serve in Donald Trump's cabinet. I find is saying those

(19:56):
billionaires are not like the average Kentucky voter. They do
not like the average Kentucky voter. And they paid for
all of this by taking money out of healthcare programs
that as our governor has been front and center in
the press sounding the alarm about this. These cuts put
thirty five rual hospital pills in this state under threat
of closure for people, you know.

Speaker 2 (20:19):
To lose access to that healthcare.

Speaker 3 (20:22):
Even people who maintain health insurance through their employers are
going to have to drive farther, wait longer. These communities
are going to lose you know, one of the largest
employers in their communities. So yeah, we have a shortage
of health care access in the state of Kentucky and
in many parts around the country. And I think Republicans
in this administration have shown just play in simply in

(20:46):
recent months that they do not care. So I do
think that we need to increase the supply of healthcare.
We need to invest in more of what people actually need,
and in Kentucky that does mean you know, more access
to addiction treatment and overdose prevention.

Speaker 2 (21:04):
But again, I think the root causes of all this happened.

Speaker 3 (21:06):
Way earlier in life, and I would again tie it
to increasing inequality and dimming prospects for working families.

Speaker 1 (21:17):
There's a reason results matter more than promises, just like
there's a reason Morgan and Morgan is America's largest injury
law firm. For the last thirty five years, they've recovered
twenty five billion dollars for more than half a million clients.
It includes cases where insurance companies offered next to nothing,
just hoping to get away with paying as little as possible.
Morgan and Morgan fought back ended up winning millions. In fact,

(21:40):
in Pennsylvania, one client was awarded twenty six million dollars,
which was a staggering forty times the amount that the
insurance company originally offered that original ofw for six hundred
and fifty thousand dollars twenty six million, six hundred and
fifty thousand dollars. So with more than one thousand lawyers
across the country, they know how to deliver for everyday people.
If you're injured, you need a lawyer. You need somebody

(22:00):
to get your back. Check out for the People dot com,
Slash podcast or now pound law, Pound five two nine
law on your cell phone. And remember all law firms
are not the same. So check out Morgan and Morgan.
Their fee is free unless they win. So let's talk.
You know, it's interesting I know that the next and

(22:24):
perhaps you know the fear of AI displacement for sort
of middle class white collar workers is now you know,
there's like a whole new group of folks that are
learning what blue collar workers were worrying about during audit.
The rise of the initial rise of automation and robotics,
right plus the global the global trade system in the

(22:47):
nineties and in the early odds, and that created this displacement.
Now we've got AI. Displacement's going to hit another chunk
of workers. This attempt to bring manufacturing back, frankly doesn't
involve many individuals, right, It is more of a robotics
and automated situation. So, you know, how do we You know,

(23:10):
we can't go backwards. We're not going to force companies
to use humans if it's cheaper to do an automated thing, right,
That's just not how capitalism works. Well, what's what should
we you know, what what is what are the jobs
in the next twenty years that we ought to be
trying to get our communities prepared for, get our public

(23:33):
education system geared towards you know, because I think about
think about the last thirty years, and we thought all
of our kids needed to learn to code, right, And
it turns out whatever coding you've learned, it.

Speaker 2 (23:45):
Doesn't matter anymore. AI is going to do it.

Speaker 1 (23:47):
And so I can tell you this as a parent,
You're petrified, am I am my kids?

Speaker 2 (23:53):
You know, my kids going to have a future and
what does that look like?

Speaker 1 (23:57):
It sounds like you have younger kids, both of mine
are in college. What do you think about is the
jobs of the future and how should government be thinking
about it?

Speaker 3 (24:07):
Yeah, for the record, my son is is sixteen and
this is obviously a very uh.

Speaker 1 (24:12):
Yes, you're right as a moment conversation. Yes, I have
a freshman. I have a senior in college and a
freshman in college. Oh wow, yeah, good stuff.

Speaker 3 (24:22):
So so look it We've always had I mean, America
is the innovation engine of the world.

Speaker 2 (24:27):
We have always innovated.

Speaker 3 (24:29):
And with every wave of you know innovation, from you know,
the industrial age to you know, the assembly line to
even modern management theory and efficiency in factories and in business,
there's there's always been displacement and we've always found, you know,
ways to innovate even around that, and people have always found,

(24:50):
you know, new ways to to to labor and to work.
And I think there is some there are some reasons
to believe. And I'm someone who spent a lot of time,
you know, running a technology company over the past couple
of years I've had the chance to, you know, when
I lost my security clearance, some of the you know,
the most strident and well known right wing trolls on

(25:14):
Twitter told me that I should learn to code. I'm like, yeah, thanks,
I did that six years ago. You know already did that.
So I say that only to say that I've you know,
spent a lot of time playing around, experimenting with and
understanding AI tools and you know, their implications in the workplace.
I am less bullish about the immediate, you know, wide

(25:39):
scale impacts of this, because there are a lot of
implementation issues, or a lot of data quality issues, hallucination issues,
and all these sorts of things that I think even
companies who have made a decision to lay off and
displaced workers thinking they're going to be replaced with AI,
are going to see and relatively short order that that
it is not the panacea that they might think it is.
Even still, I do accept the premise that we are

(26:00):
going to have some massive changes in the economy, uh
and in the jobs that are available to people. And
I think that there are there are two things we
need to wrestle with. Is one like, okay, if a
business finds a more efficient way to do something, well, great,
they're going to have more profits. But now we're going
to have more people on snap benefits. Now we're going
to have more people, you know, needing Medicaid because they

(26:22):
don't have healthcare. Because you know, all this activity in
the economy has to come from somewhere. It has to come,
you know, from from consumers buying things. And what I'm
increasingly worried about is just that that the broad consumer
base in this economy is just going to be completely
left behind because the wealthy have enough at the top
to continue pumping money into these businesses and these experiments
and buying really expensive things.

Speaker 1 (26:44):
Now we're seeing it right now, You're where the high
end consumer market is doing just fine. Yeah, but middle
and long people are pulling back. People are saving money,
and it's like this income and equality line is gap
is just getting bigger and bigger.

Speaker 3 (27:01):
Yeah, And so tax policy is I think the number
one thing that can address this. You don't have a
situation where, you know, the America's first billionaire he died
a billionaire, John Rockefeller in nineteen thirty seven. Bill Gates,
fifty years later became the fifteenth billionaire, and thirty eight
years since then, we now have seven hundred and fifty right,

(27:23):
and you know, all of the gains in the economy
since the early nineties or like fifty two percent of
them have been captured by the top one percent. So
there has to be a reckoning with this growing inequality.

Speaker 2 (27:35):
One, it's im moral.

Speaker 3 (27:35):
But two, anywhere in the world in history where you
see fascism grow, it does so in the fertile fields
of wealth inequality, and people get desperate, they turn to
strong men who.

Speaker 2 (27:45):
Say I alone can fix it right now. And that's
I mean.

Speaker 1 (27:48):
I look at I talk about the fall of Turkey
in Venezuela all the time to former democracies.

Speaker 2 (27:54):
I guess you could take Turkey.

Speaker 1 (27:56):
Is slightly higher on the democracy rating scale than Venezuela is.
Buttheles right Air Dowan and Hugo Javez before Maduro, but
Ugoshaves who sort of started this revolution. Both of them
used frustration and poor communities to go after the so
called elites right in Istanbul or Caracas. I mean, look,

(28:19):
I assume this is your experience overseas, that this it is.
There is a pattern here right where when they when
there's a belief when the gap between rich and poor
gets so big, you can weaponize the poor against the
elites and the pitchforks will come. But democracy leaves.

Speaker 3 (28:37):
Yeah, and it's replaced with corruption and crony capitalism, every hypocrisy.

Speaker 2 (28:43):
Of some sort.

Speaker 3 (28:43):
Yeah, yeah, absolutely, So we we do have to reckon
with our tax policy that that I think has concentrated
wealth at the top.

Speaker 2 (28:50):
That you know is certainly what does.

Speaker 1 (28:53):
That look like? Because I've heard this before and in frankly,
you know, we you know, this is what we did
one hundred years ago when we have all these robber barons.
We passed the Amendment on the income tax. That was
not about taxing Americans. That was about tax making sure
the rich paid something back to this country that they
were taking from it. And that's when property taxes became mainstream.

Speaker 2 (29:17):
Was back then.

Speaker 1 (29:17):
So what is what is today's answer? Because I agree
that tax policy is probably the that's what a small
d democracy should do in that sort of capitalism with guardrails.
What what what large areas are you thinking when it
comes to comes to tax policy and trying to close
the income inequality gap without it coming across as redistribution, right,

(29:41):
there's that fine line there, right.

Speaker 2 (29:43):
Sure.

Speaker 3 (29:45):
Well, one easy answer is something that that Ronald Reagan
actually did and then in the late part of his
second term, which is ensure that capital gains, you know,
gains from investment were taxed same rate as your labor.
I see no reason why people working forty eight sixty
hours a week and are subject to payroll taxes. And

(30:09):
you know, even if they don't make enough money to
actually be subject to income taxes, they're paying a lot
into to FIKA and into payroll taxes. And even in
the you know, Reagan years, they found a way to say, hey, no,
we're going to make sure that Okay, if you're if
you're just putting money, you're making money off of money,
well that's going to be taxed in the same way
that making money off of you know, your labor or

(30:29):
breaking your knees, you know, welding iron together and setting iron.
Is that we're going to tax the same And that
actually happened in this country for two years until George H. W.

Speaker 2 (30:38):
Bush undid that policy. And I don't remember if it
was eighty eight or ninety, but one of those years
check up on me.

Speaker 3 (30:44):
I think that that is a fairly easy place to start.
And then the second thing, you know that we just
have to deal with, are you know, the strategies that
the ultra wealthy use to live off of their unrealized gains.
You know, people will say, if I, if I have
stock and it appreciates in value, but I haven't sold
the stock, I didn't actually make any money. That's true,

(31:06):
except that you also collateralized that stock and borrowed a
lot of money from banks to be able to live
off of. You know, you you accessed some value from
that appreciation and that gain. And so I think even
a simple policy like removing this by borrowde wealth preservations
strategy that wealthy people use could also go some way

(31:27):
and uh in curing or or making this a more
equitable system.

Speaker 2 (31:32):
Basically, if you, if you UH obtain cash.

Speaker 3 (31:36):
Flow from those unrealized gains in any way, at that
point it would be subject to tax.

Speaker 2 (31:40):
So these are kind of simple things.

Speaker 3 (31:41):
I think there's a lot of other complicated things that
I'm sure academics and tax policy experts have a spectrum
disagreement about. But I think you know, to your last
point about redistribution, this is where democrats often get in
trouble because everybody sees that, oh, well, we're going to tax,
We're going to tax everybody more, uh, you know, hard
working people, and then we're just going to do handouts

(32:02):
to people who don't want to work.

Speaker 2 (32:04):
And this is just silliness, right.

Speaker 3 (32:06):
I believe that that's a myth for the most part,
that most people receiving, whether they're SNAP benefits or medicaid
or whatever.

Speaker 2 (32:12):
Actually do want to work.

Speaker 3 (32:13):
And I think forty million people on SNAP benefits, fifteen
million of them do work full time. They don't make
enough to actually be able to afford groceries. So I
think we got to do away with some of those
myths about the working poor in this country.

Speaker 2 (32:26):
But separately, rather than handing people.

Speaker 3 (32:30):
Money to go buy things, we as a country need
to invest some of those proceeds into building more.

Speaker 2 (32:35):
We don't have enough high quality education in this country.

Speaker 3 (32:39):
We have an energy grid that is increasingly falling behind
for the demands that are going to be placed on
it by an aiicentric economy. We don't have enough hospitals
and doctors. As I alluded to earlier, we need to
invest in all of these things heavily, and infrastructure in
this country.

Speaker 1 (32:55):
No, And it does seem though that there is a
collective agreement on that. And yet you've seen this. This
Congress doesn't function very well at the moment because we're
in this you know, we're in this like forever cold
war between red and blue.

Speaker 2 (33:12):
Yeah, and it.

Speaker 3 (33:13):
Is very dysfunctional. And even when you can have consensus,
or even when you have you know, broad agreement on issues,
you know, progress remains elusive. And I believe that it
is just that this system has been captured by the
political and economic elites that are entrenched interests. We have campaigns,
you know, bought and paid for. Elon Musk invested forty

(33:35):
something million dollars in getting President Trump reelected, and all
of these parties you know, are looking out for their
own interests, and they are the ones you know, funding politics.
And we have tried to have grassroots campaigns over the
you know, the past decade, but these relentless text messages
and emails and candidates like myself have to send two

(33:57):
people who already probably don't make much.

Speaker 2 (34:00):
No chip in five bucks to save democracy.

Speaker 3 (34:02):
And then a lot of that just goes back to,
you know, paying for campaign consultants and all the absolute
fundraiser makes the money. Yeah, it's absolute nonsense. And I
think that that, you know, we have to start electing
people to the Senate who understand the struggles of the
working poor in this country. We talk about how much

(34:24):
representation matters, you know, especially as Democrats, and we mean
that in a variety of different ways, but one way
in which we don't explicitly talk about it is do
poor people see themselves.

Speaker 2 (34:34):
In any of the people that are elected to represent them?

Speaker 3 (34:36):
And I would say that they do not, because you know,
many people who seek office year after year, cycle after
cycle and win or lose. I just don't think they
have much in common with the people who who they
are trying to represent.

Speaker 2 (34:51):
And I think that that representation matters a lot.

Speaker 1 (34:54):
So, And I'm not like asking you to throw shade
at potential primary opponents I may already have. Yeah, sorry,
why did why does Andy Basheer succeed and why did
an Amy McGrath fail in twenty twenty?

Speaker 3 (35:09):
Yeah, I mean there's there are a lot of you know,
contributing factors, and you know why you should ask Amy
what her assessment of that race is.

Speaker 2 (35:18):
I'm sure that she had all.

Speaker 1 (35:19):
The money in the world, all that money in the world.
This was not a she didn't This was not a
financial issue. So this became a you know, the you know,
an old marketing slogan was that the dog that doesn't
matter how much money you throw behind the dog food,
if the dogs won't eat the dog food.

Speaker 2 (35:37):
Yeah, you know, it's not gonna work. Why didn't it work? Yeah?

Speaker 3 (35:42):
Again, she would probably be much more uh, you know,
qualified to share an assessment with you on that. I
will say Amy McGrath. McGrath has an incredible life story.
She's a patriot that you know, has served her country
and she she's been in this fight. I think my
assessment is that in a place like Kentucky, and it's
a state that has been you know, that has put

(36:04):
its faith in its trust in Donald Trump, you know,
three times three three elections in a row, and it
you know, voters here believed the promises that he made
and believed that he was going to be looking out
for them.

Speaker 2 (36:17):
And when when.

Speaker 3 (36:18):
Democrats don't actually offer an alternative vision, when they sometimes
speak in ways that sound just kind of republican but
just a little less republican, I don't think voters can
really tell the difference, and so if you got people
on the fence, they're going to just vote for the
Republican and Andy Bisheer, didn't you know do that? This
is a governor who led with his values in both
of his campaigns. He didn't shy away from talking about

(36:40):
hard things, but he explained his choices, his decisions and
reasons for different things, and decisions he would make and
policies he would advocate for. And even people who disagreed
with Andy Bushier said that they trusted him and they
thought that he would look out for them. And then
he has shown up. We've had fourteen natural disasters or
something declared in the state of Kentucky over the past

(37:02):
couple of years or during his administration. This isn't a
guy who hides in the governor's mansion. He's been out,
He's been present with people, and I think that even
when they disagree with them are in marginal things, that
he has their back on the major thing.

Speaker 2 (37:17):
So I think that that's probably the big difference.

Speaker 1 (37:19):
What do you think is the best way to win
win over somebody who voted for Donald Trump in twenty
twenty four to vote for Joel Willett in twenty twenty six.

Speaker 3 (37:28):
Yeah, I would just ask those voters do they see
more of themselves in Joel Willett or in Donald Trump.
Donald Trump's net worth has increased three billion dollars according
to the most recent estimates since January twentieth. How's your
bottom line doing Kentucky? Wages are stagnant, costs are up,
you can't afford groceries. They're actively trying to take your

(37:50):
health care. This man went to the Supreme Court this
week to try to get permission to not give people
money to buying groceries in this administration, sure that Republicans
in the Senate couldn't negotiate a deal with Democrats so
that Americans wouldn't be faced with this unconscionable choice between
being able to afford groceries or seeing a doctor when

(38:11):
they get sick. And I would just ask voters to
keep asking themselves why that is?

Speaker 2 (38:16):
Do you believe that this man has your back?

Speaker 3 (38:19):
And I think there is ample evidence at this point
between his ballrooms, his own increase in his wealth, and
these other policies he does.

Speaker 2 (38:27):
Not definitely has a gilded age feeling to it.

Speaker 1 (38:31):
Doesn't it like, yeah, let them cake whatever, you want
to whatever cliche you want to pick. It feels it
like you're just like, yeah, the pictures are jarring. Having
good life insurance is incredibly important. I know from personal experience.
I was sixteen when my father passed away. We didn't
have any money. He didn't leave us in the best shape.

(38:54):
My mother, single mother, now widow. Myself sixteen try to
figure out how am I going to pay for college?
And lo and behold. My dad had one life insurance
policy that we found wasn't a lot, but it was
important at the time, and it's why I was able
to go to college. Little did he know how important
that would be in that moment. Well, guess what. That's

(39:17):
why I am here to tell you about Etho's life.
They can provide you with peace of mind knowing your
family is protected even if the worst comes to pass.
Ethos is an online platform that makes getting life insurance
fast and easy, all designed to protect your family's future
in minutes, not months. There's no complicated process, and it's
one hundred percent online. There's no medical exam require you

(39:40):
just answer a few health questions online. You can get
a quote in as little as ten minutes, and you
can get same day coverage without ever leaving your home.
You can get up to three million dollars in coverage,
and some policies start as low as two dollars a
day that would be billed monthly. As of March twenty
twenty five, Business Insider named Ethos the number one no
medical exam instant life insurance provider. So protect your family

(40:04):
with life insurance from Ethos. Get your free quoted ethos
dot com slash chuck. So again, that's Ethos dot com
slash chuck. Application times may vary, and the rates themselves
may vary as well, but trust me, life insurance is
something you should really think about it, especially if you've
got a growing family. Well, it leads me, and look,

(40:28):
this is by the time this airs, the shutdown is over,
it's behind it. So we're taping when they're in the
middle of it ending. And I'm one of those who
are empathetic to I get. I understand the rationale on
both sides of this argument inside.

Speaker 2 (40:43):
The Democratic Party.

Speaker 1 (40:45):
One that says, hey, they're squirming, why give up now?

Speaker 2 (40:49):
The other that.

Speaker 1 (40:50):
Says he's taking away snap benefits, he's putting the travel
system under duress. Somebody's got to be the adult in
the room here. And oh, by the way, if you're
trying if the whole point of this was to bring
more attention to healthcare, that's been a mission accomplished. And

(41:14):
then now the burden is on them to either deal
with this or watch out. In twenty twenty six, this
becomes a certainly a populist issue. So obviously you could
see I can argue one side of this. I understand
the other that, hey, the shutdown's gone politically really well
for the Democrats, and Trump has made all sorts of
mistakes like advocating to not pay snap benefits even when

(41:36):
a judge says to do it, and the Speaker of
the House is abdicated responsibility, right, Like, I can I
get the arguments and I couldn't I hear both of them.
Where do you fall on this argument? And I'm mindful
that you're in a Democratic primary at the moment.

Speaker 3 (41:53):
Yeah, but I'm not someone who is going to ever
play hide the ball with the people that I want
to vote for me and the people that I want
to represent. So in that spirit, I believe that the
deal that was just struck is a betrayal of working families,
in this country. And I'm absolutely disgusted by this choice,

(42:15):
with the with the eight Democrats who who broke pretty
angry about this, I am very fired up, Chuck. I
went to bed mad and angry last night. I woke
up this morning the same exact way. And while yes,
there are you know arguments there, I you know, we're
fond of, you know, saying in sports and when we're
trying to encourage people to to you know, get in

(42:37):
there and fight and play a game, we said, well, hey,
you can't win if you don't play. But I want
to quote my favorite, probably one of my favorite TV
series of all times, The Wire, and I'm sure this
was a David Simon line, but one of the characters
told the police chief, you can't lose if you don't play,
and that is I think some of the energy Democrats

(42:57):
needed here. If the Republicans wanted the government and open,
they found ways to force through the you know, the.

Speaker 2 (43:03):
Big bullshit bill back in July.

Speaker 3 (43:06):
They did that right with without getting the support that
you know they wanted from Democrats. They could have funded
and reopened the government the same way. Not sure there
would have been some procedural issues and delays and things
like that. They could have gotten it done if they
wanted to. Democrats did not need to go support this.
And yes, it is terrible to watch people potentially lose

(43:28):
their their SNAP or food stamp benefits. I was on
food stamps as a kid. I know what that's like.
You know, when my parents had to make decisions between
being able to afford groceries or putting gas in the
car to get to a job so they can make
money to buy more food. I get that personally, but
it is not Democrats that have made those choices. It
was not Democrats going to the Supreme Court to try
to get permission to not pay SNAP benefits. That was

(43:53):
Donald Trump. That was Republican enablers in Congress. Democrats had
a very radical idea throughout this shutdown. Maybe in the
most prosperous country on earth, with thirty trillion dollars in GDP,
we can have a country where people can afford groceries
and be able to see a doctor if you get sick.
That seemed like a pretty noble fight to me. And

(44:13):
I don't understand, you know, when we've had millions of
voters across this country, in Virginia and New Jersey, in
California and New York show up just this week, right,
you know, over the past seven days, rather to support
a party that it's a.

Speaker 2 (44:27):
Fighting for them, to just immediately turn.

Speaker 1 (44:29):
Around and say, why why do you assume the fight's over?
I mean, this is a temporary opening. You know. I
could if you made me have to message it sort
of on your I would say something like, look, we're
not going to we're not going to make people have
to ration food because this administration is going to do it.
But we're going to keep fighting for healthcare and come January,

(44:52):
if they don't do this, we're shutting this place down again.

Speaker 2 (44:55):
And what's wrong? What is wrong with that strategy?

Speaker 1 (45:00):
Because you do sort of try to strike I could
argue that it strikes the balance between you know, helping
in the immediate term and again I think, look, we're
playing with fire with what's going on with their traffic
control and not paying these folks and and all of
this stuff.

Speaker 2 (45:17):
And I take it we had a we had a
crash here and right, we don't know if.

Speaker 1 (45:21):
That had an was that impacted by right and we
can't say for sure, but we know we've put these
people under duress meaning they've got to work with a
promise to be paid right, which I've never met the
landlord that said that, hey, I'm gonna post date this
check just you know, I just don't know when I
have to get to post date it. Do you not

(45:42):
accept the premise that there's time to fight keep fighting
for this in two months?

Speaker 3 (45:49):
I think when you look at the eight Democrats who
voted for this, it sort of betrays the parties thinking
that they don't really buy this premise either. None of
those people are facing reelection next cycle. To my knowledge,
find me one person who wants to run on this
compromise right now next cycle.

Speaker 2 (46:08):
I don't think you find that Democrat any.

Speaker 1 (46:10):
What's the running the compromise? I think the question is
whether you're running. You know, you get to keep running
on healthcare? I would argue you do, oh.

Speaker 3 (46:18):
Sure, because but the problem is you've got tens of
millions of Americans who are absolutely now going to see
premium increases or they're going to go without health care.

Speaker 2 (46:28):
That is now a fact that is going to happen.

Speaker 3 (46:31):
And you know a lot of people are like, oh,
do you trust Republicans that they're actually going to give
you a vote on this or whatever. It's like, Okay,
I think you know, Thune has been very public that
there is going to be a vote and it's going
to happen on such and such date and all that.
So take them out the where there's going to be
a vote. Is that going to accomplish? Do you think
magically Republicans are going to extend these enhanced subsidies?

Speaker 1 (46:53):
I think enough, because I think they're petrified of this.
I think they're absolutely petrified of the impact. Commiss I
think they're looking her way out. Yeah, we'll see, right.

Speaker 3 (47:03):
And so I don't have that level of faith right
now because they are beholden to Donald Trump. And this
is a man who who who found his affordability narrative
for a maximum of five hours one night before he
the next day said.

Speaker 2 (47:16):
Don't talk to me about affordability.

Speaker 3 (47:19):
I mean they are going to do whatever he says,
and until he's out there saying the impersonation is.

Speaker 1 (47:23):
Noted there, Joel, I see that.

Speaker 2 (47:25):
It's incredible. Check you.

Speaker 1 (47:30):
Got to keep that up.

Speaker 2 (47:31):
What bory is it?

Speaker 1 (47:32):
Just have or do you have others that you're pretty
good at?

Speaker 3 (47:34):
Oh well, we'll save those for future besodes. My wife
hates my impersonations by the way. Oh, she's got to
be the biggest fat she can't do that to you.

Speaker 1 (47:44):
I just want to discourage it. And I've got a
shared brown impersonation that I've always been really proud of.

Speaker 2 (47:49):
Ground to be.

Speaker 1 (47:50):
I just need, you know, with the men and the
working men and wavebow. You know, you got to you
gotta have the dignity of work. There rol.

Speaker 2 (47:58):
That does very good and quick aside.

Speaker 3 (47:59):
I was was able to uh see Carl Rove and
Paul Lagala do a fireside chat last last fall, and
both of them, I mean, Karl Rove has an uh,
you know, an incredible impersonation of Donald Trump and an
even better one of George W. Bush, the president that

(48:19):
he served so firstly, and Paul Lagala busted into a
Bill Clinton uh that would deceive anyone. And I just
thought that was very impressive that the presidents that they
had served, that they had just kind of embodied their
voice so realistically.

Speaker 1 (48:32):
Well it makes you wonder did they embody their voice
or did the do the president's embody the voices of
their chief strategistic Yeah, you know who's pulling this strength now,
I'm kidding I'm kidding on that front. So I take
it that if there's no deal on healthcare, you'd say,
you think that this that these that shut down the
government in January again.

Speaker 2 (48:53):
Right, Yeah, I don't see what choice.

Speaker 3 (48:56):
I mean, look, I say this as a civil servant,
and and and perhaps I should you know, lead with my.

Speaker 2 (49:05):
You know, I understand I've lived through shutdowns. I had.
I was always a.

Speaker 3 (49:08):
You know, a an essential employee doing government shutdowns and
had you know, pay at risk, and they got paid. Yeah,
it always came back. But even if there was like
a you know, a temporary you know, blip in it,
you you you're not getting paid that much anyways, right,
and you you continue to show up and it's it's
work that you care about. But ultimately, you know, you've

(49:29):
got to be able to afford things. And I don't
want to use public servants as a as a political
football in that way. But we cannot be the only
party that cares about that.

Speaker 2 (49:40):
One.

Speaker 3 (49:40):
One side of the spectrum right now is letting Donald
Trump just run rough shot over the entire federal government,
dismantling civil servants, civil service that we fought so hard
to build in an a political way, in this country,
and uh, you know, so I get Tim Kane when
when he's trying to support federal workers, but you know
the same is true from our corner, and so so
I do think this is uh, we have to keep fighting.

Speaker 2 (50:03):
But like Democrats have to read the room the do
you think Schumer should resign as party leader?

Speaker 3 (50:11):
I I think that there are very valid and open
questions about that.

Speaker 1 (50:16):
I want.

Speaker 2 (50:17):
I don't know Chuck Schumer. I've not met with Chuck Schumer.

Speaker 3 (50:21):
You know, I get that, you know there is a
lot going on behind the scenes, and you know, for.

Speaker 2 (50:28):
A party that is out of power, and so.

Speaker 3 (50:32):
You know that's that's not something I'm prepared to say,
as we said here.

Speaker 2 (50:36):
But it is an open question. In my mind.

Speaker 1 (50:38):
Doesn't sound like somebody, if you won, you would support
keeping Chuck Schumer as a leader.

Speaker 3 (50:42):
If you had a vote, it would be a difficult
vote for me to take today, I will say that before.

Speaker 1 (50:49):
I let you go. I'm just curious. You know. I
just interviewed Governor Basheer earlier this weekend. It's on a
new sphere, which is another sort of independent media outlet,
and he said something interesting. I said, you know, I said,
he was talking about tariffs, and this is a case

(51:09):
where Andy Basheer, Mitch McConnell, and Ran Paul are all
on the same page. And he basically said, if all
three of us are agreeing on something, maybe there's something there.
What do you make of Rand Paul? And I say
this because if you win, that's a senator, you know,
the States senators, you know, no matter even if you're
from different parties, at times you need to work together.
What do you make of him? And what do you

(51:30):
make of his attempts at seeking a little bit of
distance from from Trump World in a way that we
haven't seen in the past.

Speaker 3 (51:38):
Ran Paul is an idiosyncratic senator to say the least.
You know, his views will sometimes overlap in very weird
or align, you know, in very strange and unexpected ways.

Speaker 1 (51:51):
It's a weird ven diagram, isn't it?

Speaker 2 (51:53):
It? Very much? Is I mean? But we have this
in Kentucky with Thomas Massey as well.

Speaker 3 (51:57):
You've got liberals across the state celebrating Thomas Massey's willingness
to stand up, you know, for the release of the
Epstein files, which, by the way, this issue is not
going to go away either.

Speaker 2 (52:10):
Those finals I believe will see the light of day.
They have to. Voters are demanding it. But you make a.

Speaker 3 (52:16):
Broader point just about you know how we have to
work together. No one senator can promise to get anything
done on their own. You have to build relationships. You
have to be able to work across the aisle. And
I'm not somebody who presentds just to be some above
it all centrist. I am not, and I, like I said,
We'll always tell voters you know where I stand on things,
and my mind is made up on something.

Speaker 2 (52:37):
I'm not going to hide from you what I believe
about it.

Speaker 3 (52:40):
But that doesn't absolve me or any senator or any
congressman of a responsibility to represent all the people in
our states, because it is inevitable in a state like
Kentucky if I win, you know, there are going to
be lots of people here who did not vote for me,
and they deserve a voice and they deserve.

Speaker 2 (52:59):
Representation as well.

Speaker 3 (53:01):
The problem that we have right now in this country
is that you know, you can have seventy five million
people vote for Kamala Harris and marginally more millions vote
for for Trump, and they pretend that the score was
one hundred to nothing, I know, and then all the
other people didn't exist.

Speaker 2 (53:20):
You don't you didn't win that sualy.

Speaker 1 (53:21):
Not what our founders intended. They assumed it was going
to be a messy compromise constantly.

Speaker 2 (53:27):
Yeah, and so you know, we have to be able
to do that.

Speaker 3 (53:30):
So you know, I would, I would work with you
know which who would then be the senior senator from
the state of Kentucky to take care of working families
in this state. They deserve a voice, they deserve representation,
and we need solutions minded politicians. And that's exactly what
I would be.

Speaker 1 (53:48):
Outside of Kentucky. Who's the US Senator that so far
you've been the most impressed with.

Speaker 3 (53:55):
You know, It's funny, somebody asked me, asked me that
question a few weeks so, not who I was most
impressed with.

Speaker 2 (54:00):
I was able to say a few.

Speaker 3 (54:02):
But I'm I'm gonna I'm going to continue to give
Chris Murphy props. I have appreciated, you know, he's been
a very level headed senator. He speaks passionately about you know,
a lot of issues, but you know, particularly he's someone
you know, I talked about, you know, my dad dying
a uniquely American death from fentanyl. Well there's another uniquely

(54:24):
American death, and that's to get killed at your elementary school.
And you know, when you've got senators, you know, who
are completely owned by the NRA, that that aren't you even
looking out for response responsible gun owners anymore? You know.
I've just been impressed with, you know, his leadership on
that issue and other things, and somebody who I think
is intelligent, whose heart's in the right place.

Speaker 2 (54:45):
And yeah, so I admired, admire that guy.

Speaker 1 (54:49):
And I take it that Governor Bursheer is your pick
for president in twenty twenty eight because you got a
you're going to be a home state guy. Is he?

Speaker 2 (54:55):
Is he running? Is running? I don't know. I don't
think he's U I don't so.

Speaker 1 (55:00):
Yeah, look at you doing a little bit of blocking
and tackling that I don't.

Speaker 3 (55:05):
Look at twenty twenty six, right, Yeah, of course, and
that does have to be our folks.

Speaker 2 (55:09):
I will tell you this, I.

Speaker 3 (55:11):
Do not believe, and I know Gavin Newsom has been
very public in saying this. I've been saying it privately
for months that this administration intends to have free and
fair elections in twenty twenty eight. And so if your
listeners care at all about our two hundred and fifty
year experiment with democracy here or liberal democracy in America,
it is imperative that we turn out in massive numbers

(55:33):
in twenty twenty six. I believe it's one of our
last chances to provide accountability for this administration and to
ensure that Americans have a free and fair choice, whether
that be for Andy Basheer or anyone else in twenty
twenty eight.

Speaker 2 (55:45):
So I don't think the stakes could be any higher.

Speaker 3 (55:47):
And I will say Andy Basheer has been an incredible
governor of this state, and he's shown a path to
victory here for Democrats who want to lead with their
values to respect him for that.

Speaker 1 (55:57):
Let me get chatty here on this because you worked
in the intelgen's community, and I've been working with some people,
former members of the intelligence community on an exercise on
trust and media.

Speaker 2 (56:07):
And it's not just about media and journalists. It's more
about the information ecosystem and what happens if you have
bad intelligence. Like I'm working with people who are nervous
that the information you know, we already know. There's a
lot of misinformation and disinformation out there, and that if
we don't figure out clean ways to get information, then

(56:27):
we're going to make terrible national security decisions. Like how
bad is the flow of intelligence these days? Do you
is it in considering sort of how much we've alienated
some of our key allies, you know, in the in
the world of the Five Eyes, all the English language
allies of ours that I get the impression that there's

(56:49):
either concern that you know, we've got too many leaks
in our system or all of our stuff. There's one
country in particular that gets access to intelligence without telling
them what what is? What do you feel like as
the state of America, the American the intelligence that are
are the intelligence community is getting these days? Yeah, I appreciate.

Speaker 3 (57:13):
That question more than you know, and and uh, you know,
would would love to have an extended conversation about it,
because I think that there are a lot of different
forces that are polluting the information environment and leading to
very poor information hygiene, not just in you know, our
federal government with policymakers, but with our kids and with

(57:33):
with school aged kids and people in university and and
everything else. I would just turn to Russia as an
example of this. During COVID. You may recall some of
these images of Vladimir Putin setting at the end of
a you know, a thirty foot table and an advisor
you know, at the other end, and I, you know,
equipped at the time that he had entered the uh

(57:56):
late stage Howard Hughes phase of his government, his governing.

Speaker 1 (58:01):
Have you noticed his nails are suddenly super long?

Speaker 2 (58:03):
Oh no, no, right yet?

Speaker 4 (58:04):
Right, yeah, Well, when he grows a beard, we'll know
that the transformation lenen beard.

Speaker 3 (58:08):
Yeah, yeah, but it is it is an isolated autocrat
who behaves the way that he did during COVID, who
also then makes the decision to invade Ukraine. And when
you listen to Vladimir Putins speak about, you know, his
reasons for invading Ukraine. Yes, he has this sort of
imperialistic worldview about Russia and you know, glory of Russia

(58:32):
and all these.

Speaker 2 (58:33):
Sorts of things.

Speaker 3 (58:33):
But he also routinely just says things that are untrue,
and you don't know if that's propaganda. I believe at
this point the Vladimir Putin's information environment has become massively
polluted because everybody in the Siliviki and the intelligence community
in Russia has figured out that like, this is what

(58:54):
this man believes, this is what this man wants to hear,
and that's what they tell him, and he's manipulated in
those ways. So there are very real examples of the
consequences of that type of government that we see with
Russia and the atrocities that are being committed in Ukraine.
So let's go from Russia to the US intelligence community,

(59:15):
and then I'll just finish my response with kids. My
security clearance was revoked, as we talked about it at
the top of the show, and it was revoked because
I said something mean about Donald Trump six years ago,
and because they found out I was going to exercise
political speech by potentially, you know, by considering a run
for the US.

Speaker 2 (59:31):
Senate, just astablishing something you said six years ago. Oh yeah, yeah, yeah,
what they use.

Speaker 1 (59:36):
I mean, that is just like thought police stuff. Let's
write out all the while. Yeah, it truly is.

Speaker 3 (59:42):
And you know, it was right wing Twitter that started
that dug up some of this and started attacking me.
And then I guess right wing Twitter runs our intelligence community.
Now it's a very dangerous thing. Or a Loomer the
CIA chief apparently, Yeah, exactly. And so what do I
think the follow on effects of something like what happened
to me? But it is since I mean James Comey
being indicted and other people who were actively serving in

(01:00:04):
the CIA being walked out by security because they ended
up on some list that nobody knows how. So this
is going to and perhaps already has a massive chilling
effect throughout our federal government.

Speaker 2 (01:00:18):
And it's not just the intelligence community.

Speaker 3 (01:00:20):
I mean Donald Trump went to war with a weather
forecast during his first administration. We might recall where he
modified the course of a map rather than just saying,
you know, I accidentally added an extra state in my comment.

Speaker 2 (01:00:31):
Right, So, up and down the civil service.

Speaker 3 (01:00:33):
You have people who know that if they speak truth
to power like they're supposed to, they're.

Speaker 2 (01:00:37):
Just going to be out a job.

Speaker 3 (01:00:39):
And so that is dangerous for national security. It's dangerous
for domestic security to not have expertise in the civil service.

Speaker 1 (01:00:47):
And what would you do if you're in that situation,
You know you have the So literally a week before
the head of Southern Command decided to resign rather than
carry out these orders on these on these Venezuela on
these boats out off the coast of Venezuela. I'd ask
Jim Stavridi's former NATO superamaut Like commander, former head of
Southern Command. I said, what happens if you get an

(01:01:07):
order you're not on our pretent?

Speaker 2 (01:01:08):
Sure is legal?

Speaker 1 (01:01:09):
Right? We know we know that, you know if if
you follow an illegal order, you're going to be held
accountable to right. We have made that clear in our
in our law. And he goes, well, you would, he goes,
I'd probably resign and not go public about why I resigned.

Speaker 2 (01:01:24):
I'd simply resign.

Speaker 1 (01:01:26):
Let others And you know, there's there's this sort of
there's always that that sort of a would you if
you were in a similar situation, would you simply resign?
Would you resign with a bullhorn? Or do you try
to keep working within the system? Because it feels like
there's no there's no perfect answer here.

Speaker 2 (01:01:44):
There is not.

Speaker 3 (01:01:45):
And I just want your listeners and American voters at
large to understand that the admirals and the generals and
the private first class is they're the privates first class.
They're not coming to save you. If you think there
is some massive resistance that's going to build up in
this way, you are mistaken, and it's because these are
gut wrenching decisions that have extreme amounts of personal consequence

(01:02:08):
to you.

Speaker 1 (01:02:08):
The culture it tells you, Look, if you've got an issue,
then you go ahead and resign, but you need to
do it on your terms, right, Yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:02:15):
And civil servants have an obligation I think, to resign
rather than you know, carry out those things. Whether they
speak about it at public or not would depend on, like, well,
this is a super classified thing. What can I say.
You know, there's whistleblower things. We have ostensibly protections in
this country for that, but you're still all.

Speaker 1 (01:02:32):
Those inspectors general, so it's not even clear who you
would report violations of the Constitution to.

Speaker 2 (01:02:37):
Yeah, exactly.

Speaker 3 (01:02:38):
In the military, you don't have the luxury of always
just being able to resign, you know, admirals and generals
and those sorts of things at various stages of their
you know, contractual commitments to the country, but they can
you know, resign and make a show of it.

Speaker 1 (01:02:51):
Look, the fact that the head of Southern Campan resign
should have been a much bigger.

Speaker 2 (01:02:54):
Deal with the American public.

Speaker 1 (01:02:56):
Yeah, I mean I don't think we I don't think
that whatever's left of legacy.

Speaker 2 (01:02:59):
Media made a big enough deal about it.

Speaker 3 (01:03:01):
No, and the Defense Intelligence Agency who you know, the
director there also gone because of you know, questioning the
efficacy of the military strikes that we took on Iran.
So there are a lot of a lot of things there,
and there are a lot of problems. But I do
think that you know, you do have obligations to not
carry out lawful orders. And it's easy for me to

(01:03:22):
say from the cheap seats over here at this stage
in my life, I only, you know, hope that I
would have had the courage of putting the same situation
that i'm that I am asking other people to exhibit
a day.

Speaker 1 (01:03:34):
Joe Willett, It's been a pleasure to get to know you.
I sort of you come at this with a with
a style that that is very appealing to me, I hope.
But in that you seem like you think this stuff through,
seems like you think before you speak. There's not many
politicians that do that these days.

Speaker 3 (01:03:52):
I try, Chock, have been watching you for years, you know,
I've only probably yelled at you through the television a
few times, but you know, appreciate you having me on
and for having a thoughtful conversation.

Speaker 1 (01:04:03):
I am I am a as I say. It's like,
I'm as long as you're not yellow at me.

Speaker 2 (01:04:08):
The whole time. I didn't.

Speaker 3 (01:04:12):
Yeah, and my campaign job and my campaign will fire
me if I don't remind people to go to Joelfurkentucky
dot com.

Speaker 2 (01:04:18):
If you're at all interested in supporting this camp?

Speaker 1 (01:04:21):
Are you concerned that the big money people in DC
won't invest in Kentucky because of what happened in twenty
twenty with all that money.

Speaker 2 (01:04:29):
Yes, I'm very concerned about that.

Speaker 3 (01:04:32):
You know, we invested on you know, ninety four million
dollars in the in the race here and got results
worse than we had ever gotten before. And I think
that is on people's mind spot. There's an important difference
here now. Andy Basheer has shown this path to victory,
and we just have to have the right candidate walk
down that path.

Speaker 1 (01:04:52):
Joe Willette, we'll be watching your primary, that's for sure.
I know, fairly early, right may right, yeah, leave me
So that is six months are going to fly by,
So be safe from the trail.

Speaker 2 (01:05:05):
Thank you so much. Check how you done it.

Speaker 1 (01:05:09):
This episode of the Chuck Podcast is brought to you
by wild Grain. Wild Grain is the first bake from
Frozen subscription box for our teasonal breads, seasonal pastries, and
fresh pastas, plus all items conveniently bake in twenty five
minutes or less. Unlike many store bought options, Wild Grain
uses simple ingredients you can pronounce and a slow fermentation

(01:05:31):
process that can be easier on your belly and richer
in nutrients and antioxidants. Wildgrain's boxes are fully customizable. They're
constantly adding seasonal and limited time products for you to enjoy.
In addition to their classic box, they now feature a
gluten free box and a plant based box. I checked
out the gluten free box, and let me tell you
they have a gluten free sour dough bread. It is.

(01:05:55):
We got two loads of it and we've done one
loaf already. It's a cranberry and almond sourdough bread. It's
like the best raisin bread you've ever had, except it's
not raisin. It's great. You're gonna love this. You know,
it's hit or miss if you mess around in the
gluten free bread world. This is a hit. Seriously. I
was impressed, So look for a limited time. Wildgrain is

(01:06:16):
offering our listeners thirty dollars off your first box plus
free croissants in every box when you go to wildgrain
dot com slash podcast. To start your subscription, follow these instructions.
Free croissants in every box, thirty dollars off your first
box when you go to wildgrain dot com slash toodcast
that's wildgrain dot com slash podcast, or simply use the
promo code toodcast at check out. Always use the code

(01:06:40):
get the discount. I'm telling you it's excellent, excellent bread

All Episodes

Interview Only w/ Joel Willett - How Democrats Can Win In Appalachia

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Ruthie's Table 4

The Joe Rogan Experience

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Interview Only w/ Joel Willett - How Democrats Can Win In Appalachia