And, This is Pod Save America's Jon Favreau & Tommy Vietor

Crooked Media's Jon Favreau & Tommy Vietor discuss Gavin's appearance on The Shawn Ryan Show, Epstein conspiracy theories, and how Donald Trump is trying to cheat his way through the 2026 election.
IG: @ThisisGavinNewsom
Email: [e-mail]
Substack: Gavinnewsom
Phone: 855-6NEWSOM

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:08):
This is Gavin Newsom and this is pod Save America's
Jon Favreau and Tommy Detort. When did you guys become crooked?
By the way, what the hell is that? We were
always seriously many was that a tell? Are you guys
trying to tell? I mean, what are you?

Speaker 2 (00:23):
What?

Speaker 1 (00:23):
Were you trying to communicate?

Speaker 2 (00:25):
We named it in twenty seventeen we started, Yeah, and
more people knew Podsave America than cricket at first. But
we thought crooked media like it was. It was twenty seventeen,
so it was the height of Trump just one resistance.
He's calling everyone the crooked media and all that kind
of stuff. We're taking a tongue in cheek.

Speaker 1 (00:41):
You take it back. You weren't just admitting to something.

Speaker 2 (00:43):
No, no, no, But but then it's stuck and now
now it's just here.

Speaker 1 (00:48):
And so I mean, but the point is the point
I mean, this thing is, this thing is evolved from
twenty seventeen in ways that you can act in hindsight.
Like of course, we always knew this was our trajectory,
our vision, in our But did you have any noble
ship did you have any idea that this thing would
be where it is today and you guys would be
so multi faceted, not just with one podcast, multiple podcasts

(01:10):
and books and tours everything else.

Speaker 3 (01:12):
No, absolutely absolute luck and timing. We we me and
John uh Favon love it. We sat in John's kitchen
and we uh bought like a website on medium dot com.
We tried a bunch of r ls. We couldn't get
like crookedmedia dot com. We couldn't get crooked dot com
for a long time. We like got a negotiation with

(01:34):
like the porn King of Arizona.

Speaker 2 (01:36):
Yeah, there's some guy that the porn sites in Arizona
that was going to sell it to you for crooked
crooked media, and how.

Speaker 3 (01:44):
He was passionate about it.

Speaker 2 (01:46):
So we had to go crookeed dot com.

Speaker 3 (01:48):
Web Yeah, like get crooked anyway, we rolled out like
a Medium website in one show and called it a
company and like fake until you make it.

Speaker 2 (01:56):
For a while, we read no money and we I
remember we went to the Bank of America and West Hollywood,
the three of us, and we're like, we'd like to
open up a bank account and they're like, uh, okay,
we need to put some money in it. And we're like, oh,
so we sat there when we like wrote a twenty
five dollars check or something in cash?

Speaker 3 (02:15):
Was that Oneman saying wasn't like Olga or yeah?

Speaker 2 (02:18):
Yeah, she helped us and that was that's how we started.
No investor money, no nothing.

Speaker 3 (02:21):
I think John turned us. He's like, I was sort
of thought I'd ope at a joint account for the first
time with my wife.

Speaker 2 (02:26):
Yeah, so was it?

Speaker 1 (02:28):
Well, you guys drunk one night and you said we
got some crazy idea, We're just looking for a job.
Help wanted what was it?

Speaker 2 (02:34):
So Tommy and Lovett and I, like after the White
House had talked about how there's not enough progressive media
right and so we'd had the three of us have
been having that conversation. Then during the twenty sixteen race,
Bill Simmons reached out to me because we known each
other we both went to Holy Cross and he said, so,
I have this new site called The Ringer, and I

(02:57):
want to do something about the twenty sixteen the like
because we mostly do sports and culture and stuff, but
would you be interested in doing like a podcast with
us for twenty sixteen? And he knew Dan Feiffer too,
and he was like, maybe you and Dan can do
this podcast. So we started doing it became popular and
then he's like I could do two times a week,
and then love It and Tommy were around and we

(03:19):
said let's let's do it, and so then we started
doing it at the Ringer. And then when Trump won,
we told Bill like, look, I think we want to
build something even bigger than just Pods of America. And
all the time it was called keeping at sixteen hundred.
We want to do something even bigger, and it's weird
to build a progressive media company like under the umbrella

(03:40):
of the Ringer. So we're going to go on our own.
And that's what we did.

Speaker 1 (03:44):
Wow, and did you I mean you guys are still
doing early on side gigs and oh you're a hedging
your bet.

Speaker 3 (03:50):
I lived in San Francisco. I was commuting down, crashing
in his guest bedroom. The whole time we had it.

Speaker 2 (03:55):
We had a company together, we had we were we
had a consulting.

Speaker 1 (03:58):
Firm, consulting, full fledged consulting strategies.

Speaker 2 (04:01):
We just we did speech.

Speaker 1 (04:02):
Writing, speech right, speech right, of course, which is a
good gig.

Speaker 3 (04:06):
But like, yeah, but people in my life, when you know,
look going your wife and saying honey, I want to
move to Los Angeles to start a podcast with my
friends in my late thirties.

Speaker 2 (04:18):
That's a tough She wasn't totally surprised.

Speaker 3 (04:22):
But not surprised, not sold. Wonderful person, supportive Partnerleven came
along for the rid.

Speaker 1 (04:30):
That will be a good clip. We'll get that up,
so I think we may lead with that.

Speaker 3 (04:34):
Thank you. Yes, but yeah, I mean I think, you know,
people I love desperately were like, cool, but you know
you've got like a fallback, right, we do?

Speaker 1 (04:44):
Was it? But you know, you just you were all in.

Speaker 2 (04:45):
You just knew it was gonna Yeah. Once we started Crooked,
we realized that, you know, we had to move off
of Fenway. And also I think we both had gotten
you know, we've done it for three or four years.
I think we got tick of writing speeches for we
some really great clients. You also like end up working
with a bunch of you do a company imagine.

Speaker 1 (05:03):
Corporate stuff too. Yeah, that stuff its CEOs.

Speaker 2 (05:07):
It is hard after you've been in politics to get
really excited and exercised over some CEO who like needs
a speech in four weeks and it's like it's urgent
and we're like, it's not that I won't tell you
urgent state of the Union exactly.

Speaker 3 (05:24):
I also had this sort of weird I don't know
where it came from, ingrained belief that like I needed
to be an adult now and graduate from politics the
things I did with my friend and get a real job, right.
I don't know why I thought that. And then throughout
twenty fifteen, I'd wake up at five am and like
just scroll Twitter for an hour and a half or
two before doing my job, and I was just I

(05:46):
was obsessed with politics. I could not quit it.

Speaker 1 (05:48):
It's interesting, by the way, is Twitter the go to
ms of just trying to I mean, and it continues
to be right, I mean objectively.

Speaker 2 (05:55):
I've tried to Blue Sky and it's just not I
get why people go there. I just think it's it's
it's not fast enough, it's not updated enough with the news.
There's not enough people.

Speaker 1 (06:06):
So where else? I mean, it's interesting, just as you
guys prepare for your podcasts and you're just staying on
top of everything and your course making the news, which
is a big part of the obvious part of your success.
Where else, what are you? What's your what is your
media habit. Are you cable folks, or you go home
turn on Rachel Mattaw on Monday and wonder when she's
coming back Tuesday through Friday, or you know, or I mean, honestly, what, What's.

Speaker 2 (06:30):
I never do cable anymore? I wake up, I read playbook,
I read axios am, and then I immediately go to
the company slack and people are putting news stories in
the slack and then I'm looking on Twitter and I
try to have about an hour of just reading the
news and catching up. Go to the New York Times,
go to the Washington Post, Politico, and then after I

(06:53):
do that, then I try to do other things, but
I am constantly scrolling and getting back into the the
you for.

Speaker 3 (07:00):
You similar similar stuff. But I'm a sicko like you,
Like we only have Fox on in our office because
we kind of like the conservative perspective. But then I
like to listen by the way I.

Speaker 1 (07:08):
Just walked in, and it's a newsome swearing like a
drunken sailor.

Speaker 2 (07:16):
You make a lot of appearances we do. Now the
more you watch it, you become.

Speaker 3 (07:22):
A character and you're like it was a character, but.

Speaker 1 (07:24):
You're so you were actually you're so you're you indulge,
you're watching.

Speaker 3 (07:27):
Yeah, I listened to like I try to listen to Tucker,
especially around the Iran stuff. I listened to a lot
of Bannon, h I double Info Wars. Recently you're doing Wars.

Speaker 1 (07:38):
Yeah, I mean, you just can't quit.

Speaker 3 (07:39):
I think it's after the bank, like you know, it's
it's weird.

Speaker 1 (07:44):
It's a thing that brought you back to the war.
It was so much fun.

Speaker 3 (07:48):
It was around like watching sort of hearing their arguments
on things I think is really valuable. And also like
there's people who you see only clips of and you
kind of you caricature them or you decide that they're
stupid or you and then if you see them in
their kind of home environment, you realize, like, oh, these
are dangerous people.

Speaker 1 (08:04):
I love that and who I mean that. By the way,
I could not agree with you more on that in
terms of observations. One of the reasons when I started
this podcast we had those guys on, we had Bannon on,
we had Kirk con because I don't think people were
taking them as seriously as they should be taking them.
But who do you when you guys look at that universe,
particularly from the conservative or even conspiratorial conservative side. Who
are the folks that would be in that category as

(08:26):
folks that you know, are weapons for that grievance, that
are folks that we should pay a little bit more
attention to. I mean, is it do you still count
Alex Jones in that space or is it more of
the Bannon types.

Speaker 3 (08:37):
Tucker and Bannon are kind of the most They're just
really good at what they do, but like, look, I.

Speaker 2 (08:43):
Gotta have the most cohesive ideology too, and.

Speaker 3 (08:45):
They're just like Tucker. Carlson is a very Look, I
don't agree with him on most almost anything, but he's
very talented at what he does, and he like brings
in the like I listened to his entire interview with
Sean Ryan before I listened to you on Shawn Show,
because initially Tucker was saying some things about Trump and
Sean were saying some things about Trump being corrupt, and
I was like, ooh, this is damaging to Trump. This
is good, But then I got sucked in because Sean

(09:07):
Ryan's like a Navy CeAl who became a CIA contractor,
who became a drug runner for cartels, and that even
I'm like, this is the most fishing I've ever heard of.

Speaker 1 (09:16):
You go in a studio and if you didn't think
that was interesting, you just look at all the memorability. Yes,
and the stories. There's a hinge and he explains what
that hinge did and what it represented, and there's there's machetes,
and there's all kinds of other things. I got and
I got it. By the way, for the record, for
the ten reporters that have already called, have you registered

(09:36):
it first? I haven't received it yet. Have you reported
it as a gift? I haven't yet received the invoice yet.
All of that will be uh, that will be taken
care of.

Speaker 3 (09:45):
And then you didn't leave for like fifteen hours or something.

Speaker 1 (09:48):
Yeah, don't you get Yours are four hour interviews, right?
Four hour?

Speaker 2 (09:51):
Did you not?

Speaker 1 (09:52):
Can you believe? Four hours? Did you?

Speaker 3 (09:53):
Pete?

Speaker 1 (09:53):
During we had one quick break. By the way, I
got to say about that guy, it's a hell of
a resid to me. There's a decency to him.

Speaker 3 (10:02):
Oh he seemed great.

Speaker 1 (10:03):
I mean he's like he talks about his family. I
just for me the characters about I want to talk
about your kids, talk about your wife. Yeah, sense of
community contributions. He's a good human being. I was really
I was. He created a sort of safe environment where
you know, I mean, that's where. How else is he
gonna spend four damn hours going back?

Speaker 2 (10:23):
And I haven't had a four hour conversation with my wife,
my closest friends, my parents in as long as I
can remember, like four hours.

Speaker 1 (10:31):
Well this is only scheduled for three, so I admit
I missed them all.

Speaker 3 (10:35):
Well, yeah, like I don't know Sean Ryan's politics. I
did like come away just feeling like he really wanted
to connect with you as a human being, and he
was seemed curious and I really respected that. There was
one very funny moment in the interview where you're doing
this like thoughtful answer about masculinity and politics, and you
sort of do this long thing and Sean goes, do
you know what the number one most search incest? I

(10:58):
laughed out loud.

Speaker 2 (10:59):
I text, you're sad at that? And I was like, Wow,
didn't realize incest porms hour two minute.

Speaker 1 (11:08):
Hey you guys, legit you listened. They that was Yeah,
that was way deep in well he I thought. He
asked me why I don't Now we're going to get
into the condom conversation.

Speaker 2 (11:18):
Do you were very funny condom very funny ding the
condom one? Because I could hear I could I could
see the wheels turning in your mind because he was like,
did you have anything to do with the condom lone?
And you're thinking, like, is he for it? Is he
against it? Like? I can't tell?

Speaker 1 (11:30):
And I do two thousand dollars a year if it's
been seven years, I mean they have done something like
I feel should I feel guilty? Am I proud of it?
And I don't?

Speaker 2 (11:38):
And then he was like, no, I think porn is
really bad for our kids. And I was like, oh,
you're like, okay it he's on that side of it, Okay,
that's fine, yew.

Speaker 1 (11:46):
But it's so what you know, Look, it goes to
what you guys were trying to solve for back in
twenty seventeen that the right at the time it wasn't
even the big podcast was probably or it was, was
it not dominantly right wing radio right that you were
kind of up against and so emerging? Who were there
who was sort of the dominant right wing podcaster in

(12:07):
twenty seventeen eighteen, or were there any that were really
stand out to your call.

Speaker 2 (12:10):
It's funny, wasn't it. I don't think it was like
a big deal back then.

Speaker 3 (12:14):
I'm sure like the Ben Shapiro kind of marks around
that early Wire Time, Daily Collar, Daily Wire. I don't
know the dates in my head right, but yeah, I
think those guys did a really smart thing. They the
right wing donors invested earlier and helped the build infrastructure,
and they all invested in YouTube early, yeah, and built
shows there and audience there.

Speaker 2 (12:33):
There's something about the format which we stumbled into, like
we didn't plan this, but we had complained to each
other and anyone who would listen how cable and like
television interviews just they they force you into soundbites because
you only have a five minute hit and so you
just don't get to have those conversations. And before, like

(12:55):
at one point, Love It and Tommy and I pitched
a television show that was going to be like a
like Podsave Americ on TV. Before we did the podcast
was like no, every time we did an yeah, that
was just our podcast. But then it was like we
when we tried to pitch that show, it wasn't working,
partly because like the conversations we want to have are
longer than like television executives would want to fit into

(13:19):
a show. And once we started doing the podcast, we realized, like, oh,
you get to have conversations that are more in depth, nuanced.
People are more likely to be themselves the longer you
talk to them, and you can sort of make the
points you want to make without sounding like a fucking
talking point machine.

Speaker 1 (13:36):
And was YouTube the weapon for you to really scale this?
I mean, was it the visual When when did it
become more of a visual medium than just online just voice.

Speaker 3 (13:46):
There were some like inflection points seemingly in podcasting. I
think one of them was twenty seventeen when there were
a lot of like og podcasters who came along before
that time, like Simmons and Mark Marin and lots of folks.
But I think there was a lot of growth in
seventeen which got us a lot of people's like first

(14:07):
podcast was us, We built a big RSS feed. We
actually didn't invest enough into YouTube until pretty recently, and
that was a mistake and it's a deficit we're trying
to build out of that just takes reps.

Speaker 2 (14:20):
I think we didn't even film until the pandemic. You
weren't even filming, because I remember there's a little we
have like a Dan Pfeifer on the phone and a
picture of Dan because Dan's in San Francisco, and so
we used to do that because Dan, which is.

Speaker 1 (14:34):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (14:35):
And then in the pandemic we all started doing zoom,
and then I think after that we're like, now we're
going to do a whole studio and we'll do filming.

Speaker 1 (14:40):
What do you guys think is the biggest I mean,
if you look back at some of those early podcasts
with you guys, what's the biggest change perceived or otherwise
intentional or just happenstance in terms of how you approach
interviews versus how you approached them before. Have you become
more or less fill in the blank, what argumentative? Passive?

(15:03):
Good question? You know.

Speaker 2 (15:04):
What I've been trying to do is approach interviews thinking
what do I actually want to know from this person,
and not think about it in terms of like what
is the audience going to need and want and be
happy about. And I also think that I'm trying not
to interview politicians like they are interviewed on cable, which

(15:28):
I think I sort of automatically fell into when we
first started doing it, because that's the that's the example
that you have, and when you interview them like that,
they're more likely to just give you the talking point stuff.
And when you sit down for a while, then you know,
you get more interesting stuff.

Speaker 1 (15:45):
You break them down.

Speaker 2 (15:46):
And it's not even like, oh, you finally get news
out of them that like their staff's going to be
pissed about. It's just you know, like you just listening
to you for four hours on Sean Ryan, It's like
I knew I got to learn more about you than
I've learned many other interview Yeah, it was just.

Speaker 3 (16:02):
And like not to not to blow smoke. But I
don't think there's a lot of Democrats that could just
hang like that for four hours. Like everyone's like, oh
democrats going Rogan. It's like, well, not the wrong democrat.
I mean, that's not going to help our case. But yeah,
I think, Uh, the question about Brogan came on that
podcast too.

Speaker 1 (16:19):
From that first question, Yeah he did. I was expecting
that was, oh, we have a audience question. The first
one I'm like, whoa, Okay, I got a gun and
then I got question with Rogan.

Speaker 3 (16:33):
Anyway, but Rocky start, no, I do have a bone
to pick with you, though, because when you launched.

Speaker 1 (16:43):
Four Hours, you got more than a bone. I mean,
I got an entire et when.

Speaker 3 (16:47):
You launched this show. I had been trying to I've
been in talks with Steve Bannon because I was trying
to book it, and my my strategy with this was
trying to get Steve and I do think it's interesting,
and I was kind of hoping to drive a wedge
between the kind of populous wing and the elon wing
of the party because they were just starting time and
then you had them on. I was just like, well, Ship,

(17:08):
I can't do that now.

Speaker 2 (17:09):
You know, I'm old news, your old news.

Speaker 3 (17:11):
Steve's got You've got this newsome guy's got a new crush.

Speaker 2 (17:15):
You know, you started big with like Bannon and Charlie
Kirk and now you're at us.

Speaker 1 (17:23):
Doctor Phil.

Speaker 2 (17:25):
Yeah, that's good.

Speaker 1 (17:26):
That's good, even new Gingrid. I have to run my recall.

Speaker 2 (17:29):
You need fillery.

Speaker 1 (17:30):
Yeah, but back to that just I mean, when you
talk about that, it's serious. I mean, you guys, you've
sort of raised the bar your own expectation, you know,
on excellence. I mean, how do you I mean, it
is how important our guests, do you guys, versus just
staying current on the news and providing an insight that
may not be offered anywhere else because of your own experience.

(17:51):
I mean, how how stressed are you about getting a
Bannon type or getting whoever's you know? I mean, getting
you know, Jeffrey Epstein, you know cousin on who we
love to talk about. It was really in the list.

Speaker 3 (18:03):
Booking Epstein would be huge.

Speaker 1 (18:05):
Yeah, by the way, I'm told he's alive. Some say,
some say I went in doubt, some say, some say.

Speaker 3 (18:14):
Many people are saying. I would say that we spend
the most time on the news portion of the show,
which is like kind of the first like three blocks,
because that's when you just it just takes a lot
of For me, it takes a lot of preparation to
feel prepared and have something to say and to feel
to reduce my own anxiety about doing something. I just
have to like work until I feel comfortable. The guests,

(18:36):
for I think early in the show we felt the
need to go for names or electeds or to check
a box in some way, and now it's a little
more freewheeling, like what is interesting to the audience and also,
you know, I think we we were very much a
democratic safe space, and we still are, and we're trying
to think of ways to like change it up, you know,

(18:58):
Like I Glenn Greenwald on the other day on my
Foreign Policy show, like not someone that a lot of
Democrats love, but has a really interesting perspective on freedom
of speech, and we wanted to hear it.

Speaker 2 (19:08):
Yeah, I had. I talked to Ross doubt hit on
offline about his book on religion and like the existence
of an afterlife, which the I would say. Our audience
was a little like what are you doing? But I
was like, you know what, I read the book. I
found it interesting. I want to talk to him. I
also like we are always going to be democratic strategists

(19:28):
because that was our life in the White House. And
so each show I see as like balancing a couple
different equities. One is I want to make it interesting
for people. The others want I want to give people
good information and not just bullshit, and give them the
details that they need. And then I want to make
sure we are persuading people, either people who aren't persuaded

(19:52):
who are listening, or people who are already persuaded who
are listening. But might be talking to their friends and family,
and we sort of want to give them advice on
how to convince other people to get involved in politics
to vote for Democrats, right, and so's that's part of
it too. And then we also want to be honest

(20:12):
so that when you know, Democrats fuck up or do
something that we disagree with, that we can say it
and say it respectfully.

Speaker 1 (20:19):
Yeah, yeah, when did you guys? I mean, it's obviously
we talked. I mean, it's obvious to anyone who listens
to you, guys, But it's it's not just a podcast
in a nutritional sense. You've kind of, to your point,
sort of built a movement book itself. Was about democracy,
is about civic engagement. You lead with action, not just
complaints and gripes. You talk about what people can do

(20:42):
to get mobilized organized. But one of the things that's
really been remarkable to watch is how successful you've been
on the road in building out events. Was that always
part of the original theory of the case was that
sort of table stakes in twenty seventeen said yeah, and
we'll do this, and we're gonna do big events.

Speaker 2 (21:01):
We didn't think any would show out.

Speaker 3 (21:02):
No, we had this amazing agent named Kevin Shivers who
worked at wm UH now is at hobout the name Katy. Sorry,
now is it? We have this amazing agent Kevin Shivers
at w ME now was with Kasey Wasserman who was like,
trust me, let me build this touring thing for you.
I promise you it'll work. And we're like, okay, buddy.
You know, And the first time we did an event,

(21:24):
uh there were like folding chairs and we didn't realize
that we had to end the event and love it
had to run off at like hour three to go
pee and was taking questions about light rail.

Speaker 1 (21:41):
Show and we're definitely talking about the same yeah, and like.

Speaker 3 (21:46):
Yeah, we slowly evolved and kind of figured it out.
But what we noticed over time is that a lot
often the best shows were in red states because it
turned into this like little revival.

Speaker 1 (21:55):
Get it, totally get it. I was just in South
Carolina and did seven nine's and to say every time
I'm in a red state could be Alabama, Mississippi was
out there for Biden specifically going to the Red states
on his bath intentionally not going to the Blue states,
and and everyone, I mean the state of mind there
is just more of gratitude, thank you for showing up exactly,

(22:17):
thank you for not turning your back. Arkansas was the
same way, and so I'm not surprised to hear that.
It didn't surprise me, even with Bernie on the tour
saying well, you're part in red rural parts of California
or red parts of the status of course, yeah, I
mean that's you're gonna get that.

Speaker 2 (22:30):
Energy well, because there's still you know, twenty thirty percent
of those red areas are still Democrats, and those Democrats
are starved, starve for someone. But I also think that,
I mean, what I've really loved about the touring is
just you spend too much time in a studio with
just the just your co hosts, and you do lose
you like, what are people talking about? What's interesting? Well,

(22:52):
you don't get that just by like looking online and
looking on Twitter and just being around people, Like I
get energy from that. And then when we go and
do campaign stuff before like midterms, and we go do
you know, we knock on doors and do canvassing, and
just like getting to meet people and talk to them,
it does inspire you because you're like, Okay, all is
not lost there's a lot of good people out there

(23:13):
who care about this shit, and and you know, they
just want to know what to do.

Speaker 3 (23:18):
And Trump treats it like he treats going to events
like he's a comic on the road, tries out new material,
he sees what plays, he comments back to them about
how it's playing in real time, and he like he
focus groups everything he does in the.

Speaker 1 (23:31):
Sense it's interesting you say that because the whole Newski
calls me newscum and he goes audience loves it, audience
loves it. And it's just it's just like he's I mean,
he says, so it's an applause, so he's like, hey, man,
I guts, I gotta go. You know, they gotta go.
It's my base, it's my base. Nothing. It's a way
of him saying nothing personal, like really, okay, Jesus man.
But it's interesting, just I reflect on what you guys

(23:53):
are doing. Reflects. Going back to Charlie Kirk and turning
point obviously this weekend, and there was a sort of
turning point relates to the Epstein stuff. We've danced around
that a little bit and watching Megan Kelly, who's like,
I think gone full mega. She's always danced around, but
it's now fully in. Yeah, and uh and Charlie and
of course Bannon and the Who's who? Uh, just the

(24:14):
teen off. But before we get into Epstein, I mean,
what do you what do you think of what Kirk
is doing and how he's doing it and are there
their accues or are there lessons? Are there concerns there
should be, you know, cautionary flags for Democrats should we
be doing some of similar things. But from the prism
of progressive politics, what's your sort of over under on
what what they've put together.

Speaker 3 (24:34):
I think it's really smart and strategic. I thought it
was interesting, just if for present day. I thought it
was interesting that they allowed so much space for conversation
about Epstein because like Charlie like to a large extent,
I think, kind of trades his his credibility for a

(24:56):
seat at the table right like he will be on
Team Trump eventually. But he felt the need to let
some air out of that balloon. And it was notable
and not something the Democrats always do. I think we
sometimes suppress it arguments and we should do more.

Speaker 2 (25:07):
What they did it interesting.

Speaker 3 (25:08):
I will say what he's built is super impressive. It
did help that he got a ton of like big
donor and fossil fuel money early on because they were
kind of worried about libs on campus. And I think
we need to think about long term infrastructure and party
building like that.

Speaker 2 (25:26):
I mean, one thing that Charlie Kirk also did that
was probably smart, as he goes to these campuses and
finds libs to debate, yeah, and is not afraid to debate.
And I think we are. There's enough of us now
sort of turning the corner on that in the Democratic Party.
But for a long time it was don't go on Fox.
There's no use in debating these people. And I get

(25:49):
the reasons for that, but it's also like, if you
can't defend your ideas live in front of another person
who you disagree with and who may be crazy extreme,
but you disagree with them, they've got an audience and
people are paying attention. And if you're one of the
you know, the majority of people who don't pay close

(26:09):
attention to politics in this country, right, then when you
hear one person's message, and even if there's filled with
lies and all kinds of extreme stuff, and you just
hear the other side is just talking on themselves like
you're just naturally gonna say, well, I don't know. At
least they're at least they're showing up. At least they're debating.

Speaker 1 (26:31):
It's interesting to me too. And we'll circle back circuitously
a little bit to Epstein. But I did when I
did that first podcast with Charlie Kirk. First of all,
he was great enough to come into the studio and
do the first one, and I made a comment that
got a lot of blowback, including at home, because my son,
quite literally eleven year old, was actually heard the night

(26:53):
before and woke me up early say are you seriously
meeting with Charlie Kirk. I'm not going to school, you're
taking me with you. I'm like, I thought it was
a joke the night before. I thought he was just
playing with me. But it's on his he doesn't have
a we don't have a phone, he doesn't have any TikTok.
It's just the YouTube that's on his school tablet. And
it was wired in this space. And here's where I'm going,

(27:16):
a space where I started knowing, you know, he starts
talking to me about Jordan Peterson. He says, hey, Dad,
I don't know Andrew Tate. You know, I think they
were misrepresented. You know, they're not as bad as you think.
You know, Andrew Tate's coming to California. He just said
something bad about you. You're gonna respond, you know, and
you know he's got I mean, and I'm like, what happened?

Speaker 3 (27:34):
Eleven year old?

Speaker 1 (27:34):
Yes?

Speaker 2 (27:35):
Wow?

Speaker 1 (27:35):
How do you know about Andrew Tate? What's this Jordan
Peterson stuff? And how do you know about Charlie Kirk?
And I started talking to his friends the same thing,
and he started getting it through just frankly, just game stuff.
He wanted to watch YouTube games. He started you know,
he's eleven now, now he's older, but he's twelve, but
he's you know, he's trying to get in shape now.
And so it's like body stuff. And this whole quote

(27:57):
unquote it's overused or missy us or even mislabeled, but
this mano sphere, there's sort of space which then gets
to Epstein, gets to these conspiracies, gets to these darker
pizza gate places, and gets to where we are today
in our politics. And what's I mean? You guys, you've
been you've been part of this ecosystem broadly defined but
what do you make of these subcultures and how serious

(28:21):
those algorithms are and what that means to our body politic.

Speaker 3 (28:25):
I think they're really serious. I mean, like there's schools
and school districts, and I think the UK and Australia
that developed entire curriculums to combat Andrew Tate Like it's
a real crisis in a lot of places. He's incredibly
what was it twenty eighteen or twenty nineteen is the
most google person in the world or something like that, right,
So that's real dangerous. I do think one thing someone

(28:45):
pointed out to me that really stuck with me is
a lot of the kind of pipeline to conservative influencer
spaces are through self improvement. It's like dating advice, crypto
get rich, how to get jacked, and we're like, there's
not that wellness. I know you talked a lot about

(29:05):
RFK and sort of your relationship with him, and you know,
that's the thing I hear more than anything else from
people in California. And also, you know, my wife and
I had a bunch of fertility challenges and then now
we have small kids, so there's sort of a pregnancy
or small kid algorithmic coroll right, that gets you lots
of stuff that takes you to anti vax or takes

(29:28):
you to Jordan Peterson saying, you know, women are objects,
all right, and it's it's incredibly dangerous.

Speaker 2 (29:35):
I think two big trends. One is there's a crisis
of trust in this country, and there's we're probably distrust
in almost every institution, government, media, business, and some of
that is just the actual you know, economic statistics, right,
and there's inequality and there's a whole bunch of other

(29:57):
things around that. And then there is a a crisis masculinity.
And I think I'm actually interviewing Ruth Whitman for Offline
Tomorrow who wrote boy Mom, and my wife was reading
Boy Mom first and then I read it, and her
whole point is that, like she doesn't want to call
it toxic masculinity, matter, it's impossible masculinity because it's a

(30:19):
standard that it's impossible for boys to live up to
now because you're either funneled into like you've got to
be super tough and alpha and get strong or if
you go but also you're supposed to be tender and
you're supposed to be emotionally available to But if you
do that, then you're not masculine, right, and so you like,

(30:41):
these boys are growing up stuck in between, and they're
becoming lonely, and they have less confidence in themselves and
they have less confidence in trying to, you know, talk
to girls. And it's easier to stay home and be
online by yourself because there's less friction when you don't
have to actually build relationships and go through the awkward
phases of conversation and making a connection with someone. You

(31:04):
can just be home, talk to people online, watch porn online,
and like be lonely. And it's hurting a lot of
young men.

Speaker 1 (31:12):
It's hurt It seems to have hurt our party too,
because it's been politicized and weaponized a bit against us.
Trump was seemed to be very in tune and in
touch with and back to this notion of manosphere. But
around the US give masculinity, and that's sort of pushback
against quote unquote toxic masculinity and how that was used
as a weapon to sort of tear down men understandably

(31:36):
coming out of me too and everything else. But where's
where do you see our party? The Democratic Party? Because
you see these trend lines they're now becoming headlines. It's
suicide rates that are off the charts, it's educational attainment
where women are dominating over men, the crisis of you know,
not just loneliness, but deaths of despair, overdose rates. I mean,
in every category, boys and men are struggling. Where do

(31:58):
you see the Democratic Party in relationship to that conversation?
It doesn't seem to me an easy conversation for a
lot of Democrats because they still see men in disproportionate
positions of power and influence, men still getting paid more
than women, and until that's equalized, they may not necessarily
want to have the conversation about what's mine underneath.

Speaker 3 (32:20):
Yeah, I mean I think I I was THEO Vaughn
or somebody talking about this, who's a comedian sort of
in the so called manosphere, So we need a better
term for it, right. He's like a very popular comedian
and podcaster who was talking maybe with Bernie about the
way he and some friends of his community sort of
reacted to being told they had that male privilege or

(32:42):
white privilege, and he felt like, well, I'm sort of
like dead broke. So that may exist in the world,
and it's not me, and I think it closed off
a conversation rather than opening it right. So there's a
part of it that's like just messaging and how you
talk about these things. I think if you're if you
frame it the right way, people.

Speaker 2 (32:58):
Will listen to you.

Speaker 3 (33:00):
And also, you know, you talked about this with with Sean,
like Trump is so malleable, like he's for the thing
that's happening, right, So he was against crypto and then
a bunch of you read the New York Times, they
had a big piece on how he was lobbying lobbied.
A bunch of them came to him and were like,
we can make you a shitload of money and get
you a ton of contributions for a super pack or whatever.
And he was like, sign me up, right, And that

(33:24):
is you know, making him hundreds of millions of dollars,
if not billions of dollars. But also there's a lot
of men who think of crypto as an opportunity to
catch back off in an economy where they feel left
behind by economic inequality and all the things that are
bad about capitalism. And like, I'm not saying that we
should be super for crypto for that reason, because I

(33:46):
think a lot of people get scammed and people get hurt.
But it's like, how do you not sound like work? Like,
like you're gonna poke your eye with that thing to
everybody right like, and we're scolding them.

Speaker 2 (33:56):
I think the other challenge is we have to do
more showing and less telling, and just more setting an
example for young men as opposed to like when you
see the Republicans and they're like joke around and having fun,
and then you hear the Democrats, and the Democrats are like,
we have commissioned to study, and we will find the

(34:17):
young men in the wild, and we will approach that
do not cancel the young men when you see him
in the wild. It's like, it's just really because it's
just like how we are. We analyze everything, and it's
like just fucking be a normal person. Just just be yourself,
you know. But the other big thing that happened is,

(34:37):
of course the pandemic. And you're seeing this in within
gen Z, Like there's two gen Z cohorts now and
the ones who were graduated when the pandemic hit are
still pretty democratic. Even the men and the ones who
were in high school or in college when the pandemic
hit the gap between how the men voted and the

(34:59):
women is the biggest of any generation, any other generation,
and so those and I don't know. I mean, I'm
hoping because I have a five year old and it's
almost two year old, and I'm hoping that you know
now that we haven't a generation below them that didn't
grow up in the middle of the pandemic, that it
could be a little bit better. But that's still a

(35:21):
whole generation of kids who dealt with the pandemic who
I think are and we don't talk about it. I mean,
you were. We don't talk about it because no one
wants to. No one wants to because it's a little
PTSD and no one wants to go back to that.
But that really fucked people up. How especially in your
formative years.

Speaker 3 (35:35):
How did you guys deal with being at home? You're
the governor of a state and you have four kids.

Speaker 1 (35:41):
Well, I have four kids. I had four hundred protesters
and drones ahead overhead and people with bullhorns waking the
kids up at night.

Speaker 2 (35:47):
That was an extra wrinkle.

Speaker 1 (35:48):
It's a little extra wrinkle. I mean, I had a
little duchy who didn't know any better with his nerf guns,
going up there and acting like he's a little member
of the military and hiding out and looking at people
and I'm like, brother, you're actually gonna get shot because
someone's gonna believe that's a gun. Try and explain that
to a six seven year old. Uh, and having ways
of getting out of the house where we had to
sneak out the back for it seemed like a couple

(36:12):
of years. And it ended up with my oldest daughter
and being homeschooled because of what was happening in the
class when we did come back, and uh, and just
getting bullied and hit and so, I mean it is Look,
I mean, I think the biggest I think we have
an obligation. We have an obligation to have an honest, thoughtful,

(36:34):
reflective analysis, not least of which from a policy perspective,
but we have to for our own sanity in terms
of our own person that trauma everybody went through and
we're all suppressing that and people are acting like, oh, yeah,
I don't want to talk about no. Yeah, well it's good. Okay, yeah,

(36:55):
I mean just what who Yeah, no, good, it's good.
And so I mean it's just a people went through.
I mean, it was social unrest. It wasn't just a pandemic,
it was everything happened on the streets and sidewalks. You
talk about the National Guard. I had the second largest
deployment in US history during that time of social unrest,
after George Floyd here in California. And then obviously all

(37:15):
the supply chain issues and the inflationary scars and wars,
and now Trump again. I mean, it's it's been a
hell of a time. So we got to unpack all that.
But look, I want to unpack just a few other
things with you guys, as I've got your time, as
we figure out these algorithms, as we figure out how
we're all living together online but feeling more and more

(37:38):
isolated alone. But I need to understand was Trump on
the Epstein list or not? I need to know from
the two of you, was Trump on the damn list?

Speaker 2 (37:48):
I think he is worried that he is somewhere in
the files, so like, I don't even know if there's
a list, Like I'm willing to believe that there's just
no list, But there's clearly tons and tons of documents
that the DJ has, and he has now because he's
gone through a criminal trial and been charged a couple
other times. He knows and ran the Justice Department once before.

(38:11):
He knows that there are plenty of court filings and
documents that have all kinds of information in it, and
you know, the standard to put something in an indictment
is obviously not the same. So I'm sure he is
concerned that, yeah, maybe he's not on a list as
a client whatever, but he's somewhere in there and it
could be embarrassing.

Speaker 1 (38:28):
And so he told Pam Bondy, do not really stifle
this that I don't know? Yeah, well, Pam Bondy independent,
how in the hell do you not know that you
seriously think Pam decided on her own as an individual
source for the ag miss presidents want to let you know,
here's my decision. I won't be reduced to eliminated or

(38:50):
give me a damn break.

Speaker 3 (38:51):
Come on, man, I'm my theory. And this has always
been the conspiracy's hiding and plain sight. This guy was
a rich, powerful creep with rich, powerful friends, and he
used those associations to get this sweetheart deal from Alex Acosta,
who was then the US Attorney in Florida, became the
Secretary of Labor UH that include a non prosecution agreement.

Speaker 1 (39:08):
So Arry Labor under Donald Trunder Donald Trump with Pambondi
as the ag of Flora. I'm now getting down my
oundin that is that's I'm just saying that's a thread.

Speaker 3 (39:17):
But so now, But but you're right, like, look, I'm
like not a very I'm very not conspiracy minded because
having worked in government, you see.

Speaker 1 (39:26):
That, well you were suppressing all the UFOs. Yeah, that
and all the guys had to write speech is suppressing.

Speaker 2 (39:31):
Tom I also did Ben Gazi.

Speaker 3 (39:33):
I did being Gazhi and Ghazi and Gazi.

Speaker 1 (39:35):
But also no one can keep a.

Speaker 3 (39:36):
Secret, you know what I mean, Like, no one we
could suck up a one car parade in the US
government at times, like there's no way.

Speaker 1 (39:42):
You can, Like you got a secret about chemtrails? Why
why have you done that?

Speaker 3 (39:46):
Well, but to your point, like there was a document
that came out this week because of a House investigation
into the jfk assassination where we learned that the CIA
has been lying about having an agent in South Florida
who was like running this group of anti Castro students.
They've been lying about it for sixty years. They lied
about it and to the Warrant Commission. They lied about

(40:06):
it to the House Investigative Committee. They lied it in
the nineties to a committee on assassinations. And you see
stuff like that, and you're like, And also they named
the dude who is running those guys in Florida to
be the congressional liaison to stifle the investigation in the seventies,
and you're like, okay, all right, so try to guess
a skepticism. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (40:25):
So now now you guys are lying to us about UFOs,
and you had conversations with Obama.

Speaker 2 (40:30):
Tell the truth, I want to say, UFOs. If they're
I wish we were more to know about UFOs.

Speaker 1 (40:34):
You must have had conversations. Tell me you were saying
you were sitting there. You guys are lax. Second term
everybody won a couple of martinis and you're sitting there
and you go, come on, come on to the big boss.
Tell the truth. Man, what have you seen?

Speaker 2 (40:47):
I had never been that in UFOs, but I wish
I had. If they were more, wouldn't Donald Trump have
said something? He would not be able to shut his
mouth about UFOs the first we would have gotten something
from Donald Trump like Obama. Now Obama trust I really
don't know I trust you.

Speaker 3 (41:03):
But this is I think the thing I thing people
think out there about like classified information, which is if
you have like a top secret clearance, then you can
just go into like the secrets library and kind of
leaf through and like, I don't really think there's a
deep state per se, but there are career people and
there's a lot of inertia, and they're like not given
goobers like me access to the good stuff.

Speaker 2 (41:22):
I had top secret clearance, I had never looked at
any classic information. It's like I got edits back from
the C I, A and D O D on speeches
and they would sometimes just like like cross things out
with no explanation. I guess I just have to take that,
but they cross out.

Speaker 1 (41:41):
This is your book.

Speaker 2 (41:43):
Here, like what is happening.

Speaker 3 (41:44):
But then the cool thing that would happen was there
would be a cris we just do that on signal
and then in the crisis, like something would happen and
you'd go to a meeting and they'd be like we
know this this and this through this means, and you're like,
holy shit, we could do some stuff. So that's how
it would kind of come out, all right.

Speaker 1 (42:04):
So let's talk about what else came about this morning
Donald Trump. As we do this pod this morning, Trump
allegedly talked to the delegation out of Texas and said,
not just smerdis, I'm saying, find me twelve thousand or
so votes in Georgia. I need five Republican additional congressional representatives.
We need to redistrict Texas. How serious a concern is

(42:26):
that for you in terms of the midtermst.

Speaker 2 (42:30):
I think it's a serious concern. I think that they
also run the risk if they redraw the maps that
if there's a big wave, that basically they're asking some
Republicans to take on more Democratic voters in some districts,
so it could backfire. It's crazy that they're and the
way Trump talked about it when he was asked today,

(42:50):
he was like, yeah, it's just picking up five seats.
Just want to I'm just picking up five seats, like
he's just grabbing groceries. And then he also said he's
like in some other red states, maybe.

Speaker 1 (42:59):
We'll race too. Well, maybe we'll do it here in
California as well.

Speaker 2 (43:03):
I was going to ask you about that, because challenge is.

Speaker 1 (43:05):
This little constitutional problem.

Speaker 2 (43:07):
Yeah, yeah, I know, it's what do you have to
I mean, it's a big majority in the legislature, legislature.

Speaker 1 (43:13):
There's ideas, we have, ideas, we have ideas. I mean,
the fact is you have I mean, let me ask
you this. I actually saw one of the few Democrats
back in the day when we created the independent re
District Commission, which I think personally I think should be
the case in every state. This is ridiculous. This jere
mannering is outrageous. I don't like it on either side,
and so I supported that. I remember doing that. I

(43:33):
was mayor of Sarranco at the time when that initiative
went forward. I think under Schwarzenegger, who was promoting at
the time was the governor, and I got a lot
agree from my own party for support it, which was interesting.
But I think it's the right thing to do. That said,
if these guys are playing by totally different set of
rules in democracies, in the ballance, which you can start
to go down, that it's not even a rabbit hole.

(43:54):
And argue may be the case if we're not able
to get some system of checks and balances into years,
particularly going into the twenty twenty eight election, where they
can wire a lot of things from that position of
power and influence. Is it right for me to explore
it's a question for you guys. Is it appropriate for
the governor of California and explore potential alternatives?

Speaker 2 (44:15):
It's absolutely appropriate, like to the extent that you can
find a legal avenue to do it. Yeah, I mean,
but I mean, you know the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, right,
that was going to create a national independent redistrict or anything,
and I think it's either national or not at this point. Yeah,
that's how I am. Like, I am also for it nationally,

(44:37):
but we're not. It's it's just like you know, the
the results of Citizens United right, which is like we
can't unilaterally disarm in the face of them, you know,
the these weaknesses in the.

Speaker 3 (44:51):
System that I absolutely but like kind of the like
stuffy headed question is it's not like a moral question,
but it's a question of yes, of course, we can't
eunil o our disarmed, and I agree with you and
I don't think we should. But there is a more
nuanced question of like what is the upside and value

(45:11):
of presenting a message to voters that were actually better?
You know what I mean, and it can be like
we don't take packer lobbyist money. We believe in principle,
like we wouldn't do this redistricting thing because it's wrong.
I'm like, I'm not agreeing with the things I'm saying
right now. I think like we have to win, right.

Speaker 1 (45:29):
You're very persuasions. I mean, I'm feeling very guilty right now.

Speaker 3 (45:32):
But there is a question like we need like a
reform agenda.

Speaker 1 (45:36):
What is that? No, I'm with you, man, No, it's
the worst part. You don't want to become them. I mean,
they win if you become them, and they shouldn't implicate
us into their just mischievous and and illegal ways and
or in moral ways. I mean, it's this is hardly illegal.

Speaker 2 (45:50):
Now.

Speaker 1 (45:50):
The question for California, in terms of Texas, they have
more latitude in California. It's interesting you go back, you
can do a special election, So we can go back
and do that and change the state constitution that created this,
or we'd have to move immediately to do two thirds
of legislature do it, or I call it special election,
and then you'd spend hundreds of millions of dollars both
side weaponized. It would be one of the you know,

(46:11):
it'd be a big side show for thing going on.
It would absorb a lot of resources literally and figuratively.
Or there are some other theories of the case, and
that's what we're also exploring that it relates to the
Independent Redistricting Commission. It states in the Constitution explicitly that
every census they will do one redistrict doesn't say what
happens in between, and the legislature is then afforded some

(46:35):
latitude in between. And that's a legal theory that a
lot of legal scholars have advanced and full disclosure we're
looking at now. I'm looking at it in the spirit
sort of the stoics of you know, not becoming your enemy,
mindful that I rather maintain the higher ground. It's a

(46:56):
moral authority, not just formal authority. But when I look
at the ground that these guys are leveling, and the
core tenants of our democracy, our republic being literally taken
down in real time, be in peril of being judged
not to have lived. If I don't at least explore
an alternative to save our country. Why I feel I

(47:16):
know it's a little romantic or a little over beloviating,
but I feel that way. I mean, if these guys
are literally going to rig to facto the outcome in
November next year, I can't just sit back passively, can
we Look.

Speaker 2 (47:30):
I think the way you are framing it and started
to frame it as we first started talking about this,
which is, if you had your way, there'd be independent
redistrict all across the country, and that is not the
reality we live in right now, and now before the midterms,
they're trying to just pick up five seats, like that's
just a reality that we're dealing with.

Speaker 1 (47:51):
And Concentis is talking about doing He says, well, we
had an extra.

Speaker 2 (47:55):
One there, we gave up and they and they moved
first on this. And I think if you were talking
to again, it's just a normal person who doesn't pay
attention to politics closely and asked you about it, and
you explained it that way, I think people would understand that.
I think people be like, well, yeah, it's politics, it's competitive,
and you're just you're not going to be able to
like just sit down and take it because you like

(48:16):
didn't want to dirty your hands on it. And you'd
be like, look, it's a shitty solution. It's not the
way I want to do it. But like the alternative
is that they just redistrict everywhere they're in control and
just steal a bunch of house seats and pick their
voters everywhere.

Speaker 1 (48:30):
Yeah, and it's not that, it's the consequences of that
that are pretty outside. You talk about your two kids,
your two kids, my four kids. I mean, this is
what kind of world do you want to live in?
I mean we're already seeing do you guys? Are are
you forgive me? Sort of moving slightly off topic, but
is this shock and a shock even you? Are you
in awe of how much this guy has done in

(48:53):
the first six months, the damage he's done, how aggressive
he's been. Yeah, I mean.

Speaker 3 (48:59):
I knew there would be horrible things. I knew that. Look,
people held up nass deportations now signs at rallies, right
like that that part shouldn't have been a surprise. Sweeping
up at random seemingly Venezuelan men in sending them to
a transnational gulag in Al Salvador where they're being tortured

(49:20):
is shocking. Shocking to me. I think it shocks the conscience.

Speaker 2 (49:25):
I am constantly testing myself on making sure that I
am not trying to exaggerate the threat and cry wolf,
because I do worry that maybe even in the first term,
the first Trump term, Like I look back on some
of the things that I said then and thought then,

(49:46):
and I was like, did we reduce our effectiveness by
taking everything to an eleven? And now I really do believe,
like especially around immigration, I mean that stuff. And look
I was after this last election. I was out there saying,
you know what, we should have taken the border more seriously,

(50:08):
and look, we're Obama people from immigration when Obama would say,
we're a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants,
and we're going to do deportations, but we're going to
try to prioritize, prioritize recent arrivals, criminals, people with records,
and then we're going to try to do something for
the people who've been here for decades and are working
and you have to get in line, learn English. And

(50:30):
I'm like that. I think that's where most Americans still are.
And the party got away from that. So I was
very but once he took office and he started doing
what he's doing, like it is worse than anything I
ever thought that sending them to the third countries, especially
some of these third countries that are just fucking like,
you know, war torn, and they're picking up citizens, picking

(50:50):
up you know, people with legal status. It's real, the
skin color really scary, or if they're a nearby.

Speaker 1 (50:57):
Home depot, they are standing adjacent a day laborer at
a car wash. I think, you know, I just sort
of fascinated because as we stand here today, just back
to just sort of this normalization, there are five thousand
US military in the streets that have been deployed by
the president. I say, he hasn't deployed in this first term.
He didn't employ any troops, ground troops anywhere in the world.

(51:19):
He hasn't employed any other ground troops in the first
six months. He's only employed them in the United States
to the state of California and here in La which
just in and of itself is sort of remarkable and
sobering to consider and think about almost a thousand US
Marines and federalized four thousand of the National Guard, and
people quite literally are being disappeared. And it's not an exaggeration.

(51:41):
I mean I've been with I was with a sixteen
year old kid, mom and dad disappeared. He didn't even
know how to get back in his house. He has
no brothers and sisters, you know, barely learning how just
do his laundry. They just disappeared twenty plus years going
in the same fields in Acknart and disappeared, no contact
iteration for this kid who was born in Ventura County

(52:03):
and was still in school. Well the rate occurred. It's uh,
and and how the hell the other party? I think
it was one thing for Trump to advance, this is
another to see Speaker Johnson and these goddamn guys just
completely complicit at this moment, you know, and as you
sitting here quoting Bible versus.

Speaker 2 (52:23):
It's getting pretty If that's worse, it's going to get
worse because they they are not getting the three thousand
arrested day that they want. And they are also you know,
today like I saw news that the I r. S
Is going to turn over you know, a lot of
information so that they can figure out who's undocumented.

Speaker 1 (52:39):
And they're trying to take all the state databases. It's crazy,
I mean, all of that they're coming. I mean, where
that's I mean like all I mean, can you imagine
every state that people put you know, with the confidence
of state would never turn it over. Of course, we
don't want to now being compelled to turn over. So
they're going to start cross referencing all of that.

Speaker 2 (52:57):
The other the other challenge I worry about too, is like,
I don't they do this partly because they really want
to get rid of all the undocumented immigrants in this
country and maybe legal immigrants too, but they also want
to spark a backlash from us, Like they want they
want us to react, they want us to overreact. And
so when there are people in the streets, even if

(53:19):
it's like a couple of blocks downtown in La, of
course they love that and they want it. So I'm
also mindful, like I don't want to say anything that's
gonna but then I hear them and like, right before
you came in, Steven Miller was on Fox and he
was like Gavin Newsom and Karen Bass their rhetoric is
they are literally encouraging people to kill ice agents and

(53:41):
and Will Caine on Fox just like, I'm like.

Speaker 1 (53:44):
That is insane to say it is an insane thing.
It's insane, it's disgraceful, Like quite the goddamn contrary. Just yeah,
that's a dangerous. Have empathy for these these damn I mean,
come on, I've got these. I just think about our
National Guard. These are we had thirty almost three thousand
of these guys that were in you in your backyard

(54:05):
man in LA and people are coming up the biggest
problem we were having with so many people coming up
doing selfies thanking them for the help during the fires
and after the fires and doing the traffic management. These
are the same kids that now have being told to
put masks on. These are police officers and firefighters. They
literally are being taken off the streets. They're paramedics, they're

(54:28):
teachers that are supposed to be teaching summer school, and
they're being used as pods. So I mean, Stephen Miller,
I care about those kids. You don't. You're using them
as pods. You're using the military as damn pods.

Speaker 3 (54:40):
And that's why I've been I know, get I know
you get this better than anyone, but like it's so
I heard it in your conversation with Sean Ryan, because
he's like, I saw the clips on X and it
looked like hell and those wey mos and like, just
explain to people that disconnect from what they saw on
social media and the reality of living in Los Angeles. Like,
first of all, the city is so scarred from those fires.
We're six months ago, and they were absolutely terrifying every

(55:04):
Like I'm just imagine your listener, You're going to bed,
you have two little kids, and you're like, is my
house gonna burn? Am I gonna be able to drive
out of here? Like those are the thoughts people were having, right,
So six months whatever, A few months later, these communities
in Los Angeles, mostly Latino communities, immigrant communities, are being
terrorized by these ICE agents wearing masks, throwing people into

(55:25):
unmarked cars, not wearing uniforms, and like they're not getting
criminals off the street. And my friends are like, oh, well,
aren't they horrifying protests?

Speaker 1 (55:34):
No?

Speaker 3 (55:35):
No, it's like three blocks downtown.

Speaker 2 (55:37):
Yeah, it was.

Speaker 3 (55:38):
It was completely manageable by the LAPD. They've taken care
of bigger messes.

Speaker 1 (55:42):
And it's sixteen hundred HP and LAPD, I mean sixteen
hundred surrounding a couple square blocks. I mean, it's just
that it's overwellian. But those guys are putting.

Speaker 2 (55:53):
Out and I've told people too, like we this is
why we had We also have to remember too, for
the guard, for the police, even for some ICE agents too, right,
Like you can't make them the enemy. No, that's it,
because first.

Speaker 1 (56:05):
Democrats need to be careful about that. That's my point. Yeah,
I mean when we say abolish this or abolish that,
I mean, we're still climbing out of the damn defund
police stuff. And you know even you know, we've had
some well known Democrats defund ice back in the day.
I mean, just I hope we're this is exactly I mean,
that truly is what these guys want right now.

Speaker 2 (56:24):
It's just so easy to be like, we need immigration
enforcement in this country. We do, we do. We don't
need a fucking secret police that answers to Stephen.

Speaker 1 (56:32):
Miller, the largest private secret police in the world. Now
with the bunny that's coming in from this big, beautiful betrayal. Well,
wasn't there.

Speaker 3 (56:40):
California bill that said that they would have to not
wear masks?

Speaker 1 (56:43):
So back to you guys, asked that that very stubborn
question about well, what about the constitution and the law
on the issue of redistricting. The question of the constitution
of law as it relates to a state right to
enforce or determine the enforcement or demand a prescriptive act
of a federal agent, meaning can we legally enforce the

(57:07):
federal rules around masking? And so it's an open ending question.
That said, there is not only a bill to be
an amended this week, it will be on my desk
very shortly, and based upon how it reads, we're making
a lot of amendments. But how could I not sign
that just if nothing else to send a message? I mean,

(57:27):
no identification, no warrants. I mean, I'm sitting there, you know.
I mean how many states you got people running around
concealed carry I mean if some masked person came up
to me tries to throw me in the back of
a white van. Yeah, I mean, how in the hell
are we not going to have some problems.

Speaker 2 (57:41):
Which has been happening right, Like there are people who've
impersonated ice officers who are trying to assault people, rob people,
and it will.

Speaker 1 (57:49):
Only and you know I mean that, you know that's
going to get worse. And so it's a it's not
an unfair quest. Like I understand the doc scene, there's
there's they always go to these exceptions and they try
to prove that as a rule. So there's some ballots anyway. Yeah,
we're just gonna there's a federal obviously, the way to
solve for this what Corey Booker and a few others.
I think Padilla's got a bill with Booker to do

(58:10):
it at the federal level. In the absence of that,
states are going to have to try to push back
and see what we can and test fate in the
courts and see what the limits are. But and by
the way, we've had wild success in the courts. California
has sued more than any other state. I were winning
eighty plus percent or at least the preliminary injunctions and
winning some of the early decisions, as we did with

(58:30):
the one hundred and twenty two lawsuits we had against
Trump one point zero won the vast majority. So they
still the overreach of this administration still is next level,
a legendary. Let me ask you guys this in closing,
we were you you know, I'm so. I was interesting
to hear your former boss a couple of days ago

(58:53):
at a fundraiser in New Jersey and he said, you know,
Democrats need to step up. I know you guys have
been talking about this and we need to be more aggressive,
more sertive. But he also implied, you know, let's not
look for the guy gall and the white horse to
come save the day in twenty twenty eight. Let's get
our shit together every day between now and then and
not lose sight of what's right in front of us.

(59:16):
Give me, you're over under on assessing your former boss's comments,
the timing of them, the tonality. Yeah, you're on the spot.
Don't give me the political answer. Don't be a politician here,
and don't even be a pundit. Tell me personally, what's
your sort of sense tonally of where the party is
as a leader of the party. Barack Obama made this comments.

(59:38):
Obviously they've been debated. They resonate with me, how they
resonate with you.

Speaker 3 (59:44):
Look, I think that what's been heartening in the last
few months is the way you've seen individuals step up,
different Democrats stepping up, right, Like a lot of people
have said comments to me like I didn't really like Avenusom,
but I like that he's fighting, and I think I
might like him now, right, Like Chris van Holland going
down del Salvador meeting at Brigo Garcia, like I didn't

(01:00:07):
know I was a big Chris van Holland fan, but
now I am right. So people are stepping up in
ways big and small. One thing we're working on here
Cricket Media is we have a pilot program going where
we're trying to encourage our audience that live in Arizona,
Texas and North Carolina to run for office at every level, dogcatcher,
you know, like school board, everything, because we just don't

(01:00:29):
want any race to go on a post. I think
we've got like a thousand people who've tried to sign
up so far. So we're just trying to like rally
people have people feel like they have agency and they
can do something, especially in this moment. I think Obama's
comments are right. I think he's also in a tough
spot because a lot of people miss him. They feel
like he's been absent. They want him to speak out

(01:00:50):
on more things. I think it was especially complicated for
him during the Biben administration because there's a bit of
a fraught relationship there and there were just you know,
some issue was that people probably really wanted to hear
Obama on like Gaza, he was just the wrong messenger.
Like Joe Biden thinks that he is the Yahoo whisperer

(01:01:10):
and was not going to listen to anybody else on that.
So I do think like I would would I love
to see Barack Obama out there more. Yes, I think
sometimes us political advisors us hacks. I'm looking at John Nayu.
We get into mindset where it's like you save your
powder and you go out two weeks before midterm, and
that's how you win an election. And I think what

(01:01:31):
Donald Trump taught us is he did constant Karen feeding
of this kind of media world, built their audiences, built
his profile, built a brand for maga in himself, and
that was more effective. And we need more of that,
like kind of you know, twenty four to seven, three
sixty five work.

Speaker 2 (01:01:49):
I think there's a few things going on with him,
and you know, one of his comments, I think he
said something like, we can't be it's too much naval gazing,
you know. And if you again, we talked about this earlier.
If you look at the news and you look at
news about Democrats, it is inevitably Democrats talking about how
to win back someone we lost and what do we

(01:02:11):
do and what's the future of the party. So there's
a lot of naval gazing, which we always do as
a party, especially now that we've lost a second race
to Donald Trump. So I think people's I think people
are not trusting. When I say people, I mean like
democratic politicians, a lot of them are not trusting their
instincts anymore, because you're like, how does Donald Trump won
the presidency twice after an insurrection? After you're right, like,

(01:02:33):
and so maybe nothing I believed about politics is right right,
So there's a lot of there's extra caution, and so
I think he was talking about that. I know he
is like extremely concerned about this. I also know that
he believes that he has a very big presence and

(01:02:54):
that when he's out there that a lot of other
people don't get oxygen, and he feels very strongly he
needs to make way for a new generation. I also
think there's I was president for eight years. I gave
you this much of my life, and I like, I
can't keep doing this all the time. Like there's a
little bit of that. But I also know that when

(01:03:15):
he gets out there, like you know, I wind yeah,
I like worked with him around the I worked with
him around the convention, and that was like his he
was first badly doing the convention, and he was like
he the more we worked on it, the more he
got into it. And he was like, and now I'm
psyched and I'm ready for the speech is great, and
I want to hit the trail. So it's like he
is still a political animal. But when you're the longer

(01:03:35):
you're out, I think the harder it is to get
back in. And I do think there is I think
there's plenty of space between Barack Obama being out there
every day in Donald Trump's face, which I don't think
is a good idea, and like not doing much at all.
Like I think there's a big space in between there.
And I think he's just got to figure out like
how he's going to be the most useful, because that's
how he thinks, right, It's not like what about my

(01:03:56):
brand or what about this? Like how can I actually
be useful in moving the ball for it? What's actually
going to be most effective coming from me? And because
just because he's you know, cerebral like that, and I
think that's probably what he's trying to figure out.

Speaker 1 (01:04:08):
Are you guys just you're over under on sixteen or
excuse sixteen twenty six six, which I mean sitting here
today with all you know, the big beautiful bill smart
A lot of the provisions don't. I mean, we're going
to assert, but we can't prove the impacts necessarily on

(01:04:29):
a lot of them, some very much so, but some
will be delayed intentionally. What's you're over under in terms
of how we're going to fare?

Speaker 2 (01:04:37):
I will say on the on the bill. Tony Fabrizio,
Trump's polster had a memo today and he found in
most of the battleground district's Republicans running behind. He also
tested the extension of the ACA credits and found that
it is wildly popular to extend those credits, and that

(01:04:58):
is going to start. People are starting start getting those
notices this fall right away that their premiums are going
to go.

Speaker 1 (01:05:03):
We're expecting two million people have premium increases on that
just in California, long two million, and we expect, based
upon legitimate conservative pre prior experience, six hundred thousand people
will drop out because they can't afford the premium increases.
So just that alone, that's not the three point four
million in California that we expect we lose under Medicaid,

(01:05:24):
our medical separate above six hundred thousand just on that alone.
So that's interesting and I appreciate that memo coming out
and that being illuminated.

Speaker 2 (01:05:32):
And his suggestion is that Republican should vote to extend
the credit. We'll see if they actually do that, because
it's a separate above from the BI But look, they
when we passed the Affordable Care Act, we owned everything
that went wrong with the healthcare system. And guess what
now they now they passed Trump's health reform and they
got it Obamacare to give rich people at tax cut,

(01:05:53):
So they own everything that goes wrong with the healthcare system.
Now the premiums go up, you're pissed at your insurance company,
your rural hospital closes down. It's all on Trump. And
then rich people get a tax cut. And by the way,
you're paying for more or you're paying more higher prices
because of his dumb fucking tariffs. Right, So I think
I feel good about the mid terms, but I also
feel like Democrats need to and I know, you know

(01:06:16):
a lot of strategists don't agree with this, but I
think Democrats should talk about what they'll do if they
have power again. And now you have to be careful
because we went back the House and Senate. Basically all
we can do is stop harm, you know, like we
can send out subpoenas too, but like who knows if
they'll even respond to the subpoenas, So like we don't
have we can't over promise, but I think we can say, look,
this is part one of a two part step, you know,

(01:06:40):
a two part thing here where we take back the
Senate in the House and then hopefully take back the presidency.
And then when we do that, this is this is
our ideas, like, this is what we want to do
for people.

Speaker 1 (01:06:50):
Well, let me end on that, because now we're extending
this one quick time because on that it's just so interesting.
So I had Frank Gluns on my pod and I
had Gingrich and obviously we're going to talk about the
contract on America with America eever you want to phrase it.
And it was really interesting. Frank calls balls and strikes
about newt and nude obviously will toot his own foreign
and it's just interesting the perspectives. But the potency of

(01:07:13):
that at the moment was obviously outside the political utility
of having an agenda, holding yourselves to account on the agenda,
sort of scoring your own progress and having some transparency.
It wasn't just that as a document as a weapon
to get into power, but how they actually utilized it.

(01:07:33):
Is that something the Democratic Party should be working on
along the lines what John just said, I mean we
yes right.

Speaker 3 (01:07:39):
Now, yeah, yes, yes, yes. I think like like I am,
I'm hopeful about twenty twenty six. I feel like you
kind of have historical trends. And also the thing I'm
really watching is just inflation and prices and like the
tariff stuff. It has not bit yet, but none of
it makes sense. Like we're putting a fifty percent tariff
on Brazil today because we think Bolsnaro tried the stage

(01:08:02):
of violent coup.

Speaker 1 (01:08:03):
A sonarios a national security.

Speaker 3 (01:08:05):
As a national security emergency, that we're necessitating fifty percent tarif, right, So, like,
none of this makes sense. He's not addressing costs. That's
what people really care about, and I think that'll bite
him in the ass. I hope, I hope, I hope
healthier stuff maybe we'll figure out if we can we
can sell that. But I think Democrats have done a
lot of work trying to figure out what went wrong
in the last election. Media podcasts like Hey, turns out

(01:08:28):
Biden was old, we haven't done a lot.

Speaker 2 (01:08:30):
Of work too, By the way, we're guilty. Yeah, we've
been doing.

Speaker 3 (01:08:33):
It right, We like we haven't, but we're not the party.
We haven't done a lot of work on ourselves. Like
how do we fix our brand problem?

Speaker 1 (01:08:39):
How do we how do we make I think that
you didn't like the twenty seven percent in March and
then the NBC poll, like at least we got twenty
seven percent. I mean, he could have been twenty five.

Speaker 3 (01:08:49):
It could have been too good. How do we become
a party that people want to first of all, movement
people want to be a part of that is fun
and inspiring and exciting, and also just policy positions that
get back to first principles, like anti war, for working people,
ethical right, like what's our reform agenda? And I think
like whether it's a Contract for America or like a

(01:09:09):
policy proposal, there's got to be an alternative that you
can turn to that isn't just Trump bad.

Speaker 2 (01:09:15):
And thinking back to the twenty twenty primary, how many
fucking debates did they go into the minutia of Medicare
for All proposed implementation? Implementation right, which is what we do,
like imagine if instead of like arguing about this, we
were just like, what's a what's a big goal that
people can grab onto? Right, which is Trump has done that,

(01:09:36):
Mamdannie did that in New York.

Speaker 1 (01:09:38):
Right.

Speaker 2 (01:09:38):
What if we just said, like, all right, no one
ever has to pay over ten percent of their income
for healthcare, and how well we're gonna We're gonna, look,
we're gonna govern, it's gonna be a mix of credits,
government expansion, whatever, We're gonna figure it out. That's our goal.
Everyone who works should be able to live in house
and never be homeless.

Speaker 1 (01:09:55):
That's it.

Speaker 2 (01:09:55):
We're gonna figure out where build more houses, We're gonna
figure out rent. Like, I just think that we get
into the policy details of like how we're going to
get it done, and we need to be more like,
here's a big goal that people can grab onto and
it's and it's a good contrast with them and then
just go from there.

Speaker 1 (01:10:11):
I love that. And just to close the loop on this,
who does that? I mean, you say it through the
prism of our presidential aspirants and they're all putting out
their damn white papers and they're trying to shape the
party conversation you have the sort of DLC version of
this and the Bruce Reed folks and from and we
need a version of that two point zero the community

(01:10:33):
Opportunity responsibility type agenda that can frame broadly those values.
And then we came back into them. Is it Nancy
Pelosi working with Jeffreys? Is it Ken Martin? Is it
a state Democratic Party parties? Is it mayor you know
this or governor that? I mean, who is it?

Speaker 2 (01:10:49):
Look? I think I think California has always led the way.

Speaker 1 (01:10:53):
And for those listening if you saw this son of
a bitch's face, really it's like here, it happens here.
First America's Coming.

Speaker 2 (01:11:04):
Attraction, the Laboratory that.

Speaker 1 (01:11:07):
This one you know what on that we will close
to all you listening from the great state of California.
It's been my honors.

Speaker 2 (01:11:16):
This was really fun.

Speaker 3 (01:11:17):
Thank you for having I like having you.

Speaker 1 (01:11:19):
On the other side of this. Thank you guys,