March 13, 2025 • 47 mins
Bernie Sanders delivers a stark warning about America's democratic crisis while rallying unprecedented crowds across the Midwest. Speaking candidly with Pod Save America from Warren, Michigan, Sanders draws a staggering 10,000 attendees—an extraordinary turnout for a non-campaign event that signals growing resistance to what he describes as an oligarchic takeover.
"We're no longer moving toward an oligarchy, we are living in one," Sanders declares, pointing to Trump's inauguration ceremony where America's three wealthiest individuals sat prominently alongside thirteen billionaire cabinet nominees. This concentration of wealth and power, coupled with aggressive moves toward authoritarianism, represents what Sanders calls "the scariest times in my lifetime."
The conversation delves into the Republicans' proposed reconciliation bill, which would provide $1.1 trillion in tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans while slashing Medicaid, nutrition programs, and education funding. Perhaps most shocking is the plan to eliminate 83,000 positions at the Veterans Administration—many held by veterans themselves. "I can't think of a less popular decision," Sanders notes.
Despite these challenges, Sanders finds hope in the massive crowds gathering at his rallies. He believes when constituents mobilize in overwhelming numbers, they can make lawmakers more afraid of voter backlash than they are of Elon Musk's financial threats. "When people stand up and talk, when your phone line bangs off the hook, when you see rallies...you know what, I'm going to think twice about it," he explains.
The conversation takes a surprisingly personal turn when Sanders reveals he's only tried marijuana twice in his life and "it didn't quite agree with me," politely declining the interviewer's suggestion to "get stoned" and discuss the future. This moment of levity underscores that while Sanders might be leading a movement against oligarchy, his approach remains firmly grounded in pragmatic political organizing.
Join the movement to protect American democracy from billionaire control. Stand up, speak out, and show politicians that the people's voice still matters more than Musk's billions.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:04):
Senator, welcome back to Ponce of America.
Good to be with you.
We were just talking about this.
We're in Warren, Michigan.
It is not election year.
There are 10,000 people here.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
I have, needless to say, I've done a lot of rallies,
and we've done rallies duringthe presidential campaign that
were larger than this for sure.
But the idea that in anon-campaign, coming here to
Warren Michiganigan, that youhave 10 000 people is totally
insane.
And what it tells me and we hadtremendous turnouts in kenosha,
(00:33):
we had wonderful turnouts in asmall community in altuna,
wisconsin and what it tells meis the american people are up in
arms now.
They are not going to let Trumpand his friends turn this
country into an oligarchy,they're not going to let him
turn us into an authoritariansociety and they're not going to
allow him to give tax breaks tobillionaires and cut the
(00:54):
programs that working classpeople need.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
You said something yesterday in Wisconsin.
You said we're no longer movingtoward an oligarchy, we are
living in one.
Yeah, which I hadn't heard yousay before.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
Well, look, I think the evidence is pretty clear.
When you have a president getinaugurated and standing behind
him, sitting behind him with thethree wealthiest people in the
country Mr Musk, mr Bezos, mrZuckerberg and then, sitting
scattered throughout the stage,13 other billionaires who Trump
(01:27):
nominated to head major agencies, secretary of treasury, etc.
You tell me what you would callit.
This is.
I find it hard not to describeit as a government of the
billionaires, and that is whatAl-Aqaq is about.
Speaker 1 (01:41):
There's this you know , you made this video after like
two weeks into Trump's term andit was really meaningful for me
, just personally, because Ifound it very helpful to think
about how to fight back.
You talked about needing todefine what's happening, needing
to fight back in the short termand then needing to build a
progressive movement and agendain the long term.
(02:01):
But, there was also like a,there was a gravity in your
voice and a sense that in a waythat I maybe hadn't heard before
.
I don't, I don't know if youagree with that look these are,
you know, the scariest times inmy lifetime.
Speaker 2 (02:12):
That's all I mean.
I think that's objectively thetruth.
You know, it is not just.
They want to give tax breaks tobillionaires and cut programs
for working people.
Frankly, that's happened before.
But you combine that with thepower of the oligarchy in
general.
You combine that with mr muskowning twitter and able to send
(02:36):
out his messages to hundreds ofmillions of people.
You combine that with the factthat people like bezos, the
second wealthiest person in thecountry, fired or got rid of
most of his editorial staff andis going to convert them into a
right wing thing.
Combine that with the fact thatTrump is suing major media
outlets and is threatening toinvestigate PBS and NPR.
(03:01):
So it's not only the power ofmoney.
It's also, combined with that,the movement toward
authoritarianism.
You know, when Trumpunilaterally cuts federal
funding that was passed byCongress, that is illegal, that
is unconstitutional.
When you have the vicepresident saying, well, in his
judgment, the courts don't havethe right to stop
(03:24):
unconstitutional acts of thepresident man, that is
authoritarian.
That's what the courts are.
He is now trying to end whatthe founding fathers were pretty
smart about creating a form ofgovernment where there were
checks and balances.
You know a legislative body, anexecutive body, a judiciary, so
he's moving aggressively in allof these areas.
(03:46):
Yeah, there was gravity in myvoice.
Speaker 1 (03:48):
This is a scary moment there is strange
contradiction in fighting back,because, on the one hand, you
have the kind of brazenness ofwhat Trump is doing, as if he
won't ever have to worry aboutdemocratic legitimacy at all,
that they're not worried aboutbeing held accountable or
they're not worried about peoplepaying attention, they're not
(04:08):
worried about what could happen.
But then we're here in adistrict that a Republican won
by a few points.
Right, these people still careabout their jobs, right?
This is a place where normalpolitics just seems to still be
possible to practice.
And I'm just curious how youthink about that, that on the
one hand, we're facing thisunprecedented, brazen power grab
by the richest human beings inthe history of planet Earth and,
(04:30):
on the other, we got to knockon doors and turn people out to
win by a few hundred, maybe athousand votes in a district
like this.
Speaker 2 (04:37):
Well, I think and this is what I believe.
Maybe I'm wrong, but it is whatI have always believed, and I
am a politician, you know.
And when people stand up andtalk, when your phone line bangs
off the hook, when you seerallies if I'm the congressman
from this district and I see9,000 people coming out who
(04:59):
really do not want tax breaksfor billionaires and cuts in
Medicaid, you know what I'mgoing to think twice about it.
Tax breaks for billionaires andcuts in Medicaid you know what
I'm going to think twice aboutit.
So I think what Trump and Muskhope is they can create a sense
of powerlessness in people.
Hey, what do you think?
I got all the money, I got allthe power, I own the media, I
can buy elections.
What do you think you can do?
You can't stop me.
(05:20):
And if people believe that we'regoing to lose, but if people
understand that, when they standup and fight back and that's
why, at the end of these remarks, I talked about the history of
this country, this is not thefirst time, you know I think
back a slightly different thing.
You know, in December of 1941,1941, the United States was
attacked at Pearl Harbor.
You know what we have to fighta war on two fronts complete.
(05:42):
The military was not preparedto do that.
Yet in two years the countrycame together.
We were able to lay thegroundwork for victory.
We can do it.
Speaker 1 (05:55):
We can do it when people are mobilized and are
prepared to stand up and fightback.
So what does success to youlook like in the short term?
Speaker 2 (05:59):
In the short term, it means a solid defeat of this
outrageous reconciliation bill.
It means a solid defeat of thisoutrageous reconciliation bill
which should provide $1.1trillion in tax breaks to the 1%
and massive cuts to Medicaid,nutrition and education programs
.
That's the immediate we win,that we got them on the
defensive.
Speaker 1 (06:22):
And that's why I'm here in this district and why I
was in Kenosha and Altoonaearlier.
What does that argue for doingeven before we get to that
reconciliation vote?
Because right now they'retrying to jam through this
continuing resolution just tokeep the government open, to
give them time to negotiate witheach other, to figure out their
tax cuts and Medicaid cuts.
Speaker 2 (06:38):
Well, I'll be back in Washington on Monday and we'll
be delving into that, butthere's a lot of stuff that's
flying on so I can't give you agood answer on that one.
Speaker 1 (06:46):
You know, I remember when the Bush tax cuts were on
the table and they talked aboutstarving the beast.
Sure, you remember.
But the reason they said thatis they were kind of attenuating
the connection between massivetax cuts for the richest people
and inevitably what they wouldtry to do next, which was
(07:06):
privatizing social security,cutting health care.
They understood that there waslike a political risk in doing
that.
Can you remember a time whenyou have had, at the exact same
moment, an active proposal tocut one trillion dollars worth
of taxes for the richest people,to give people making over a
million dollars an average of$70,000 just in cash money,
while also firing eightythousand people in the veterans
(07:29):
affairs?
Speaker 2 (07:29):
no, this is unprecedented, uh, and it's why
this is a scary moment.
Look, musk is many things, buthe is extraordinarily arrogant
and extraordinarily aggressive,and they're going for it,
they're going for it, they'regoing for it.
I mean, it's just hard to keepup with what they are doing, and
that's not an accident as well.
(07:50):
But I tell you, I think thatwhen you propose to cut, what is
it?
83,000 positions at theVeterans Administration the
American people are going to sayyou're not going to do that
Because, no matter what yourpolitics may be, there is
respect for people who put theirlives on the line to defend our
(08:12):
country.
And I've been talking toveterans all over this country
and you know what.
I don't think they're going toget away with that.
I think the veterans communityis going to stand up.
I think you have seniors allover this country saying no, I
can't get a phone call nowbecause the Social Security
Administration is understaffed.
Some 30,000 people a year die,who have disabilities, because
(08:34):
they don't get their benefits ontime.
This will only make it muchworse.
Speaker 1 (08:37):
So there was a report out of the Times about
basically a fight in the cabinetroom or then a cabinet meeting
between musk and rubio and duffyand trump and all these
characters because they'refeeling the the political
consequences of the attention onlong hold times, people just
trying to find out what happened, their social security checks,
or veterans being laid off.
(08:58):
Most of the 25 of the peoplethat work at va are veterans, so
they are firing veterans whotake care of veterans.
I can't think of a less populardecision.
Is there any hope in thepressure that's taking place
inside of the Trumpadministration?
I know we want to beat thesepeople, but in the meantime
we've got to figure out anythingwe can do to stop these
(09:19):
decisions.
Speaker 2 (09:21):
I think not.
I mean, I think the answer isgoing to be exactly what we're
doing here today, and that isrally thousands of people all
over this country.
We'll be our next trip.
We expect we'll probably beheading west, maybe to Colorado,
nevada, arizona, whatever andjust put pressure on these
members of Congress.
Now, in fairness to them,because of the corrupt campaign
(09:43):
finance system, if someRepublican today stands up and
says you know what?
I am not going to cut Medicaidin my district to give tax
breaks to billionaires, you knowwhat happens the next day.
Musk says guess what fella?
We're going to primary you.
I got endless amounts of money.
You're in trouble.
These guys are scared to death.
They're scared to death of Musk, but we're going to have to
force them to make a choice.
(10:04):
They could be scared to deathof Musk or they could be scared
to death of their ownconstituents.
That's the choice we're goingto give them.
Speaker 1 (10:13):
I don't know if you have any interest in talking
about what Democrats are doingwrong if you cared about their
outfits at the State of theUnion, but we can skip it if you
want.
Speaker 2 (10:20):
Yeah, look, democrats will.
Do you want to talk aboutDemocrats?
I'll give you Chuck Schumer'snumber, hakeem Jeffries, you can
talk to them.
I'm here doing as you know.
I'm an independent.
I'm proudly longest standingindependent in American
congressional history.
I'm doing what I do, democratswill do what they do, and that's
that.
Speaker 1 (10:39):
So we talked to a bunch of people on the line that
were excited to be here and onething we heard was just people
saying how much they believe inyou.
They're here because they wantto do what you think is best and
they they view you as like amoral leader of the movement.
Um, but they also are feelinguh worried and nervous that
you're a little bit out herealone and you know you said that
(11:01):
you may not seek reelection.
Uh, I didn't make thatdefinitive.
I said I didn't make itdefinitive, I am 38 years of age
now.
Speaker 2 (11:10):
I am getting old.
Speaker 1 (11:11):
I'm not Listen, I think, there's a lot of ways to
be 89.
There's a lot of differentversions of 89.
You're Sprite, you're Sprite.
Rolling Stones they're stilltouring, but do you think about
a successor?
Speaker 2 (11:25):
No, I don't want to Look.
All I will tell you is that oneof the untold stories is that
when I was in the House, Ihelped form the Progressive
Caucus.
You may know that and we hadabout five people at the time
grew a little bit.
Today there are somewherearound 100.
And there are fantastic people.
Many of them dozens of themyoung people, many of them are
(11:47):
women, people of color, greatpeople.
So you know, that is one of thesuccess stories that the
progressive movement has had.
We've elected people the likesof which, when I was in the
House, you know, 18 years ago,they didn't exist.
So we're making some realprogress.
We've got to do a lot more.
Here's my last question for you.
Speaker 1 (12:05):
You want to talk about the future.
Speaker 2 (12:14):
Would you ever take an edible with me and sit down
and just have a conversationabout the future?
Just get really stoned onmarijuana.
Really brainstorm.
No, Well, I'm happy to talk toyou.
Speaker 1 (12:19):
I don't need to do marijuana to talk.
Okay, what happened?
What happened to the radical?
What happened to the Bernie ofthe 60s?
Let's get stoned Are youserious?
Speaker 2 (12:26):
Yeah, no, that's not who I am.
As a matter of fact, I've donemarijuana twice in my life Twice
, yeah didn't quite agree withme.
Speaker 1 (12:33):
Do you want to end Daylight Saving Time?
Speaker 2 (12:35):
Doesn't matter.
Okay, thank you very much.
That's our show for today.
Dan and I will be back with anew show on Friday.
Talk to everybody then.
Speaker 4 (12:46):
Anyway, that was from Pod Save America.
Bernie Sanders has beenobviously going on this tour and
has been breaking crowds.
Words like conservative,liberal, socialist, anarchist,
communist, marxist used to havereal meaning.
When you used to toss thosewords out, there was an
(13:08):
ideological risk, because thosewords meant something.
Now, when you hear words likethat, it's kind of just a
pejorative.
Uh, people toss out peoplecalled kamala harris a marxist
during the campaign, when kamalaharris is not even materially a
socialist.
Uh, she's a laissez-faire, uhliberal for the most part, and
(13:31):
an identitarian liberal at that.
So one of the words that hasnow come to my attention is the
word traitor, and if words meannothing, I guess it would also
end up hitting somebody likeElon Musk.
(13:53):
So when Elon Musk writes youare a traitor, you could be
absolutely certain that whoeverElon Musk accuses of being a
traitor may be the exactopposite.
Elon Musk would not dare to sayyou are a traitor to President
Donald Trump.
After Donald Trump became thefirst president in history to
switch sides of a war and accusethe side the United States had
(14:14):
been supporting in that warUkraine of starting the war,
even though the world watchedlive on television as Vladimir
Putin ordered the Russian armyto invade Ukraine, which, at the
very start of Vladimir Putin'swar against Ukraine, donald
Trump called genius.
That was Donald Trump's wordfor genius.
That was his word for the warcriminal Vladimir Putin, who
(14:37):
invaded Ukraine and begantargeting hospitals with missile
strikes in the first week ofthe war against Ukraine.
Senator Mark Kelly was inUkraine this past weekend
visiting hospitals and otherthings and tweeted Just left
Ukraine.
What I saw proved to me wecan't give up on the Ukrainian
people.
Everyone wants this border in,but an agreement has to protect
(15:01):
Ukrainian security and it can'tbe given away to Putin.
Let me tell you about my tripand why it's important we stay
in Ukraine.
Before bothering to read anymore of the Senator Kelly
threads about this trip toUkraine.
Elon Musk immediately saiddirectly to the senator on
Twitter you are a traitor.
(15:21):
To which Mark Kelly, the formerNavy pilot and astronaut,
responded you are a traitor.
An astronaut responded you area traitor.
Question, mark elon, if you donot understand that defending
freedom is a basic tenet of whatmakes america great.
It keeps us safe.
Maybe you should leave it tothose of us who do.
(15:42):
And, of course, elon muskdoesn't understand anything
about the values of this country.
He grew up with the values ofthe white South Africans and
then moved to Canada and endedup in the United States, a
country whose history he hadnever studied, whose values he
does not share and who he provesalmost daily with tweets like
(16:06):
that.
You are a traitor.
Ukrainian President VladimirZelensky, like all foreign
leaders who visit the OvalOffice, was playing to two
audiences when he was talking tothe President, donald Trump, in
the Oval Office First, theaudience at home and second, the
American audience.
President Zelensky apparentlydid very well with the audience
(16:26):
back home in Ukraine.
According to a recent poll inUkraine it was reported by the
New York Times showing thatPresident Zelensky's approval
rating, going from already ahigh of 57 percent far above a
recorded approval rating thanthe current president, then it
went up to 67 percent approvalafter President Zelensky's Oval
(16:52):
Office visit.
That's an approval rating thatthe president has never come
close to this weekend.
When asked if he's been toughon Russia, the president said
this I've been very tough toRussia, tougher than anybody has
ever been to Russia, if youthink about it.
(17:12):
First of all, we had thisRussia, russia, russia hoax,
which was a very bad thing.
It could have led to a war.
Speaker 3 (17:20):
I think I've been very tough to Russia, tougher
than anybody's ever been toRussia, If you think about it
first of all we had the Russia,russia, russia hucks, which was
a very bad thing.
It could have led to a war andthat was started by Schiff and
all these lowlifes.
Speaker 4 (17:37):
I've been having a lot of interesting conversations
and debates on this topic, tobe honest, and my primary thing
that I have been looking for iswhere is the accountability from
Russia?
I have heard people, not onlyonline but even in the
(18:00):
administration, whether it's thepresident, whether it's the
Secretary of State, marco Rubio,whether it's Elon Musk, and
they're all talking about howUkraine is going to have to give
up its territory, talking abouthow Ukraine is going to not
becoming, to become a member ofNATO and essentially
undercutting them in every way.
(18:21):
Support and we're supposed tosomehow believe that it's just
in that, um, that somehow thisis tough on russia, and I don't
think that anybody can actuallybelieve this.
(18:47):
Anybody could be this stupid.
We can see with our own eyeswhat's going on.
We can see that this is asabotage of an ally, we can see
that it is weakening the NATOalliance and I think it's going
(19:09):
to be, when we look back at it,as one of the greatest blunders
and betrayals in history.
And if, as a result of thisaction, ukraine will lose the
war, it will go down ascompletely the fault of the
(19:36):
current administration who lostthe war in Ukraine, and it will
go down in history as one of theworst losses of the war for one
of our allies, and I really dohope that it does not happen.
So we will pay attention andsee where this goes.
(20:04):
A lot of the people who,speaking of transitions, a lot
of people who voted for thepresident, have started to
realize that when they talkedabout these federal workers, the
drain on society, et cetera, etcetera, they didn't understand
(20:27):
that that meant them.
They didn't understand thatthat meant them.
Speaker 5 (20:41):
I'm sitting in the Commonwealth of Virginia and
this has now hit the state nextto us a bit, which is West
Virginia.
Jennifer Piggott voted forTrump in the November election.
Then in February she was firedfrom her civil service job.
Absolutely, I feel a little bitbetrayed.
She was among more than 125people dismissed last month from
the Treasury Department'sBureau of Fiscal Service in
(21:02):
Parkersburg, West Virginia.
Speaker 6 (21:03):
There's always that back and forth conversation.
Now it's like this was coming,but we didn't Like nobody that
I've talked to understood thedevastation that having this
administration in office woulddo to our lives.
Speaker 4 (21:16):
This is somewhat shocking to me when I hear
people say they didn't know.
There was an article thatactually came out in 2024 about
this Project 2025.
It was a lot of pages, ofcourse.
I actually personally refusedto read it because of how much
(21:37):
stuff was in it.
So I just kind of read analysisabout it.
But one of the things that waswidely distributed was this
article came out of 2024 thatthe project 2025 proposal was
they were going to cut what iscalled unelected bureaucrats.
(21:58):
I don't know how you could bevoting and be working for the
federal government and notunderstand that unelected
bureaucrats means you.
In that Project 2025 summarythat was in that article in 2024
(22:22):
, it actually said the goal wasto get rid of 1 million federal
workers, or 1 million unelectedbureaucrats.
So, again, this I don't knowstuff.
I just kind of think it has hitthat category of you didn't
want to know, uh, because therewere other reasons that, uh, you
(22:47):
were supporting a particularbelief system, but the
information was obviously thereand now we're at that stage
where a lot of people arefinding out.
I think I did the story maybe afew shows ago the farmer who's
(23:10):
at risk of losing his farmbecause he didn't understand
that the program that his farmwas benefiting from was a Biden
policy that USAID wasdistributing, and so it's just
(23:31):
one of these things where I'vealways somewhat believed that a
lot of the knee-jerk reaction tothe government and how
government functions and howgovernment doesn't function is
primarily because whatever thegovernment is doing at the time,
most people are unaware of it.
(23:51):
And we have these two problems,and they are real problems.
We have a Democratic Party wholikes the government, but they
will not admit when thegovernment is not working, so
they have to defend somethingthat people could see materially
or isn't working for them.
(24:13):
And then you have a particularpart of the Republican Party who
cannot admit when something inthe government is working and is
hell-bent on destroyinggovernment programs that do work
.
And then you have a populaceace, which is the normal part of
the country, who cannot decidewhich part is which.
(24:34):
Which part of the government isnot working because it's
inefficient, and which part ofthe government is not working
because there are people in thegovernment who don't want it to
work, and this is done, um,somewhat purposely.
I always famously tell the storyof the Donald Rumsfeld lecture,
where he talks about workingfor President, ronald Reagan and
(24:57):
Rumsfeld was over this agencyand it was humming along well.
He thought he was doing greatand President Reagan called him
and basically read him the rightact.
And Donald Rumsfeld said youknow, I don't know what you're
talking about.
The agency is running great.
And President Reagan said yes,that's the problem we saw in a
previous administration with theEnvironmental Protection Agency
(25:21):
when they put Rick Perry overthe Environmental Protection
Agency.
They didn't put Rick Perry overthe Environmental Protection
Agency to make sure itfunctioned correctly, they put
him over it to stop it fromfunctioning.
In the same way, he saw thisrecent thing with the Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau.
They didn't put the director ofthe Consumer Financial
(25:44):
Protection Bureau to protect itin this go-around, they put the
person there to make sure it isineffective.
This go around, they put theperson there to make sure it is
ineffective.
So this, this is a small part ofhow you see these things play
out.
This, this, this person in westvirginia, you know, works at
(26:04):
the treasure department anddidn't somehow think that her,
her, that she was on thechopping board.
Because when you imagine aunelected bureaucrat, most of
the time when I think about anelected bureaucrat myself, I
think about the federal judges,I think about the fbi, I think
about the cia, I think about theatf, you know.
(26:28):
I think about fps or somethingelse where I used to work, and
everybody kind of has theagencies that they know.
But I don't think that peoplethink when they think about a
unelected whatever, they'rethinking about the National Park
Agency or you know somethinglike that they're not thinking
(26:48):
about the Treasury Department.
Everybody may, in their headevery now and then, think about
the IRS when it's tax time, butthey never think about the fact
that that's just kind of atalking point, that behind that
unelected bureaucrat is a actualperson.
That person has a job.
That job puts money into theeconomy.
(27:08):
That person has a job.
That job puts money into theeconomy.
That person has a family.
That family probably lives at ahouse, so they have to pay a
mortgage, etc.
Etc.
Etc.
I think they think about howinterconnected everything is
(27:29):
until you see it hit them andthen people say, oh, I didn't
know it was coming.
Well, this is the conversationthat you should have been
engaged in when you're dealingwith something like an election
and instead of having realconversations about what is
going to affect you, you'rehaving meta conversations about.
You know I don't knoweverything else that won't
affect you Trans athletesomewhere playing on a
(27:54):
volleyball team.
You'll get obsessed with stufflike that ginned up, go vote on
culture issues and then end upnot having a job.
Speaker 2 (28:03):
Tyrants no teams, no tyrants.
Speaker 5 (28:06):
The cuts have shaken up a community that
overwhelmingly voted for Trump.
He won West Virginia with 70%of the vote, one of his biggest
victories.
But the betrayal felt byPiggott, a church-going
conservative and three-timeTrump voter, comes as political
analysts are examining earlysigns of a possible backlash in
(28:26):
Republican strongholds likeParkersburg, where the
government-slashing efforts ofTrump and Doge are beginning to
hit home.
Speaker 3 (28:34):
Elon Musk has basically taken over our
government and has called theshots.
Unfortunately, it seems to be.
Speaker 4 (28:44):
So when Elon Musk gave the $288 million to the
Trump campaign, what exactly didyou think he was giving them
the money for?
Now, on my bookshelf right nowI have a book on Elon Musk by
Walter Isaacson, and in thisbook, which was actually very
(29:09):
well done, it talks about the,the person that is Elon Musk, he
and almost every company hetakes over.
Her works it in the book, blah,blah, blah.
He breaks the company apart.
He pretty much will go in,he'll fire everybody that he
(29:36):
feels like he's not useful andthen, if he thinks that he made
a mistake, he'll do this clawingback, where he'll try to fire
them back, them back in abusiness that may actually work
(29:57):
because of businesses based onprofits, and yada, yada, yada in
the government, where thegovernment is actually not a
business, that it's not aboutprofit making and actually it
doesn't always work that well.
Uh, we, we saw with the e cuts,et cetera, et cetera.
So I've always told people thisnotion that a billionaire is
(30:17):
there because they're trying todo something that benefits
everyday people is going to berare, if not non-existent, and
it's unfortunate that peoplewere very comfortable with this.
Uh, we have they.
They have their billionairesover there.
(30:38):
Now we have our game and notunderstand that what they were
actually trying to do in.
Elon does not like regulations,like most uh inventors etc.
Don't like regulations thatthere's constantly in this book
where he's having to go at itwith the air force, because the
(31:00):
air force has a lot ofregulations and elon sees
regulations as suggestions andthat's actually not how that
works.
So you, you would think thatthey would also think that you
know, I don't know, cutting theTreasury Department so they can
fleece the place may also kindof be some regulations that they
don't like.
(31:20):
And you see this with thecrypto stuff.
All of a sudden there's thismassive we're going to do this
with crypto and everybody thattakes a real honest look at
crypto knows most of it is kindof scam full of republican
voters who lost their federaljobs, joined democrats at a
recent anti doge protest nearthe bureau of fiscal service
(31:42):
offices in parkersburg.
Speaker 5 (31:44):
But the federal job losses in the state could soon
extend beyond the bfs building,says West Virginia University
economics professor John Deskins.
Speaker 7 (31:54):
West Virginia is at the very top of the states in
terms of the federal workforceas a share of total workforce in
the state.
So if the federal layoffshappen, if they hit West
Virginia, we stand to suffer adisproportionate share.
When those jobs disappear, whenthat income disappears, when
that spending leaves the stateeconomy.
Speaker 5 (32:13):
There's interviews with three dozen workers,
business owners and politiciansin Parkersburg.
Nearly all said that Trump'sfocus on cutting government
spending was a worthyUnfortunately, it seems to be.
A handful of Republican voterswho lost their federal jobs
joined Democrats at a recentanti-Doge protest near the
Bureau of Fiscal Service officesin Parkersburg.
(32:34):
But the federal job losses inthe state could soon extend
beyond the BFS building, saysWest Virginia University
economics professor John Deskins.
Speaker 7 (32:45):
West Virginia is at the very top of the states in
terms of the federal workforceas a share of total workforce in
the state.
So if the federal layoffshappen, if they hit West
Virginia, we stand to suffer adisproportionate share when
those jobs disappear, when thatincome disappear.
Speaker 5 (33:02):
But in Reuters interviews with three dozen
workers, business owners andpoliticians in Parkersburg,
nearly all said that Trump'sfocus on cutting government
spending was a worthy goal, andReuters' Ipsos polling shows
Americans' attitude toward Trumpare so far essentially
unchanged since he began firingfederal workers in February.
As of this week, his approvalrating was holding steady at 44
(33:26):
percent.
Speaker 6 (33:28):
Costs and waste and fraud and and, and.
We love that big picture.
I love that big picture, myfriends.
You know we were excited aboutthat because it is true.
But again, I can't go.
I can't help but go back to thefact that what is the decisions
that you're making right nowsolving in the big picture?
It's just so.
Speaker 4 (33:47):
So the concept of voting for that again, voting
for elon musk, essentially towreck people's lives, I can't do
it so here's the problem, andthen I feel for this, uh, young
lady and I feel for the peopleof west virginia.
Nobody, nobody, likes fraud,waste, and Everybody in general
(34:12):
could say I want to get rid ofgovernment spending.
What they don't think about onthe other side of that statement
is the jobs that come with saidunsaid government spending.
And what also doesn't happen,as evidenced in this matter, is
(34:32):
people realizing wait a minute,is my job?
A part of government spending?
Is the job I'm doing subsidizedby the government Because the
government is so massive?
The government is so massivebut, believe it or not, when you
(34:55):
look at the numbers you'd besurprised how big the government
is now as opposed to how big itwas, let's say, when Bill
Clinton was president.
For fun, you can go see whichgovernment was bigger the
government we have now or thegovernment we had when Bill
Clinton came into office.
And this also goes into thethinking that when they say
(35:15):
we're going to make cuts, cuts,cuts, you don't think that means
the stuff you want.
When people say they want cuts,they're thinking about a
program that did somethingsomewhere that they don't like,
but they're not thinking aboutall the programs that they do
like.
And no politician is going tospecifically tell you yes, I'm
(35:42):
going to cut SNAP, yes, I'mgoing to cut the program that
gives free lunch to schools.
Yes, I'm going to cut theprogram that ends Ebola.
Yes, I'm going to cut the AIDSprogram.
No politician is going tooutright say that.
So they'll say they're going tocut wasteful government
(36:03):
spending because then they knowyour imagination will run wild
and they don't have to bespecific, because if they were
specific you probably wouldn'tvote for it.
Speaker 5 (36:17):
The economic impact of the mass dismissals across
America may not be immediatelyfelt.
So far, 100,000 governmentworkers have been fired or taken
a buyout.
Fired or taken a buyout.
Parkersburg is bracing foranother round of layoffs, with
all government agencies orderedto make plans to cut career
staff by March 13th.
Speaker 4 (36:57):
The quote of the day is going to come from Plato the
price good men pay forindifference to public affairs
is to be ruled by evil men.
Oh yeah, yeah, back all 6,000fire workers from the past month
that they let go without payand they hired all 6,000 back
(37:24):
and gave them back pay.
Of course, like I've saidbefore, the cuts alleged cuts
have not been targeted.
It's not about anything morethan ideological capture.
It's not about efficiency.
(37:46):
It's not about fraud, waste andabuse.
It's not about governmentspending.
It's just an ideology, and theideology is government bad.
And then they fire people andthen they realize, oh my
goodness, we needed those people, that government good.
(38:12):
I've been listening to a lot ofthe war room with Steve Bannon,
one of the architects, one ofthe brain trusts behind the
populist movement of the rightpopulist movement, I should say
and he had to give a warningshot and say look, you know you
have to watch for things likeMedicare and Medicaid, social
Security, because a lot of, ashe said, magapatamians are on
those programs.
(38:32):
And I just kind of laughed andI said isn't that exactly how it
works?
You hate the government rightup until you're using it, just
like a president hates executivepower right up until they have
it.
It's kind of the nature of howthis game seems to work out.
Speaker 8 (38:54):
Started, as most things do in Trump 2.0, with
Elon, who offered somesignificant cope on Twitter in
response to a new projectionfrom the Atlanta Fed that GDP
was set to fall off a cliff.
A more accurate measure of GDPwould exclude government
spending.
But since Elon is our unelectedCEO, dictator king, his random
Twitter musings are now rapidlybecoming government policy.
(39:14):
Days later, commerce SecretaryHoward Lutnick took to Fox News
to announce he was looking atchanging how GDP is calculated
in line with exactly what Elonjust said.
Since Republicans, led by Elon,are in the middle of destroying
the government, mass firingworkers and attacking Medicaid,
they don't really want thenumbers to accurately reflect
the way that their austerity foryou, socialism for the rich
(39:34):
agenda is actually really badfor the entire economy.
So instead they're just goingto hide it.
But that's not all.
The Trump administration justannounced they're completely
disbanding two differentcommittees that both assist in
producing accurate economicstatistics.
This new scheme to cook thebooks on GDP also aligns with
Elon's anarcho-capitalistideology, which views all
government activity as quotenon-productive.
(39:57):
Do we really believe thatgovernment spending and
investment is meaningless andcontributes nothing to the
economy?
We're talking aboutinfrastructure, research,
electricity generation, publicschools all meant to be ignored
as drivers of real, productiveeconomic activity.
It's insanity, it's stupidity.
Elon and Trump, they are bothmasters at concocting
alternative realities.
They have hardcore cultfollowings who've proven willing
(40:18):
to suspend reality in order tobelieve the pronouncements of
their dear leaders.
These manipulate economicstatistics will be one weapon of
gaslighting to feed theirfabricated fantasy lands.
Speaker 4 (40:30):
I've been reading a lot of the Wall Street Journal
lately just because I know itused to be the Republican Bible
when it came to economics aswell as Forbes Went ahead and
got a yearly subscription toboth to pay attention to the
markets closely because I sawthat there was talk about
(40:54):
somewhat this manipulation ofthe numbers.
And of course I think everybodyheard me say multiple times I'm
an economic existentialist, soa lot of the stuff they're going
to try to hide it won't work.
You'll feel it Just like theprevious administration.
You know they could say thatthe economy is doing great, and
(41:14):
by the economy they mean the S&P500.
They mean the stock market, etcetera.
But when the Wall Street isdoing good, the Main Street is
doing bad.
People know very, very soonthat something is up.
So of course the attempting ofplaying with the numbers and
(41:38):
cooking the books is I don't putit past them, I don't put it
past anybody but I'll do my bestto keep reporting the facts
about the job numbers, about thestock market etc.
And it's been tipsy-turvy,especially with the tariffs.
(42:02):
The market does not likeuncertainty, uncertainty, and as
much as I make fun of the stockmarket, I think I used to say
stock market is just a couple ofold white people's feelings and
uh, but.
But uh, like, a lot of peoplemeasure the success of their
(42:26):
administration based on what thestock market is doing, and uh,
so I'm going to, I'm going tokeep using that same analysis
and looking at it as well aslooking at what's happening
every day as far as jobs, etc.
I'm going to stick to thisbecause the Department of
(42:47):
Education is on the choppingboard.
It's always been kind of aRepublican goal for years.
Even George Bush, w Bush wantedto do this is on the chopping
board.
It's always been kind of aRepublican goal for years.
Even George Bush, w Bush wantedto do this ended up failing
major backlash and had to comeup with a no child left behind,
type of thing.
So Linda McMahon basically toldthe Department of Education
(43:13):
staff to prepare for their finalmission and is already prepared
to try to cut half of the staff.
So, uh, cuts, cuts, cuts, andwe will.
We'll keep abreast to what it'sat what's happening big, big
election coming up, big electioncoming up for federal judgeship
(43:33):
next week it's actually sorryit's coming up in about 20 days
and it's a big deal going out ofWisconsin, and so I'll tell you
why that's a big deal on thenext episode, see you.
Senator, welcome back to Ponce of America.
Good to be with you.
We were just talking about this.
We're in Warren, Michigan.
It is not election year.
There are 10,000 people here.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
I have, needless to say, I've done a lot of rallies,
and we've done rallies duringthe presidential campaign that
were larger than this for sure.
But the idea that in anon-campaign, coming here to
Warren Michiganigan, that youhave 10 000 people is totally
insane.
And what it tells me and we hadtremendous turnouts in kenosha,
(00:33):
we had wonderful turnouts in asmall community in altuna,
wisconsin and what it tells meis the american people are up in
arms now.
They are not going to let Trumpand his friends turn this
country into an oligarchy,they're not going to let him
turn us into an authoritariansociety and they're not going to
allow him to give tax breaks tobillionaires and cut the
(00:54):
programs that working classpeople need.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
You said something yesterday in Wisconsin.
You said we're no longer movingtoward an oligarchy, we are
living in one.
Yeah, which I hadn't heard yousay before.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
Well, look, I think the evidence is pretty clear.
When you have a president getinaugurated and standing behind
him, sitting behind him with thethree wealthiest people in the
country Mr Musk, mr Bezos, mrZuckerberg and then, sitting
scattered throughout the stage,13 other billionaires who Trump
(01:27):
nominated to head major agencies, secretary of treasury, etc.
You tell me what you would callit.
This is.
I find it hard not to describeit as a government of the
billionaires, and that is whatAl-Aqaq is about.
Speaker 1 (01:41):
There's this you know , you made this video after like
two weeks into Trump's term andit was really meaningful for me
, just personally, because Ifound it very helpful to think
about how to fight back.
You talked about needing todefine what's happening, needing
to fight back in the short termand then needing to build a
progressive movement and agendain the long term.
(02:01):
But, there was also like a,there was a gravity in your
voice and a sense that in a waythat I maybe hadn't heard before
.
I don't, I don't know if youagree with that look these are,
you know, the scariest times inmy lifetime.
Speaker 2 (02:12):
That's all I mean.
I think that's objectively thetruth.
You know, it is not just.
They want to give tax breaks tobillionaires and cut programs
for working people.
Frankly, that's happened before.
But you combine that with thepower of the oligarchy in
general.
You combine that with mr muskowning twitter and able to send
(02:36):
out his messages to hundreds ofmillions of people.
You combine that with the factthat people like bezos, the
second wealthiest person in thecountry, fired or got rid of
most of his editorial staff andis going to convert them into a
right wing thing.
Combine that with the fact thatTrump is suing major media
outlets and is threatening toinvestigate PBS and NPR.
(03:01):
So it's not only the power ofmoney.
It's also, combined with that,the movement toward
authoritarianism.
You know, when Trumpunilaterally cuts federal
funding that was passed byCongress, that is illegal, that
is unconstitutional.
When you have the vicepresident saying, well, in his
judgment, the courts don't havethe right to stop
(03:24):
unconstitutional acts of thepresident man, that is
authoritarian.
That's what the courts are.
He is now trying to end whatthe founding fathers were pretty
smart about creating a form ofgovernment where there were
checks and balances.
You know a legislative body, anexecutive body, a judiciary, so
he's moving aggressively in allof these areas.
(03:46):
Yeah, there was gravity in myvoice.
Speaker 1 (03:48):
This is a scary moment there is strange
contradiction in fighting back,because, on the one hand, you
have the kind of brazenness ofwhat Trump is doing, as if he
won't ever have to worry aboutdemocratic legitimacy at all,
that they're not worried aboutbeing held accountable or
they're not worried about peoplepaying attention, they're not
(04:08):
worried about what could happen.
But then we're here in adistrict that a Republican won
by a few points.
Right, these people still careabout their jobs, right?
This is a place where normalpolitics just seems to still be
possible to practice.
And I'm just curious how youthink about that, that on the
one hand, we're facing thisunprecedented, brazen power grab
by the richest human beings inthe history of planet Earth and,
(04:30):
on the other, we got to knockon doors and turn people out to
win by a few hundred, maybe athousand votes in a district
like this.
Speaker 2 (04:37):
Well, I think and this is what I believe.
Maybe I'm wrong, but it is whatI have always believed, and I
am a politician, you know.
And when people stand up andtalk, when your phone line bangs
off the hook, when you seerallies if I'm the congressman
from this district and I see9,000 people coming out who
(04:59):
really do not want tax breaksfor billionaires and cuts in
Medicaid, you know what I'mgoing to think twice about it.
Tax breaks for billionaires andcuts in Medicaid you know what
I'm going to think twice aboutit.
So I think what Trump and Muskhope is they can create a sense
of powerlessness in people.
Hey, what do you think?
I got all the money, I got allthe power, I own the media, I
can buy elections.
What do you think you can do?
You can't stop me.
(05:20):
And if people believe that we'regoing to lose, but if people
understand that, when they standup and fight back and that's
why, at the end of these remarks, I talked about the history of
this country, this is not thefirst time, you know I think
back a slightly different thing.
You know, in December of 1941,1941, the United States was
attacked at Pearl Harbor.
You know what we have to fighta war on two fronts complete.
(05:42):
The military was not preparedto do that.
Yet in two years the countrycame together.
We were able to lay thegroundwork for victory.
We can do it.
Speaker 1 (05:55):
We can do it when people are mobilized and are
prepared to stand up and fightback.
So what does success to youlook like in the short term?
Speaker 2 (05:59):
In the short term, it means a solid defeat of this
outrageous reconciliation bill.
It means a solid defeat of thisoutrageous reconciliation bill
which should provide $1.1trillion in tax breaks to the 1%
and massive cuts to Medicaid,nutrition and education programs
.
That's the immediate we win,that we got them on the
defensive.
Speaker 1 (06:22):
And that's why I'm here in this district and why I
was in Kenosha and Altoonaearlier.
What does that argue for doingeven before we get to that
reconciliation vote?
Because right now they'retrying to jam through this
continuing resolution just tokeep the government open, to
give them time to negotiate witheach other, to figure out their
tax cuts and Medicaid cuts.
Speaker 2 (06:38):
Well, I'll be back in Washington on Monday and we'll
be delving into that, butthere's a lot of stuff that's
flying on so I can't give you agood answer on that one.
Speaker 1 (06:46):
You know, I remember when the Bush tax cuts were on
the table and they talked aboutstarving the beast.
Sure, you remember.
But the reason they said thatis they were kind of attenuating
the connection between massivetax cuts for the richest people
and inevitably what they wouldtry to do next, which was
(07:06):
privatizing social security,cutting health care.
They understood that there waslike a political risk in doing
that.
Can you remember a time whenyou have had, at the exact same
moment, an active proposal tocut one trillion dollars worth
of taxes for the richest people,to give people making over a
million dollars an average of$70,000 just in cash money,
while also firing eightythousand people in the veterans
(07:29):
affairs?
Speaker 2 (07:29):
no, this is unprecedented, uh, and it's why
this is a scary moment.
Look, musk is many things, buthe is extraordinarily arrogant
and extraordinarily aggressive,and they're going for it,
they're going for it, they'regoing for it.
I mean, it's just hard to keepup with what they are doing, and
that's not an accident as well.
(07:50):
But I tell you, I think thatwhen you propose to cut, what is
it?
83,000 positions at theVeterans Administration the
American people are going to sayyou're not going to do that
Because, no matter what yourpolitics may be, there is
respect for people who put theirlives on the line to defend our
(08:12):
country.
And I've been talking toveterans all over this country
and you know what.
I don't think they're going toget away with that.
I think the veterans communityis going to stand up.
I think you have seniors allover this country saying no, I
can't get a phone call nowbecause the Social Security
Administration is understaffed.
Some 30,000 people a year die,who have disabilities, because
(08:34):
they don't get their benefits ontime.
This will only make it muchworse.
Speaker 1 (08:37):
So there was a report out of the Times about
basically a fight in the cabinetroom or then a cabinet meeting
between musk and rubio and duffyand trump and all these
characters because they'refeeling the the political
consequences of the attention onlong hold times, people just
trying to find out what happened, their social security checks,
or veterans being laid off.
(08:58):
Most of the 25 of the peoplethat work at va are veterans, so
they are firing veterans whotake care of veterans.
I can't think of a less populardecision.
Is there any hope in thepressure that's taking place
inside of the Trumpadministration?
I know we want to beat thesepeople, but in the meantime
we've got to figure out anythingwe can do to stop these
(09:19):
decisions.
Speaker 2 (09:21):
I think not.
I mean, I think the answer isgoing to be exactly what we're
doing here today, and that isrally thousands of people all
over this country.
We'll be our next trip.
We expect we'll probably beheading west, maybe to Colorado,
nevada, arizona, whatever andjust put pressure on these
members of Congress.
Now, in fairness to them,because of the corrupt campaign
(09:43):
finance system, if someRepublican today stands up and
says you know what?
I am not going to cut Medicaidin my district to give tax
breaks to billionaires, you knowwhat happens the next day.
Musk says guess what fella?
We're going to primary you.
I got endless amounts of money.
You're in trouble.
These guys are scared to death.
They're scared to death of Musk, but we're going to have to
force them to make a choice.
(10:04):
They could be scared to deathof Musk or they could be scared
to death of their ownconstituents.
That's the choice we're goingto give them.
Speaker 1 (10:13):
I don't know if you have any interest in talking
about what Democrats are doingwrong if you cared about their
outfits at the State of theUnion, but we can skip it if you
want.
Speaker 2 (10:20):
Yeah, look, democrats will.
Do you want to talk aboutDemocrats?
I'll give you Chuck Schumer'snumber, hakeem Jeffries, you can
talk to them.
I'm here doing as you know.
I'm an independent.
I'm proudly longest standingindependent in American
congressional history.
I'm doing what I do, democratswill do what they do, and that's
that.
Speaker 1 (10:39):
So we talked to a bunch of people on the line that
were excited to be here and onething we heard was just people
saying how much they believe inyou.
They're here because they wantto do what you think is best and
they they view you as like amoral leader of the movement.
Um, but they also are feelinguh worried and nervous that
you're a little bit out herealone and you know you said that
(11:01):
you may not seek reelection.
Uh, I didn't make thatdefinitive.
I said I didn't make itdefinitive, I am 38 years of age
now.
Speaker 2 (11:10):
I am getting old.
Speaker 1 (11:11):
I'm not Listen, I think, there's a lot of ways to
be 89.
There's a lot of differentversions of 89.
You're Sprite, you're Sprite.
Rolling Stones they're stilltouring, but do you think about
a successor?
Speaker 2 (11:25):
No, I don't want to Look.
All I will tell you is that oneof the untold stories is that
when I was in the House, Ihelped form the Progressive
Caucus.
You may know that and we hadabout five people at the time
grew a little bit.
Today there are somewherearound 100.
And there are fantastic people.
Many of them dozens of themyoung people, many of them are
(11:47):
women, people of color, greatpeople.
So you know, that is one of thesuccess stories that the
progressive movement has had.
We've elected people the likesof which, when I was in the
House, you know, 18 years ago,they didn't exist.
So we're making some realprogress.
We've got to do a lot more.
Here's my last question for you.
Speaker 1 (12:05):
You want to talk about the future.
Speaker 2 (12:14):
Would you ever take an edible with me and sit down
and just have a conversationabout the future?
Just get really stoned onmarijuana.
Really brainstorm.
No, Well, I'm happy to talk toyou.
Speaker 1 (12:19):
I don't need to do marijuana to talk.
Okay, what happened?
What happened to the radical?
What happened to the Bernie ofthe 60s?
Let's get stoned Are youserious?
Speaker 2 (12:26):
Yeah, no, that's not who I am.
As a matter of fact, I've donemarijuana twice in my life Twice
, yeah didn't quite agree withme.
Speaker 1 (12:33):
Do you want to end Daylight Saving Time?
Speaker 2 (12:35):
Doesn't matter.
Okay, thank you very much.
That's our show for today.
Dan and I will be back with anew show on Friday.
Talk to everybody then.
Speaker 4 (12:46):
Anyway, that was from Pod Save America.
Bernie Sanders has beenobviously going on this tour and
has been breaking crowds.
Words like conservative,liberal, socialist, anarchist,
communist, marxist used to havereal meaning.
When you used to toss thosewords out, there was an
(13:08):
ideological risk, because thosewords meant something.
Now, when you hear words likethat, it's kind of just a
pejorative.
Uh, people toss out peoplecalled kamala harris a marxist
during the campaign, when kamalaharris is not even materially a
socialist.
Uh, she's a laissez-faire, uhliberal for the most part, and
(13:31):
an identitarian liberal at that.
So one of the words that hasnow come to my attention is the
word traitor, and if words meannothing, I guess it would also
end up hitting somebody likeElon Musk.
(13:53):
So when Elon Musk writes youare a traitor, you could be
absolutely certain that whoeverElon Musk accuses of being a
traitor may be the exactopposite.
Elon Musk would not dare to sayyou are a traitor to President
Donald Trump.
After Donald Trump became thefirst president in history to
switch sides of a war and accusethe side the United States had
(14:14):
been supporting in that warUkraine of starting the war,
even though the world watchedlive on television as Vladimir
Putin ordered the Russian armyto invade Ukraine, which, at the
very start of Vladimir Putin'swar against Ukraine, donald
Trump called genius.
That was Donald Trump's wordfor genius.
That was his word for the warcriminal Vladimir Putin, who
(14:37):
invaded Ukraine and begantargeting hospitals with missile
strikes in the first week ofthe war against Ukraine.
Senator Mark Kelly was inUkraine this past weekend
visiting hospitals and otherthings and tweeted Just left
Ukraine.
What I saw proved to me wecan't give up on the Ukrainian
people.
Everyone wants this border in,but an agreement has to protect
(15:01):
Ukrainian security and it can'tbe given away to Putin.
Let me tell you about my tripand why it's important we stay
in Ukraine.
Before bothering to read anymore of the Senator Kelly
threads about this trip toUkraine.
Elon Musk immediately saiddirectly to the senator on
Twitter you are a traitor.
(15:21):
To which Mark Kelly, the formerNavy pilot and astronaut,
responded you are a traitor.
An astronaut responded you area traitor.
Question, mark elon, if you donot understand that defending
freedom is a basic tenet of whatmakes america great.
It keeps us safe.
Maybe you should leave it tothose of us who do.
(15:42):
And, of course, elon muskdoesn't understand anything
about the values of this country.
He grew up with the values ofthe white South Africans and
then moved to Canada and endedup in the United States, a
country whose history he hadnever studied, whose values he
does not share and who he provesalmost daily with tweets like
(16:06):
that.
You are a traitor.
Ukrainian President VladimirZelensky, like all foreign
leaders who visit the OvalOffice, was playing to two
audiences when he was talking tothe President, donald Trump, in
the Oval Office First, theaudience at home and second, the
American audience.
President Zelensky apparentlydid very well with the audience
(16:26):
back home in Ukraine.
According to a recent poll inUkraine it was reported by the
New York Times showing thatPresident Zelensky's approval
rating, going from already ahigh of 57 percent far above a
recorded approval rating thanthe current president, then it
went up to 67 percent approvalafter President Zelensky's Oval
(16:52):
Office visit.
That's an approval rating thatthe president has never come
close to this weekend.
When asked if he's been toughon Russia, the president said
this I've been very tough toRussia, tougher than anybody has
ever been to Russia, if youthink about it.
(17:12):
First of all, we had thisRussia, russia, russia hoax,
which was a very bad thing.
It could have led to a war.
Speaker 3 (17:20):
I think I've been very tough to Russia, tougher
than anybody's ever been toRussia, If you think about it
first of all we had the Russia,russia, russia hucks, which was
a very bad thing.
It could have led to a war andthat was started by Schiff and
all these lowlifes.
Speaker 4 (17:37):
I've been having a lot of interesting conversations
and debates on this topic, tobe honest, and my primary thing
that I have been looking for iswhere is the accountability from
Russia?
I have heard people, not onlyonline but even in the
(18:00):
administration, whether it's thepresident, whether it's the
Secretary of State, marco Rubio,whether it's Elon Musk, and
they're all talking about howUkraine is going to have to give
up its territory, talking abouthow Ukraine is going to not
becoming, to become a member ofNATO and essentially
undercutting them in every way.
(18:21):
Support and we're supposed tosomehow believe that it's just
in that, um, that somehow thisis tough on russia, and I don't
think that anybody can actuallybelieve this.
(18:47):
Anybody could be this stupid.
We can see with our own eyeswhat's going on.
We can see that this is asabotage of an ally, we can see
that it is weakening the NATOalliance and I think it's going
(19:09):
to be, when we look back at it,as one of the greatest blunders
and betrayals in history.
And if, as a result of thisaction, ukraine will lose the
war, it will go down ascompletely the fault of the
(19:36):
current administration who lostthe war in Ukraine, and it will
go down in history as one of theworst losses of the war for one
of our allies, and I really dohope that it does not happen.
So we will pay attention andsee where this goes.
(20:04):
A lot of the people who,speaking of transitions, a lot
of people who voted for thepresident, have started to
realize that when they talkedabout these federal workers, the
drain on society, et cetera, etcetera, they didn't understand
(20:27):
that that meant them.
They didn't understand thatthat meant them.
Speaker 5 (20:41):
I'm sitting in the Commonwealth of Virginia and
this has now hit the state nextto us a bit, which is West
Virginia.
Jennifer Piggott voted forTrump in the November election.
Then in February she was firedfrom her civil service job.
Absolutely, I feel a little bitbetrayed.
She was among more than 125people dismissed last month from
the Treasury Department'sBureau of Fiscal Service in
(21:02):
Parkersburg, West Virginia.
Speaker 6 (21:03):
There's always that back and forth conversation.
Now it's like this was coming,but we didn't Like nobody that
I've talked to understood thedevastation that having this
administration in office woulddo to our lives.
Speaker 4 (21:16):
This is somewhat shocking to me when I hear
people say they didn't know.
There was an article thatactually came out in 2024 about
this Project 2025.
It was a lot of pages, ofcourse.
I actually personally refusedto read it because of how much
(21:37):
stuff was in it.
So I just kind of read analysisabout it.
But one of the things that waswidely distributed was this
article came out of 2024 thatthe project 2025 proposal was
they were going to cut what iscalled unelected bureaucrats.
(21:58):
I don't know how you could bevoting and be working for the
federal government and notunderstand that unelected
bureaucrats means you.
In that Project 2025 summarythat was in that article in 2024
(22:22):
, it actually said the goal wasto get rid of 1 million federal
workers, or 1 million unelectedbureaucrats.
So, again, this I don't knowstuff.
I just kind of think it has hitthat category of you didn't
want to know, uh, because therewere other reasons that, uh, you
(22:47):
were supporting a particularbelief system, but the
information was obviously thereand now we're at that stage
where a lot of people arefinding out.
I think I did the story maybe afew shows ago the farmer who's
(23:10):
at risk of losing his farmbecause he didn't understand
that the program that his farmwas benefiting from was a Biden
policy that USAID wasdistributing, and so it's just
(23:31):
one of these things where I'vealways somewhat believed that a
lot of the knee-jerk reaction tothe government and how
government functions and howgovernment doesn't function is
primarily because whatever thegovernment is doing at the time,
most people are unaware of it.
(23:51):
And we have these two problems,and they are real problems.
We have a Democratic Party wholikes the government, but they
will not admit when thegovernment is not working, so
they have to defend somethingthat people could see materially
or isn't working for them.
(24:13):
And then you have a particularpart of the Republican Party who
cannot admit when something inthe government is working and is
hell-bent on destroyinggovernment programs that do work
.
And then you have a populaceace, which is the normal part of
the country, who cannot decidewhich part is which.
(24:34):
Which part of the government isnot working because it's
inefficient, and which part ofthe government is not working
because there are people in thegovernment who don't want it to
work, and this is done, um,somewhat purposely.
I always famously tell the storyof the Donald Rumsfeld lecture,
where he talks about workingfor President, ronald Reagan and
(24:57):
Rumsfeld was over this agencyand it was humming along well.
He thought he was doing greatand President Reagan called him
and basically read him the rightact.
And Donald Rumsfeld said youknow, I don't know what you're
talking about.
The agency is running great.
And President Reagan said yes,that's the problem we saw in a
previous administration with theEnvironmental Protection Agency
(25:21):
when they put Rick Perry overthe Environmental Protection
Agency.
They didn't put Rick Perry overthe Environmental Protection
Agency to make sure itfunctioned correctly, they put
him over it to stop it fromfunctioning.
In the same way, he saw thisrecent thing with the Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau.
They didn't put the director ofthe Consumer Financial
(25:44):
Protection Bureau to protect itin this go-around, they put the
person there to make sure it isineffective.
This go around, they put theperson there to make sure it is
ineffective.
So this, this is a small part ofhow you see these things play
out.
This, this, this person in westvirginia, you know, works at
(26:04):
the treasure department anddidn't somehow think that her,
her, that she was on thechopping board.
Because when you imagine aunelected bureaucrat, most of
the time when I think about anelected bureaucrat myself, I
think about the federal judges,I think about the fbi, I think
about the cia, I think about theatf, you know.
(26:28):
I think about fps or somethingelse where I used to work, and
everybody kind of has theagencies that they know.
But I don't think that peoplethink when they think about a
unelected whatever, they'rethinking about the National Park
Agency or you know somethinglike that they're not thinking
(26:48):
about the Treasury Department.
Everybody may, in their headevery now and then, think about
the IRS when it's tax time, butthey never think about the fact
that that's just kind of atalking point, that behind that
unelected bureaucrat is a actualperson.
That person has a job.
That job puts money into theeconomy.
(27:08):
That person has a job.
That job puts money into theeconomy.
That person has a family.
That family probably lives at ahouse, so they have to pay a
mortgage, etc.
Etc.
Etc.
I think they think about howinterconnected everything is
(27:29):
until you see it hit them andthen people say, oh, I didn't
know it was coming.
Well, this is the conversationthat you should have been
engaged in when you're dealingwith something like an election
and instead of having realconversations about what is
going to affect you, you'rehaving meta conversations about.
You know I don't knoweverything else that won't
affect you Trans athletesomewhere playing on a
(27:54):
volleyball team.
You'll get obsessed with stufflike that ginned up, go vote on
culture issues and then end upnot having a job.
Speaker 2 (28:03):
Tyrants no teams, no tyrants.
Speaker 5 (28:06):
The cuts have shaken up a community that
overwhelmingly voted for Trump.
He won West Virginia with 70%of the vote, one of his biggest
victories.
But the betrayal felt byPiggott, a church-going
conservative and three-timeTrump voter, comes as political
analysts are examining earlysigns of a possible backlash in
(28:26):
Republican strongholds likeParkersburg, where the
government-slashing efforts ofTrump and Doge are beginning to
hit home.
Speaker 3 (28:34):
Elon Musk has basically taken over our
government and has called theshots.
Unfortunately, it seems to be.
Speaker 4 (28:44):
So when Elon Musk gave the $288 million to the
Trump campaign, what exactly didyou think he was giving them
the money for?
Now, on my bookshelf right nowI have a book on Elon Musk by
Walter Isaacson, and in thisbook, which was actually very
(29:09):
well done, it talks about the,the person that is Elon Musk, he
and almost every company hetakes over.
Her works it in the book, blah,blah, blah.
He breaks the company apart.
He pretty much will go in,he'll fire everybody that he
(29:36):
feels like he's not useful andthen, if he thinks that he made
a mistake, he'll do this clawingback, where he'll try to fire
them back, them back in abusiness that may actually work
(29:57):
because of businesses based onprofits, and yada, yada, yada in
the government, where thegovernment is actually not a
business, that it's not aboutprofit making and actually it
doesn't always work that well.
Uh, we, we saw with the e cuts,et cetera, et cetera.
So I've always told people thisnotion that a billionaire is
(30:17):
there because they're trying todo something that benefits
everyday people is going to berare, if not non-existent, and
it's unfortunate that peoplewere very comfortable with this.
Uh, we have they.
They have their billionairesover there.
(30:38):
Now we have our game and notunderstand that what they were
actually trying to do in.
Elon does not like regulations,like most uh inventors etc.
Don't like regulations thatthere's constantly in this book
where he's having to go at itwith the air force, because the
(31:00):
air force has a lot ofregulations and elon sees
regulations as suggestions andthat's actually not how that
works.
So you, you would think thatthey would also think that you
know, I don't know, cutting theTreasury Department so they can
fleece the place may also kindof be some regulations that they
don't like.
(31:20):
And you see this with thecrypto stuff.
All of a sudden there's thismassive we're going to do this
with crypto and everybody thattakes a real honest look at
crypto knows most of it is kindof scam full of republican
voters who lost their federaljobs, joined democrats at a
recent anti doge protest nearthe bureau of fiscal service
(31:42):
offices in parkersburg.
Speaker 5 (31:44):
But the federal job losses in the state could soon
extend beyond the bfs building,says West Virginia University
economics professor John Deskins.
Speaker 7 (31:54):
West Virginia is at the very top of the states in
terms of the federal workforceas a share of total workforce in
the state.
So if the federal layoffshappen, if they hit West
Virginia, we stand to suffer adisproportionate share.
When those jobs disappear, whenthat income disappears, when
that spending leaves the stateeconomy.
Speaker 5 (32:13):
There's interviews with three dozen workers,
business owners and politiciansin Parkersburg.
Nearly all said that Trump'sfocus on cutting government
spending was a worthyUnfortunately, it seems to be.
A handful of Republican voterswho lost their federal jobs
joined Democrats at a recentanti-Doge protest near the
Bureau of Fiscal Service officesin Parkersburg.
(32:34):
But the federal job losses inthe state could soon extend
beyond the BFS building, saysWest Virginia University
economics professor John Deskins.
Speaker 7 (32:45):
West Virginia is at the very top of the states in
terms of the federal workforceas a share of total workforce in
the state.
So if the federal layoffshappen, if they hit West
Virginia, we stand to suffer adisproportionate share when
those jobs disappear, when thatincome disappear.
Speaker 5 (33:02):
But in Reuters interviews with three dozen
workers, business owners andpoliticians in Parkersburg,
nearly all said that Trump'sfocus on cutting government
spending was a worthy goal, andReuters' Ipsos polling shows
Americans' attitude toward Trumpare so far essentially
unchanged since he began firingfederal workers in February.
As of this week, his approvalrating was holding steady at 44
(33:26):
percent.
Speaker 6 (33:28):
Costs and waste and fraud and and, and.
We love that big picture.
I love that big picture, myfriends.
You know we were excited aboutthat because it is true.
But again, I can't go.
I can't help but go back to thefact that what is the decisions
that you're making right nowsolving in the big picture?
It's just so.
Speaker 4 (33:47):
So the concept of voting for that again, voting
for elon musk, essentially towreck people's lives, I can't do
it so here's the problem, andthen I feel for this, uh, young
lady and I feel for the peopleof west virginia.
Nobody, nobody, likes fraud,waste, and Everybody in general
(34:12):
could say I want to get rid ofgovernment spending.
What they don't think about onthe other side of that statement
is the jobs that come with saidunsaid government spending.
And what also doesn't happen,as evidenced in this matter, is
(34:32):
people realizing wait a minute,is my job?
A part of government spending?
Is the job I'm doing subsidizedby the government Because the
government is so massive?
The government is so massivebut, believe it or not, when you
(34:55):
look at the numbers you'd besurprised how big the government
is now as opposed to how big itwas, let's say, when Bill
Clinton was president.
For fun, you can go see whichgovernment was bigger the
government we have now or thegovernment we had when Bill
Clinton came into office.
And this also goes into thethinking that when they say
(35:15):
we're going to make cuts, cuts,cuts, you don't think that means
the stuff you want.
When people say they want cuts,they're thinking about a
program that did somethingsomewhere that they don't like,
but they're not thinking aboutall the programs that they do
like.
And no politician is going tospecifically tell you yes, I'm
(35:42):
going to cut SNAP, yes, I'mgoing to cut the program that
gives free lunch to schools.
Yes, I'm going to cut theprogram that ends Ebola.
Yes, I'm going to cut the AIDSprogram.
No politician is going tooutright say that.
So they'll say they're going tocut wasteful government
(36:03):
spending because then they knowyour imagination will run wild
and they don't have to bespecific, because if they were
specific you probably wouldn'tvote for it.
Speaker 5 (36:17):
The economic impact of the mass dismissals across
America may not be immediatelyfelt.
So far, 100,000 governmentworkers have been fired or taken
a buyout.
Fired or taken a buyout.
Parkersburg is bracing foranother round of layoffs, with
all government agencies orderedto make plans to cut career
staff by March 13th.
Speaker 4 (36:57):
The quote of the day is going to come from Plato the
price good men pay forindifference to public affairs
is to be ruled by evil men.
Oh yeah, yeah, back all 6,000fire workers from the past month
that they let go without payand they hired all 6,000 back
(37:24):
and gave them back pay.
Of course, like I've saidbefore, the cuts alleged cuts
have not been targeted.
It's not about anything morethan ideological capture.
It's not about efficiency.
(37:46):
It's not about fraud, waste andabuse.
It's not about governmentspending.
It's just an ideology, and theideology is government bad.
And then they fire people andthen they realize, oh my
goodness, we needed those people, that government good.
(38:12):
I've been listening to a lot ofthe war room with Steve Bannon,
one of the architects, one ofthe brain trusts behind the
populist movement of the rightpopulist movement, I should say
and he had to give a warningshot and say look, you know you
have to watch for things likeMedicare and Medicaid, social
Security, because a lot of, ashe said, magapatamians are on
those programs.
(38:32):
And I just kind of laughed andI said isn't that exactly how it
works?
You hate the government rightup until you're using it, just
like a president hates executivepower right up until they have
it.
It's kind of the nature of howthis game seems to work out.
Speaker 8 (38:54):
Started, as most things do in Trump 2.0, with
Elon, who offered somesignificant cope on Twitter in
response to a new projectionfrom the Atlanta Fed that GDP
was set to fall off a cliff.
A more accurate measure of GDPwould exclude government
spending.
But since Elon is our unelectedCEO, dictator king, his random
Twitter musings are now rapidlybecoming government policy.
(39:14):
Days later, commerce SecretaryHoward Lutnick took to Fox News
to announce he was looking atchanging how GDP is calculated
in line with exactly what Elonjust said.
Since Republicans, led by Elon,are in the middle of destroying
the government, mass firingworkers and attacking Medicaid,
they don't really want thenumbers to accurately reflect
the way that their austerity foryou, socialism for the rich
(39:34):
agenda is actually really badfor the entire economy.
So instead they're just goingto hide it.
But that's not all.
The Trump administration justannounced they're completely
disbanding two differentcommittees that both assist in
producing accurate economicstatistics.
This new scheme to cook thebooks on GDP also aligns with
Elon's anarcho-capitalistideology, which views all
government activity as quotenon-productive.
(39:57):
Do we really believe thatgovernment spending and
investment is meaningless andcontributes nothing to the
economy?
We're talking aboutinfrastructure, research,
electricity generation, publicschools all meant to be ignored
as drivers of real, productiveeconomic activity.
It's insanity, it's stupidity.
Elon and Trump, they are bothmasters at concocting
alternative realities.
They have hardcore cultfollowings who've proven willing
(40:18):
to suspend reality in order tobelieve the pronouncements of
their dear leaders.
These manipulate economicstatistics will be one weapon of
gaslighting to feed theirfabricated fantasy lands.
Speaker 4 (40:30):
I've been reading a lot of the Wall Street Journal
lately just because I know itused to be the Republican Bible
when it came to economics aswell as Forbes Went ahead and
got a yearly subscription toboth to pay attention to the
markets closely because I sawthat there was talk about
(40:54):
somewhat this manipulation ofthe numbers.
And of course I think everybodyheard me say multiple times I'm
an economic existentialist, soa lot of the stuff they're going
to try to hide it won't work.
You'll feel it Just like theprevious administration.
You know they could say thatthe economy is doing great, and
(41:14):
by the economy they mean the S&P500.
They mean the stock market, etcetera.
But when the Wall Street isdoing good, the Main Street is
doing bad.
People know very, very soonthat something is up.
So of course the attempting ofplaying with the numbers and
(41:38):
cooking the books is I don't putit past them, I don't put it
past anybody but I'll do my bestto keep reporting the facts
about the job numbers, about thestock market etc.
And it's been tipsy-turvy,especially with the tariffs.
(42:02):
The market does not likeuncertainty, uncertainty, and as
much as I make fun of the stockmarket, I think I used to say
stock market is just a couple ofold white people's feelings and
uh, but.
But uh, like, a lot of peoplemeasure the success of their
(42:26):
administration based on what thestock market is doing, and uh,
so I'm going to, I'm going tokeep using that same analysis
and looking at it as well aslooking at what's happening
every day as far as jobs, etc.
I'm going to stick to thisbecause the Department of
(42:47):
Education is on the choppingboard.
It's always been kind of aRepublican goal for years.
Even George Bush, w Bush wantedto do this is on the chopping
board.
It's always been kind of aRepublican goal for years.
Even George Bush, w Bush wantedto do this ended up failing
major backlash and had to comeup with a no child left behind,
type of thing.
So Linda McMahon basically toldthe Department of Education
(43:13):
staff to prepare for their finalmission and is already prepared
to try to cut half of the staff.
So, uh, cuts, cuts, cuts, andwe will.
We'll keep abreast to what it'sat what's happening big, big
election coming up, big electioncoming up for federal judgeship
(43:33):
next week it's actually sorryit's coming up in about 20 days
and it's a big deal going out ofWisconsin, and so I'll tell you
why that's a big deal on thenext episode, see you.
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com