Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar - 7/5/23 (VAULT UNLOCKED): Bernie Sanders Full Interview w/ Krystal Ball

Episode Date: July 5, 2023

We unlock from the Krystal Kyle and Friends Vault a full length interview between Bernie Sanders and Krystal Ball originally released on July 30th 2021.To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show uncut and 1 hour early visit: https://breakingpoints.supercast.com/Merch Store: https://shop.breakingpoints.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoicesSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an iHeart Podcast. is irresponsible son, but I have DNA proof that could get the money back. Hold up. They could lose their family and millions of dollars? Yep. Find out how it ends by listening to the OK Storytime podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple podcast, or wherever you get your podcasts. Camp Shane, one of America's longest running weight loss camps for kids, promised extraordinary results. But there were some dark truths behind Camp Shane's facade of happy, transformed children. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually like a horror movie. Enter Camp Shame, an eight-part series examining the rise and fall of Camp Shane and the culture that fueled its decades-long success. You can listen to all episodes of Camp Shame one week

early and totally ad-free on iHeart True Crime Plus. So don't wait. Head to Apple Podcasts and subscribe today. and seeker of male validation. I'm also the girl behind Boy Sober, the movement that exploded in 2024. You might hear that term and think it's about celibacy, but to me, Boy Sober is about understanding yourself outside of sex and relationships. It's flexible, it's customizable, and it's a personal process.

Singleness is not a waiting room. You are actually at the party right now. Let me hear it. Listen to VoiceOver on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Hey guys, Ready or Not 2024 is here and we here at Breaking Points are already thinking of ways we can up our game for this critical election.

We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade the studio, add staff, give you guys the best independent coverage that is possible. If you like what we're all about, it just means the absolute world to have your support. But enough with that. Let's get to the show. Hey, guys. Welcome to Crystal, Kyle, and Friends. I'm very excited about the episode we have for you today. I think you guys will find it pretty interesting. I got to sit down for 30 minutes with Senator Sanders and talk about all the things from how he views the Biden administration, how I view the Biden administration, whether progressives are doing enough, his change in role from sort of perpetual outsider status to

now being in the room and what that's been like. So it's pretty interesting talking to him. Yeah. So this episode is a little bit bittersweet for me because, I mean, I love the fact that you got to talk to Bernie and I have full faith and confidence in your abilities. I know you're going to do an amazing job, but I'm not in this interview and there's a reason why I'm not in this interview. So, I mean, you could probably give the timeline better than me, but they reached out to you and basically said, yeah, we'll do an interview under the condition it's only you. Correct? Yes. So that was—we actually didn't reach out to them.

See, you say that, but I feel like months ago you did reach out to them and invite them. And then now, like, months later, they finally responded responded and they were like, sure, but only you. I actually can't. You're probably right, because probably at the beginning, at the beginning of the podcast, I probably did reach out. But it has been that request has long expired. So they reached out. The senator is very frustrated with the media not asking him a single decent question. So I think they wanted to have a place where they thought they'd get a more substantive discussion. I've interviewed him a couple times before

and for whatever reason. That was the very first thing they led with when they reached out to me was like, want to do this interview, but really want it to be just you. They were also kind of open on whether it would live here or with breaking points. So it wasn't just you that they didn't want.

It was also Sagar that they didn't want. You made it seem like it was relatively non-negotiable that they wanted to talk to you. That was definitely my... It was like a hard line kind of, like, sure, we'll do it, but this is the condition. Yes. Yes.

So, you know, am I butthurt over that? Yes. I'm very butthurt over that. I mean, I supported Bernie more than anybody in 2016, more than anybody in 2020. I got him on Joe Rogan. That's, you know, you could talk to Faj Shakir, his campaign manager. I'm the one who set all that up. Yeah. I think that's fair. To sort of be thrown under the bus in a way. And whether it's Sagar or me, I mean,

Sagar, he'll even tell you he's more Bernie's ideological enemy than I am yeah and so to be somebody who's more ideologically aligned with him and supported him as much as I did and for him to just be like I'm gonna kick you off your own show that stung I didn't like that I was talking to Korn about it and he was like really why would he do that I was like I don't fucking know so you tell me i mean your theory was like oh it's just he likes you and so he wants to do with only you my theory is more for whatever reason he doesn't want to involve me or saga and the case of me maybe it's because i called him a

cuck repeatedly it could be if he saw that could be but i kind of doubt he saw that you know what i mean i honestly i mean it's very hard to say what the behind the scenes looks like. I honestly would be surprised if it was like personal to you or personal to Sagar. I think it was more, I mean, this is speculative. I have no idea, right? All I know is that it was presented to me as like, we want to do this interview and give you a good chunk of time, but we want it to be a one-on-one and like that's a stipulation. So they were open on which platform, they were open on how we promote it. You know, you'll see the conversation, like it's definitely not a softball interview and it's wide ranging and all that stuff. So they were open on all of those pieces, came in the studio, which I also

appreciated because it makes for a better conversation, but that was like the one thing they were hard on. It needs to be one-on on one. The other possibility, like you pointed out, I don't know how much I buy this, but the other possibility is that maybe his like his manager or his comms person doesn't like me or Sagar and was like, we just want it to be only you. So that's another possibility. Or the Senate or knows that the senator has a certain like knows who I am. I know he knows who you are, too, but had, you know, a certain comfort level with me or whatever and just had me in mind. So he was on my show during the campaign. Yeah.

And that was more, I think what happened there was Fasha Keir, the campaign manager, I set up the Rogan interview. And then they felt like the right thing to do is to give Kyle an interview. I didn't even ask for an interview because I didn't do interviews then i didn't really want an interview but they were like do an interview because oh basically like let me pay you back for the rogan we're getting you the rogan yeah and so you know the one thing yeah this is obvious everybody will know this but they gave me 15 minutes it was like in out quick interview i asked like four fucking questions but you know especially because he's not a short-winded person yeah so you just get the sense but that's the thing that's get that's a little frustrating is that you do get the sense

that it's sort of look down his nose at certain people. And I think he does have this contradictory belief where he talks all the time about, oh, we love independent media and we want independent media to grow. And it's like, well, all the people who were part of the Justice Democrats and were in the squad were more than happy to go on all these left-wing shows when we were helping them get elected. And now that they are elected and now that they're not really fulfilling their mission, it's like all of a sudden when we get tiny bit critical of them, gone. And so it's like you don't really actually want a thriving independent media because that actually does mean more tough questions for you. And you're willing to dismiss or overlook or not pay attention to and not go on any of the shows that were huge supporters of you. So I kind of think it's bullshit.

Right wing media always has right wing politicians and they feed each other. They echo each other's arguments and there's like a bond there. And on the left, I mean, that's not the case. But you know what? At this point, I should really stop complaining because the fact of the matter is. I don't want to have any sort of relationship with any of these people, you know, whether it's politicians, whether it's other people in the media space. I mean, I've seen what happens in the past and recently with stuff like that, and it's like it's just it's just a drain and it's a waste and it's mental energy wasted and it's just it's not worth it.

Yeah. Well, I think why it's important is because there's two ways for media to really matter and have an impact, which is, you know, the goal of media is to matter and have an impact. Ultimately, one is just to have a large audience. Right. Which you have. You have to have sort of like elite awareness of what's going on in that space if you're looking to influence policymakers and the people who, you know, run this country and run the world. And so it helps a lot in that latter category to have people like Bernie Sanders or AOC or any member of Congress who, you know, is going on those platforms and sort of bridging that divide between alternative media and these elite spaces. Because otherwise they just they pretend like the large audiences don't exist. They pretend like the whole space and genre and whatever is like irrelevant and doesn't doesn't exist at all, even as we get higher views than CNN or higher views than MSNBC or whatever. So that's part of why I think it

matters, this conversation about whether left politicians are actually engaging with these spaces. Yeah. So what I want to do is we'll have the interview here and then I want to respond to it, break it down, get your thoughts on it. And then also, you know, I'll tell everybody, had I been there, which I wanted to be there, had I been there, the questions I would have asked. Well, we also should say you gave me that list of questions beforehand, too, of things that you were thinking of. And I think a lot, I mean, there are a lot of things that either you or I were interested in and would have asked, but definitely informed the interview,

some of the things that you sent. So that's why ultimately, I mean, I'm not gonna lie to everybody. My initial reaction when I was told, he wants to come on your show, but kick you off. My reaction was like, fuck him. No, I don't want him on the show. How about that?

That was my initial reaction. But when I'm not as emotional and I'm a little more calm and rational about it, yes, you think through it and you realize, number one, you're a phenomenal interviewer and you're going to ask great questions. And number two, yeah, I could write down a bunch of questions that I would have asked and give you the list and you can determine which you think are fair and which ones you

think maybe aren't. And then you'll incorporate that into your questions. So even though I'm not there, I am some percentage there because some of the questions were inspired by some of the things that I showed you. So, you know, when I'm more calm and rational about it, yes. We ended up doing what is the right thing, and you sat down and you interviewed him. But yes, I'm not going to lie,

the irrational lizard part of my brain was like, you can go fuck himself. You're not coming on my show and kicking me off. Fuck out of here. Fair. All right. With that, we will bring you Senator Sanders. He wanted to talk about the reconciliation bill, which is what he's been spending a lot of time on.

But we got into media. We got into Trump. We got into the coal miners strike. We got into the plant closing in West Virginia and quite a bit of back and forth on Biden and what progressives could do with their leverage. Let's take a look. Senator Sanders, so great to see you, sir. Thanks for joining us.

Good to be with you. Absolutely. Let's dive right into the nitty gritty of what you've been spending most of your time on, which is this budget bill. What's in it that you're excited about? What do you think is going to be most consequential? And are there things that you were disappointed didn't make it in? Well, first thought, thank you very much for asking that question, because you would be astounded as to how little interest there is in the inside the Beltway media core about those issues. Every day I'm hounded. What's the process? When is it going to be done? What about this? I just forget to ask what's in the bill? Now, as I think many people may know, I have indicated in my view that this

bill is the most consequential piece of legislation for working families since the 1930s, FDR, the New Deal. Okay, what's in it? Well, first thought, at a time of massive income and wealth inequality, you know what we actually do? We demand that the wealthiest people in this country and large profitable corporations who in some years are paying zero in federal taxes start paying their fair share of taxes. So that in itself is a fairly radical statement. Number two, what we do, and I have to tell you, this is still a work in progress. We've got to get the budget thing done. Then we've got to get the reconciliation bill done. Number two, what we do is take a look at what's going on with children in America. You know, we don't talk about that in this country. Everyone talks about future

generations. They love America, but they ignore the needs of the children. We have the highest rate of childhood poverty of any major country, almost any major country in terms of children. We address that in a very frontal way, very broad way. What we do is expand a child tax credit. Every working class family in America who has kids will get a check for $300 a month. We think that that in itself will cut childhood poverty in the United States of America in half. How's that?

And then on top of that, we understand that our child care system is totally dysfunctional, right? People are spending 25, 30 percent of their incomes while they go to work on child care. The premise that we're operating under now is that nobody in America should pay more than 7% of his or her income for childcare. You'd step forward. In addition to that, we put a lot of money into children's nutrition programs. So a big focus on the needs of our kids. The United States is the only major country on earth not to provide paid family and medical leave, right? There are women today who give birth, have to go back to work in a week because they don't have any paid leave. We end that.

And that's a significant step forward. Right now, driving over here from the Capitol, it's a 10-minute drive. You see people who are homeless living in tents all over the city. We are putting an unprecedented amount of money into building low income and affordable housing. We are dealing with the existential threat to this planet of climate. And we're putting hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars into transforming our energy system, creating a civilian climate core will put hundreds of thousands of young people to work transforming our energy system etc etc and we are dealing in terms of Medicare you have a lot of folks in Vermont around this country

older people who can't afford dentures can't afford hearing aids can't afford eyeglasses we're going to expand Medicare those are just some of the provisions which I think are transformative for American society. Is there still a possibility of the Medicare age being lowered as part of this? That's still on the table. So I wanted to ask, you said this is obviously a work in progress still. Do you have red lines in terms of certain programs that must be there in order to garner your support, certain dollar amount or threshold that it must meet? Well, I have a lot of red lines, but so do 49 other members. Right. So, I mean, what makes this very, very difficult, and I hope everybody appreciates this, the Senate is split 50-50. We will have zero Republican support for this type of legislation. They're more interested in giving

tax breaks to billionaires and throwing working people off of the Affordable Care Act. So they're not there. We've got 50 people. Everybody knows it is a very diverse caucus. Philosophically, people have very different ideas. So my job is to try to put it together. But I think all of these basic principles are going to be included. I didn't even mention making community colleges tuition-free, taking on the pharmaceutical industry, so

Medicare negotiates prices. But all of those basic principles will be in the legislation. Now, you ask me, are there aspects of it that I am disappointed in? No, there aren't. We proposed $6 trillion as a bill. Many of my more conservative Democratic colleagues did not agree with that. And it was taken down to three and a half trillion, plus 600 billion going into the physical infrastructure, which is part of the so-called bipartisan bill. Yeah. And I want to ask you about that in a

minute. So it seems like you have obviously a couple of constraints. You have people like Senator Manchin. He's expressed skepticism over some of the provisions regarding climate change. You also have the Senate parliamentarian to contend with. They previously stripped down the $15 minimum wage the last time around. Things like the PRO Act, immigration reform, potentially the renewable energy standard. It seems like those all might be contested by the Senate parliamentarian. Those are all hurdles that we've got to overcome. Yeah. And what is your expectation there, though? I don't want to make any, you know, any speculation on that. But I just, again, want people to understand that because

of the filibuster, this gets back to the filibuster. So we don't even have 50 votes plus the vice president. We're operating under reconciliation rules and the so-called bird rules, which means and this is hard for people outside of the Beltway to understand, it's not just, hey, I have an idea, let's put it in the bill. It has to conform to reconciliation rules, which have to do with budgetary processes, not policy decisions. Her argument, which I strongly disagree with against the minimum wage, is that was policy,

not a tax proposal. So we have to, in a sense, conform to the Byrd rules, budget rules, rather than just the good policy that we have to do. Why do you have to conform to those rules from this particular parliamentarian? Because, look, the Republicans previously, they got a ruling they didn't like. They got a new parliamentarian. And I just look, I know you see the climate crisis as existential as I do, too. It seems hard to understand how you would let the advice of an unelected government worker, somebody that we have hired, a staffer who's unelected, who is there to provide you with guidance on what these rules should be, allow them to stand in the way of doing what is really necessary to deal with what is truly an existential crisis. You're right. Period. You are right. So, again, there are 50

members of the Democratic caucus. I share your view. Not everybody agrees with that. Yeah. In other words, you know, if you're saying, you know, should the leader fire the parliamentarian, you can make that argument. But I have to tell you that there are members of the Democratic caucus who do not agree with that. And same thing on the filibuster. Is there any movement towards filibuster reform? Because it's another one of these things that it's kind of hard to understand. You see what needs to be done. It's really clear. I know you see it really clearly. And then you have this kind of, you know, archaic Senate procedure that's standing in the way of actually accomplishing it. You know, you talk about climate being an existential threat to the planet. I would also put in that area the attacks on democracy that we're seeing in Texas and Georgia and states all

over this country. And to me, that is an existential threat against American democracy. Do I think we should act boldly to overturn what these states are doing, who are very clear about trying to exclude African-Americans, Latinos, young people, people with disabilities from the political process? Of course we should. Do we have 50 votes to do that? Well, we're working on that. So let's talk a little bit about the infrastructure plan, the bipartisan plan. There was a lot of focus and obsession, I would say, with getting a couple of Republicans on board with this plan so that you can pass in a bipartisan way. The reports are it includes some privatization schemes, things like

asset recycling, which is basically just a fancy name for selling off some public works. Do you expect to vote in favor of that bill based on what you know? Good question. All right, look, between you and me, don't tell anybody. I think this whole process doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Look, you've got needs out there. Should we invest heavily in rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, roads, bridges, water, huge problem, wastewater plants, broadband? All of those are huge issues. Of course we should do it. My own preference would have been to do it in one bill.

That's all. And get the 50 votes plus the vice president that we need. Again, there are 50 votes plus the vice president that we need. Again, there are 50 members of the Democratic caucus. Some felt it very important to, for whatever reason, to show the world that they can work with Republicans. And that's what this process is about. So I think by and large, and we haven't seen the fine print of this legislation yet as you and I chat, I think the investments are sensible. Roads, bridges, all that stuff. Creates jobs. It's important. What we call the pay for is how these things are going to be funded in many ways do not make a lot of sense to me based on what I have seen up to now. They are

pretty conservative approaches. And the reason for that is Republicans, of course, don't want to raise any taxes on the wealthy or large corporations. So the Democratic negotiators are caught in a bind. What are your what's your understanding right now of those pay for us? I think the asset recycling. Yeah, that is the idea that we privatize infrastructure, that we give over roads and bridges and parking meters or whatever it may be to the private sector, I think is a very foolish idea. I'm not a great fan of privatization. And what they are also doing is taking money from other pots of money that were passed in previous COVID bills, which should be used later on, concerned about small businesses, restaurants, etc.

So in general, the pay-fors are not good. But here is the bottom line, and this is the world that we live in. We have 50 votes. One person says no, nothing happens. So I am willing to go along, I think, I want to see the final details of the bipartisan bill if there is 100 percent agreement on the part of the Democrats who are negotiating this, that they are going to go along with the reconciliation package. And do you have those assurances today? That is a very good question. And the fate of the all I can tell you is if I have anything to say about it, there will not be a bipartisan bill unless there is a reconciliation bill.

I guess that gets into one of the other questions that I've had and a lot of other people have had, which is that it seems like the Manchins and the Gottheimers of the world, the more conservative Democrats, are always willing to threaten to withhold their vote over things that frankly make the bills worse. Manchin willing to walk away if we're raising taxes on corporations too much. Gottheimer and the SALT tax caucus over in the House saying we really are dying to, you know, give the wealthy in our district a tax break. And there's not an equivocal willingness to walk away from the progressive side. Well, I wouldn't say that, Crystal. I really would not. In fact, we have gone as far as we have gone. Let's again, you know, sometimes we kind of take things for granted. What we are looking at as legislation right now that is more consequential than any time in the last 70, 80 years.

So it's a big deal. It would not have happened without the progressive caucus in the House standing up and fighting. So in the House, for example, it is not the – there are some conservatives that say, hey, unless you do these conservative things, we're not going to vote. It is dozens and numbers, dozens're not going to afford it. It is dozens and numbers, dozens of members of the Progressive Caucus who say, you know what? We are going to expand Medicare. We are going to deal with child care. We are going to deal with pre-K.

We are going to deal with paid family and medical leave. That is a huge, huge, huge step forward. Look, this bill, you got a fairly conservative United States Congress. What can I tell you? But this bill is a major, major step forward. But your point is well taken. Historically, I remember I was in the House for 16 years. Over and over again, I heard, oh, Bernie, your ideas are great.

But, you know, we have all these conservatives who can't vote for it. We have kind of turned that around a little bit. That's what this bill is about. That's a big deal. But we are right now in a pivotal bit. That's what this bill is about. That's a big deal. But we are right now in a pivotal moment. And I have made clear and I think Schumer has made clear Pelosi has made clear. The president has made clear this is a two track process. You want this bipartisan bill? Fine. You're going to vote for reconciliation. You don't want it. That's it. And so to reiterate, if you don't feel confident that all of the Democrats are going to stick together to pass something close to what you've

proposed with this budget bill, you're going to be out in terms of the infrastructure bill. It won't happen. That's all. It's not me. I mean, Pelosi has said, I think very strongly and effectively that this is you guys want your bipartisan bill. That's fine. We're going to bring the reconciliation bill up at the same time. And that's exactly the right strategy. The president has made that clear. So it's not just me, but we're going to go forward together. We're not going forward at all. What is your assessment of the Biden administration to date? I know you have a lot of hopes for this particular bill. You know, my own thought is the relief bill was important. It was significant. But also,

especially with the $15 minimum wage stripped down, all of those provisions were ultimately temporary. It was. But you're not going to. I mean, look, do I have disagreements with Joe Biden? Obviously, I do. I ran for president against him. One clear difference. I strongly believe in a Medicare for all single payer system. Current health care system is totally dysfunctional. His views are different. But having said that, and I have to make this point, sometimes progressives, oh, it's not perfect. Oh, we didn't do this. We didn't do that. And by the way, we have not given up on the minimum wage. All right. We are going to continue to fight for that. And I think we have a shot. Can you elaborate on that? No, but I think we have there are ways that, you know,

it can be implemented and it must be implemented. OK, we have too many people working for starvation wages. But this is what I would say about Joe Biden. You know, somebody who throughout his career in the Senate was considered to be a moderate. All right. For whatever reason, you know, Biden came into office and he looked around him and he said, you know what? Climate is an existential threat. We have got to deal with it. Yes, the working class has been decimated for decades now. We have got to address that.

So what he did that no president, you correct me if you think I'm misstating this. What he did said, well, we're going to spend 3% more here and 5% more there. But he said, these are the issues. We are going to deal with the needs of the children. We are going to deal with the needs of the elderly. We are going to deal with climate. We are going to deal with paid family and medically. We are going to deal with housing. Virtually every major crisis that we are facing, he is prepared to deal with. I have not seen a president in my lifetime who has done that. Am I wrong? I see that perspective, but I also see a president who's willing to let a lot of those agenda items be killed by the filibuster and the parliamentarian.

Well, but again, I don't want to defend him. I think the point you made a few minutes ago is exactly right. In this critical moment, when we're dealing with the future of the planet, when we're dealing with the future of democracy, you know what? I think majority should rule and not the, I believe that strongly. But don't think that he can snap his fingers, no matter what he may or may not believe, and make things happen. All right. There are certain things he could do, though, through executive, for example, canceling student debt. Yeah, that's right. That's right. There are certain things he could do, though, through executive, for example, canceling student debt. Yeah, that's right. That's right. There are things he can legalizing marijuana.

Yes. He could potentially do through an executive order. And so there hasn't been a willingness, even though he says, yes, I support the 15 dollar minimum wage. Yes, I support the proact to use all the tools that are at his disposal to actually make those things happen. You're absolutely sure of that? Is that fair? No. I mean, in other words, you do not know about the discussions that he has with people who walk into his office. It's wrong to assume that when you're dealing with a United States senator who does not want to end the filibuster,

that he can go in there and say, hey, I want you to do that. So don't give the president— Although he could do what you proposed when you were asked on the trail. How would you deal with Senator Manchin? You said, I go to West Virginia. I do the rally. I'd call him out. Right. I mean, there are things you could do. All that I'm saying, do not minimize. I mean, and I don't want to get into personalities, but sure. personalities. But any member of the United States Senate has the power to kill this thing. And to think that the president alone can change that is not 100 percent correct. Sure. But there are executive actions that he could take on student debt and other things.

We can agree on that. I am not. Yes. You know, Joe Biden and I, marijuana. I think the war on drugs has been just a disaster for this country, for the African-American community. I think it should end. I think marijuana should be legalized. We do that fairly simply. But, yeah, so we have differences. But on this piece of legislation, at the end of the day, if we are successful, if, you know, this will be a major, major achievement. Yeah.

Universal pre-K, two free years. You know what it means? If you're a working mom or dad out there, what we are talking about, and again, it's not going to happen overnight, and there's not enough money in this bill that I would like, as much as I would like to see. But what we are doing is expanding public education

from K through 12 to three years old. So you've got a three-year-old, you got a four-year-old, kid will go to school, not going to cost you a nickel. How's that? Maximum of 7% for childcare when people are paying 20 or 30%. Do you think that's significant? And by the way, what we haven't discussed,

when we talk about rebuilding the physical infrastructure and addressing climate, transforming our energy system, you're talking about millions and millions of good paying, in many cases, union jobs. Is that transformative? So I don't want to argue with you about whether he could do more. He could. All right. But I don't want you or anyone else to think that what we are talking about here is not extraordinarily significant and transformative for the lives of working families. Your political role has changed a lot over the past decade.

It has. I'm getting bolder. My hair is getting wider. You're right. You are very much in the room now, you know, in terms of implementing the Biden agenda. There's almost no one who's more central to all of that than you. Do you still see yourself as an outsider? Look, you're absolutely right. My role has been transformed. I am, frankly, much more comfortable being in front of 25 or 30,000 people at a rally doing five town meetings a day. I love doing that. I love it. That's where I get my energy from. You miss it? Yes, I do. I love it. It's, I get, you know, people say, oh, Bernie, you inspired

me. Trust me, those folks, young people especially, inspire me. I love it. It's I get people say, oh, Bernie, you inspired me. Trust me, those folks, young people especially inspire me. I love it. But that's not my role right now. I'm chairman of the Budget Committee. So I'm trapped in a room with a lot of middle aged or aging members of the United States Senate trying to work out a transformative agreement. And it is in a sense, I don't know that i was born to do that but that's the role that i have uh and i am proud that many of the ideas you know these ideas that we're talking about are they're not all that i had talked about they're not funded in the way i would have liked but many of them are there on the table right now and I think it's fair to say that unless there was a progressive movement in this country not just me but

so many other great progressives these things would not be discussed right now does that mean to say that we still don't have a very long way to go absolutely we do yeah I get back to the crooks in the pharmaceutical industry or ripping off the American people the absurdity of our current privatized health insurance system, the fact that no matter what we do on climate in this bill, which will be unprecedented, it is not enough. How do you deal with the issue that we can't do it alone? You've got to work with China, India, other countries, huge issues. But if we can pass this bill, it'll be an important step forward. Were there considerations around or is it still on the table even to put the public option into this bill?

You and I both support Medicare for all. I'd rather see that. Joe Biden ran on the public option. It seems like that's kind of fallen off the table. I don't want my preferences to expand public health and health care. So you would rather see the Medicare age lowered, for example. Yes. Gotcha. That makes sense. I wanted to ask, you mentioned the pharmaceutical industry. I got a couple more just very specific questions for you. There's a plant that's closing in West Virginia. It's 1,100 jobs and it's a generic pharmaceutical maker.

One of the things that we found, of course, during the pandemic is that a lot of critical PPE and other medicines not made in this country that made us incredibly vulnerable. Seems like a candidate and the workers in the union there are asking for the Biden administration to invoke the Defense Production Act. Does that make sense to you? Is that something that you would encourage? Let me get I can't give you a definitive answer, but in general, yeah. I mean, I think, as you've indicated, it is unbelievable how poorly prepared we were. That we have doctors and nurses who couldn't have masks, decent N95 masks or gowns or gloves is beyond comprehension. So it goes without saying.

And by the way, we're putting a lot of money into research and development in terms of future pandemics so that we are a lot better prepared. And that would mean that we produce these products here in the United States. You mentioned your disenchantment with Beltway Media, something you and I share, and I know you have longstanding criticisms there. There's a minor strike going on right now, something like 1,100 miners down in Alabama have been going on for four months. They are picketing in front of BlackRock in Manhattan right now as we're talking.

And at least as of last week, there hadn't been a single cable news segment on this four-month long strike, first of its kind in 40 years. What sort of, I mean, what's going on with that? Why do they ignore these incredibly significant? I don't want to overly generalize. Yeah, there are great a lot of respect or connection with working class people. Those issues that impact people, get their hands dirty, are not terribly high priorities for a lot of the corporate media. I mean, again, I would point back to here we are working on a piece of legislation which is transformative for working families. Very, very little interest. But the process is what is interesting.

Gossip is very interesting. But here you have strikers who are taking on Wall Street and getting very little coverage. It does not surprise me. Yeah. It also doesn't fit into a political horse race kind of narrative, which I think is kind of their comfort zone in terms of covering corporate media does is not particularly interested in class issues. Here you have mine is thinking on a major Wall Street entity. So. Yeah. Last question I have for you. One thing that I've always really appreciated about you and the way that you've thought about the Trump era as you've

recognized him as a symptom of these broader underlying problems. And as I was looking at some of the statistics this week, every metric that was bad when we got Trump has gotten worse. So inequality now, we're not just in the Gilded Age, we've surpassed the Gilded Age. We had the worst year ever for addiction, overdoses. Mental health has collapsed. All of these indicators that tell you, you know, you've got a society where you have a lot of people who are hopeless, a lot of people in despair. We did a hearing, by the way, on life expectancy. Yeah. Which got no, by the way, got virtually no coverage.

Also got no coverage. None. So the point to be made is that if you're wealthy, you're going to live 10, 15 years longer in America than if you're poor. Can you believe that? Wow. No one was particularly, very little media interest in that. Wow. So given that all of those metrics have gotten worse and given that our former president seems very interested in running again, do you think he could get reelected?

Sure. Look, I think you have, and this would be a whole other longer discussion. Yeah. You've got many, many millions of people who are working longer hours for lower wages. They are hopeless about the future. Their kids are not doing well. They are turning to drugs, to alcohol, even to suicide. They're going nowhere in a hurry. Somebody's got to talk to those people. Somebody's got to talk to those people. And I think the Democratic Party has not done a particularly good job in that. I hope if I ever

have the damn time and we can pass this bill, actually get out into Trump land and to start talking to working class people. Because when people are frustrated and angry, they turn to bad things. And that's where racism and sexism and homophobia and xenophobia rear their ugly heads. And what we have got to do is say to those people, look, there is a reason why you can't afford to send your kid to college. There is a reason why the rich are getting richer and you're getting poorer. Let's talk about what those reasons are, how we can create a nation that works for all of us. And you've got to be involved in that. And in Trump, you know, what people don't talk about, you may have noticed Trump has held some rallies recently, huge turnouts, huge turnouts

for a non-campaign moment. So is he a potent threat? Yes. And we have got to think long and hard about how we reach out to those people, many of whom, not all, some of them are going to be racist and frankly, you're never going to reach out. Nothing you can do about it. And that is really sad. It upsets me very much.

That is the reality. But not all of them are. You've got to give them some hope. You've got to give them an alternative. And I don't think we're doing anywhere near enough. Now, what this bill is about, this crumpled piece of paper, this is the legislative language. You got it? What it's about is saying to those people, you've given up on government, but you know what?

We have not given up on you. We know you can't afford to send your kids to college. You're going to be able to do that at least for two years. You can't afford child care. You can't afford teeth in your mouth. We're going to address that. Is that all that we have to do? No. Is this an important step forward in order to restore the faith of millions of people that their government can work for them, not just, you know, billionaire campaign contributors? That's what this is about. Senator, thank you. It's great to see you. Thank you for your time. Thank you.

So that was Senator Sanders covered quite a lot of ground there. I thought it was interesting there at the end, him talking about the conditions that exist in the country that led to Trump. I mean, this is actually a controversial view, bizarrely, that like economic conditions might fuel political conditions. But he's clearly concerned about not enough getting done. And yet there's also a tension there where now, rather than just being the outsider, throwing bombs and occupying that role, which is a space he feels very comfortable in, he's trying to navigate this new space of like being in the room and being the insider. So it was interesting to hear him articulate that kind of tension. Yeah. You know, that's one of the things I was thinking of, um, to ask him. And that's something that you touched on, um, is I really do think he, he has contradictory views right now. On the one hand, he still thinks

himself as like the crusading outsider trying to take down the system. But on the other hand, your whole life, I'm sure that gets, that's what Trying to take down the system. But on the other hand, not your whole life. I'm sure that gets that's what's in your head. Right. But on the other hand, he's got to be honest with himself about the fact that's not the role he's playing now. The role he's playing now is I'm the cheerleader for the administration. And yeah, I try to hold them to the left flank of what is possible. But what is possible is a lot different from Bernie Sanders of 2016 and Bernie Sanders of his entire fucking career. Yeah. Where he was the one dragging the spectrum saying, no, bitch, I'm going to make some shit possible. Yeah.

Now he's like, OK, we have to accept the pragmatic terms and in the pragmatic terms, I'll be the left flank of that. I thought it was funny. There's a moment, I guess not funny, revealing. There's a moment when he's like sometimes progressives like they want everything to be perfect and they want everything. Yeah, that was you, bitch. That was you, motherfucker. That was the part where I was like, this is very different from, you know, the role that you've

occupied previously. And it's like, yeah, of course we want things to be better. Of course we want, you know, you to do everything you can for Biden to do everything he can. That's our job. That's our role. Because if we don't push and demand the very bare minimum of what working class people deserve, no one else is going to do it. So the best part of the interview is, I think very clearly when you ask about Biden and, you know, he contradictory urges again,

on the one hand, you want that old side of him wants to come out and be like, here's the things that we need to do. But then on the other hand, he's sort of like, hey, you know, whether his has there been a president who's ready to deal with climate and wages and paid leave and all these things like him. And, you know, you go back and forth three times. You checkmate him there three times.

You hold him accountable. And you basically say, like, he's like, oh, I can't do it all on his own. And you're like, yes, he can. He has executive orders. He could get rid of student debt if he wanted to today. He could legalize marijuana if he wanted to today. The other thing is, like you said, he could go to West Virginia and do a rally in West Virginia and rile up West Virginians against Joe Manchin. If Joe Manchin stands in the way, you know, he can do the old LBJ or FDR move, call Kirsten Sinema and Manchin into the office. Hey, I'm going to make you an offer you can't refuse. I'll be your best

friend or I'll be your worst enemy. You pick. Yeah. And he can do all of that. He's chosen to do none of that. So when Bernie sits there and he's like, oh, he's trying and he's doing a lot and you're like, no, he's not. Oh, OK, you're right. You're right. See, that's the thing that was so sad, honestly, is and I don't he's not doing he's not lying when he says this stuff. I think he's just confused and contradictory. And on the one hand, like I said, he's got that thing where old Bernie is still in him. Right. But new Bernie's like, well, give the president credit because I think he's better. Obviously, he thinks Biden is better than Obama and obviously he thinks Biden is better than Bill Clinton. Yes. But the idea is they're also an FDR, that's one of the questions I wanted to ask him. Those are also really low bars. Exactly.

That's one of the questions I wanted to ask him. I wanted to ask him, is Joe Biden closer to the new Bill Clinton or the new FDR? And if he says the new FDR, I would have been like,

bullshit. Here's the list of how he's not like that. So, but I think that was definitely the best part of the interview because you basically, you pressed him and you checkmated him three times.

And I don't even think he realized he was checkmated because he would literally flip like that. Oh, he's doing a lot. He's doing all he can. Here are the things that he's doing. And you're like, well, he could do more. Oh, yeah. No, you could definitely do that. It was just immediately flip, flop, flip, flop, flip, flop.

And you caught him three times. The thing that is interesting in interviewing him is he is different than most. He does not like to spin and he doesn't typically spin. So when he's saying he really thinks Biden is better than Obama and then Clinton, I don't I use those words. He didn't use. Yeah, but I don't. He said of any president in our lifetime. That's what he means by that. Right. We certainly by the way, Reagan and Bush just just to interject, he said, oh, he's ready to deal with climate wages and paid leave. And it's like. We haven't gotten anything on any of those things yet. Right. So that's the other problem is that he's taking these like proposals which are still up in the air and

likely going to get slapped down and giving him credit for those things. Why are you doing that? That was why I tried to frame it as how do you assess the Biden administration so far? So far. Right. I get you have a lot of hopes for this bill. And I think we would both agree there's some really significant items that Bernie wants in the reconciliation package. That's a long way from happening. And we've seen already the way $15 minimum wage got stripped down of the relief bill. And that mattered a lot because that was effectively the only permanent change that was even being proposed as part of that bill. So were there good things in the relief bill that were really critical in that moment? Yes, of course. I mean, we saw the way that the checks

were helpful for poverty, the short term child tax credit, also significant and dramatically decreased poverty. Those are all short term things. Yeah, you made that point. He ignored it. So to paint that as FDR is, you know, that's just not true. So I think he's prospectively looking at here are the things that I believe we've got in this bill that I've been pushing for that I think we have a pathway to getting done. We're looking at like, yeah, but here's the reality of where things have been. And also, by the way, and this is part of

what he admits to is he says, oh, we've got to keep in mind early in the interviews. Oh, we've got to keep in mind the bird rule and the parliamentarian. I know it's difficult for people outside the beltway to understand. And I said, well, yeah, but why do why are we letting a parliamentarian hem in what the agenda should be? And he's like, I, you know, I agree. I think that's ridiculous. But that then gets ignored when when he says, I think Biden's doing everything he can. It's like, well, no, we already acknowledged that he's not. He could fucking not. You could get rid of the parliamentarian. You could push for filibuster reform. Who knows if it will work or not? But you could go to you could go to West Virginia in the way that Bernie proposed on

on the campaign trail. So there and then putting all of that aside, there are executive actions he could do today that he just isn't. That's the reality. So it's even worse than we're letting on here because you keep bringing all they could fire the parliamentarian. They don't even have to fire the parliamentarian. They could fire the parliamentarian. They don't even have to fire the parliamentarian. They could ignore the parliamentarian. They could do specific carve-outs on the filibuster and say,

voting rights has nothing to do with filibuster. It doesn't apply to this anymore. There's 160 exceptions to the filibuster right now. You could also just increase the number of reconciliation attempts you have

from two or three to fucking 10. And then all of a sudden, you got all these other things that you can do and you got a lot more chances to get good policy through. So there are so many ways around it and he's not acknowledging it. And I noticed something. Now his fallback line is like you say, hey, the parliamentarian is a staffer and they have no

power effectively. Their job is just to explain to you what precedent is. And what did he say? You're right. But there are 50 other senators who disagree. And I think that's my biggest objection is that, yeah, when he's having conversations with people who agree with him ideologically, he'll be like, yeah, I agree with you. But then when when, you know, you're in the room with these other people, instead of acknowledging that these are ideological enemies who need to be pressured and need to be you need to find a way like biden should to make them fall in line and he has the power to you know exert some pressure on them that's where i start getting pissed off is because i feel like he's gaslighting us because don't tell me you ideologically agree with me on this shit and then also make the excuse which is exactly what you just explained that he did and to and use that line multiple line multiple times, by the way, in the interview.

Oh, you're right. You said, do you have any red lines? This was one of the early questions. Do you have any red lines on this thing? Basically asking, Hey,

will you tank the bill of certain things? If they put certain things in there, take certain things out of there. And he basically said, I do, but so do 50 other senators. Right. So it's always like,

Oh, what was me? I'm just this one Senator. And you know, what am I supposed to do? And if Biden is who Bernie Sanders seems to think he is, he would have already dismissed the parliamentarian or said we're going to do more cracks at reconciliation or put more exceptions in there for the filibuster or reform the filibuster back to the talking filibuster or did the thing with Manchin already where he did the rally or Manchin. He could any of that shit he could have done. And he's done none of it, which tells me he's not the guy that, you know, is Bernie. And I even have to think that Biden's really this guy because Biden is probably just telling

Bernie what he wants to hear when he's in the meetings with him. Well, that I think that's a really good point of it is true that Bernie on his own, right, as one actor in this process, trying to corral 50 Democrats, including Manchin and Sinema. Yeah, that's that's an impossible task. But what he's presenting is that he has a lockstep ally in Joe Biden, who's also doing everything that it takes. And that's the part that just I mean, it just doesn't hold up to scrutiny. No evidence. If that was the dynamic, then it wouldn't be Bernie Sanders in the left who's under pressure. It'd be Joe Manchin who's under pressure. It'd be Kyrsten Sinema who's under pressure, who's in a tough spot, who's getting called out publicly. It would be, you know, you you wouldn't have these concerns about the parliamentarian and about the filibuster. And I mean, and I asked him specifically, you know, he seemed to agree

and acknowledge that a lot of provision of the PRO Act, the Renewable Energy Standard, immigration reform, that it was questionable whether these items would make it through the parliamentarian and the Byrd rule.

And, you know, we see the way that that limitation has been intentionally imposed so that the Biden administration can go to their allies, you know, whether it's people who are advocating on immigration reform or people who are advocating on fifteen dollar minimum wage, people who are advocating on climate and go, look, I really tried, but we just can't get it done. So some of the questions that I wanted to ask him now, a bunch of them you you touched on and you made them your own and you asked him. I'll just leave those out here. Yeah. One of the things I wanted to ask him is just very simply,

give me a current criticism you have of Joe Biden. Yeah. Because he does seem to be taking this role of now I'm going to I'm going to be an advocate for Biden and basically imply or outright make the argument that, yes, Biden is more ideologically in agreement with me than he is with Manchin and Sinema. When he had when he talks to Manchin, he makes Manchin think I'm with you. And when he talks to Bernie, he makes Bernie think I'm with you. That's what you remember. You remember in some meeting with Republicans, I guess, around the infrastructure bill. Remember, they came away thinking that he had agreed even with them. Right. That's what he does. Whatever their papers or whatever it was that they were negotiating.

And then the White House staff had to come clean up after and be like, no, no, no, that's not his position. So I do think I think it's Biden's disposition to try to make whoever is in the room with him. Yeah, that's right. And, you know, one of the ways I would press Bernie on that question, give me a current criticism you have of Biden is, you know, you supported Medicare for all. Joe Biden said he supported a public option. Now, neither one of them is on the agenda.

We're not talking about any of them. Right. So are you going to criticize him for that? Right. That's something that I wanted to ask. His explanation on the public option, he made it seem like it was my choice to instead of pursuing the public option. To expand Medicare. To expand Medicare. And that actually, to my knowledge, it's newsmaking that Medicare expansion is still on the table because the reporting had been that the lowering the age had basically been stripped down. So that

apparently is still potentially in play. See, but that's where I think Bernie's just wishful thinking there. You think so? Absolutely. I mean, this is the same thing. Everybody, it was all this kabuki theater about the $3.5 trillion

partisan reconciliation human infrastructure bill. Everybody was pretending like, yes, we're on the brink of agreeing. And then two seconds later, Kyrsten Sinema comes out and she's like, I don't support that.

Right. And everybody's like, oh! Yeah. How the fuck did you guys not know that of course that's the case so there's this weird kabuki theater well yeah bernie might be saying i want it to still be on the table and maybe the people i've talked to recently think it's still on the table that shit is not still on the table no way if it is and it gets through then i'll be the happiest man on the planet but that i definitely don't think that's the case.

Another question I wanted to ask him is about, they just had a march in over 40 cities for Medicare for All last week. I'm curious why he didn't say anything about it, why he didn't voice support for it, why none of the people, the lefties in Congress did it. Regardless of what you think of the organization or the people involved, it's March for Medicare for All. Which is like, that's your thing. This is your thing.

And now, mom's the word. Yeah. That was one that I was regretful that I wasn't able to get to. I mean, I would love to have gotten to all of them, but that was what I was really sorry to not get his response on because it is strange to live in a moment where it seems like we were so close to having that thing. And now it's like it seems like it's completely evaporated and you don't have Bernie, who was the leader who really put that on the table talking about it. You don't have him laying out, OK, here's how the path for

how we get here. So I would have been interested here as a response for sure. I wanted to ask why or if maybe is a better question. The progressive House Democrats, why is it they don't organize better, band together, vote as a block? And why can't he play a leadership role in that as a senator? Yeah. To sort of get even if you just slap together a coalition of six, there's a three vote margin in the House, right? So if you guys did act like the Tea Party and you did vote together, then you can effectively get whatever you want. Like I say, my pipe dream to get as much change as quickly as possible would have been if you had a group of six or 10 or 12 progressive House Democrats and Bernie could

be, you know, a leader of theirs in the Senate where they say not a single thing is going to get through Congress unless and until Joe Biden takes out that executive order pencil and pencil pen and eliminates student loan debt and legalizes marijuana. And I don't want to hear it. I don't want to hear a single peep against this. It's on him. not on us it's on him if he does it fine we're in business if not blame him because guess what these things poll very very popular so i we are standing up for democracy we are standing up for the american people and even if the media shits on them and they will republicans will shit on them democratic leadership will shit on them if they had spine Republicans will shit on them. Democratic leadership will shit on them. If they had spine, they could do that. And guess what? Eventually, after week two or three, Biden would talk to them and maybe you don't get everything, but maybe you do get $50,000

worth of student loan debt canceled. And maybe you get weed decriminalized instead of legalized around the country, which is a fucking win I would take. Yeah, but they don't do this. And I want to know why the fuck aren't you doing this? I don't I genuinely think they don't do this and I want to know why the fuck aren't you doing this? I genuinely think they don't realize how much power they have. You think that's it? I do. Yeah, I do. Listen, I don't think

Bernie's corrupt. I don't think he's serving corporate interests. I think he means what he says and I just think fundamentally he's got a little bit of Washington brain going on and you,

suddenly you stop thinking big and you stop thinking of like, you try to color within the lines. You don't want to be the sore thumb that sticks out and do something that looks like that. Because guess what? If it fails, you feel stupid. In some ways, that portion of the conversation where I asked him, do you still see yourself as an outsider? I sort of felt like it was the most revealing part because he articulated that tension and discomfort with the role that he's occupying now. Like he misses the rally. He misses being that guy, right? That was a role that felt very comfortable to him.

And now he's in the room. And so I think you're right that there's a different mentality that he's operating with than we've ever seen from Bernie Sanders his entire time in Washington. And you've seen that we've seen that transition happen with AOC and the way she positioned herself when she first came into the House versus how she positions herself now. And it's it I thought that was very revealing just to see how he himself is kind of viewing his role and viewing that transition and ending up, you know, sounding a lot like saying things, oh, you progressives always want the sky and the moon. And, you know, of course, Biden's doing everything he can do. Oh, well, you're right. He's not actually doing everything he could do. And just one more I'll give you here. I was I wanted to ask him to your point.

Do you fear at all that Biden is using your outsider status to sort of lull the left to sleep and say, see, even Bernie's with me, even Bernie agrees with me. Did you read that piece from Alex Sammonson, American Prospect, about how Joe Biden defanged the left. No. Very good piece. Not specifically about Bernie, more about progressive activist groups in D.C. who he points out, you know, voting rights gets totally quashed and you don't hear a peep from civil rights groups like women's protections and daycare and these sorts of issues gets get stripped down and pushed aside and you don't hear anything from the feminist groups. And just goes through point by point of like, you know, $15 minimum wage gets stripped down and you don't hear anything.

So what's going on? And he essentially posits that these groups have all sort of been co-opted by Washington Marine where they've been allowed in the room. They're given the illusion of influence. They don't want to lose that positioning and that access, which they feel like is valuable, even though it's not really garnering them anything at this point. And so they keep their mouth shut. I mean, the infrastructure bill is a perfect example. Now, I do want to say you did have Sunrise out protesting about the infrastructure bill and taking a little bit of a harder line there.

So I want to give them credit for that. But almost all the climate provisions stripped down of the infrastructure bill, right, and pushed to the reconciliation bill, which is much more of a question mark than the infrastructure bill is. And is subject to the whims of Joe Manchin, who has already expressed concern about the climate change portions of that bill. And oh, by the way, the probably most transformational part of the climate agenda in the reconciliation bill is the renewable energy standard, which is at risk of being stripped out by the parliamentarian. So in spite of all this, I mean, you hear and what is truly an existential crisis that we are all living through and we hear lots of words and rhetoric about a World War II style mobilization because the threat is that real.

But then you're going to let the parliamentarian decide whether you're going to do what it takes to save the world. Like what? In what world does that make any kind of sense? And yet most of these groups have been really quiet because all it took was to just, like, give them some pats on the head, invite them to some meetings, occasionally have Ron Klain, like, tweet something nice down about them, and they've effectively been defanged. What was the term you used? The illusion of power? What was it? They're given the illusion of of you had a good phrase there but i forget the word i have no idea well whatever it was it it struck a chord um and listen i think this is honestly a bigger problem with institutions too that once things become an institution once

you set up a bureaucracy uh things sort of take on a life of their own. And yeah, it's almost a contradiction in terms, right? Like a group in Washington that's institutional, that's an outsider group? No, by definition, you're insiders because look at where you are. Well, and what were we just looking at before we started doing this? Our revolution, which came out of the Bernie Sanders movement,

is now rebranding themselves as pragmatic progressives, which is so cringe because that's what Hillary called herself back in 2016 that we all rolled our eyes and are like, what is this? They're curbing their advocacy for the Sanders platform of Medicare for all, Green New Deal and those bolder proposals in favor of trying to push public option and the Biden more incrementalist positions. So it's sad to see. Yeah, there's a great MLK quote about how now's not the time to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. And it just it fits this moment so perfectly because the guy who was the quintessential outsider crusader, unapologetic, policy focused, rigid. And I mean that with a positive connotation, not a negative connotation. thing where, you know, he'll the the positive parts are when he admits to you like, oh, yeah, OK, he could do more. Oh, yeah. OK. Ballimentary in his bullshit. Oh, yeah. OK. We should get rid of the filibuster.

Oh, yeah. He could legalize marijuana and and eliminate student loan debt. Like that's the positive part. But everything he says before that is always like, what do you expect? This guy could do all this shit. Right. So it's like he can't do it don't be ridiculous okay yeah he could do it and it's like that's the tug-of-war going on inside him yeah and it's sad to see because he used to have definitive answers to that to those questions on one side of it well and i do have um i do kind of understand where he's coming from because he looks at the things that he thinks can get into the reconciliation bill and actually pass and sees, you know, universal pre-K and sees paid leave and sees child tax credit and sees two years of free community college and sees significant investments on climate. But he's wrong. That's not passing. And the CCC. So he's really desperately trying to hold that thing together,

believing correctly that those provisions would be really significant. They would, but that's not passing. If they get through. And so that's, I think, where part of the disconnect comes in, is he's sort of like preemptively getting credit, giving credit to Biden for things that haven't actually happened yet and that you don't see a demonstrated willingness from Joe Biden to fight to actually make happen in order to even get the things that he said there, which he was fire the parliamentarian or ignore the parliamentarian or come up with, you know, you can do reconciliation 10 times a year instead of two or three times a year. Here's another exception to the filibuster. We're going to go back to the talking filibuster.

I'm going to go to West Virginia and I'm going to call out Joe Manchin. I'm going to do a rally there or I'm going to call him into the office and make him an offer they can't refuse and do the character stick approach in order to even just get the things that Bernie is acting like we already have, that needs to be done. And the fact that he doesn't see that or get that or acknowledge that is astonishing to me. How long have you been in Washington, D.C.?

Like, you're giving credit for a bill that hasn't passed and that is falling apart right in front of our eyes because Kyrsten Sinema just was like, I'm not going to vote for it. You're already given credit for that. And you don't even realize to even get just the things you said. We need hardball that's beyond any hardball that we've seen since LBJ. Yeah. And Bernie Sanders alone can't get it there because you need the backing of the president. Yes, you do. Because ultimately you're going to you're going to get you are going to get as much of the reconciliation bill as Joe Biden is willing to fight for. That's right. That's exactly right. And by the way, the other crazy thing is that he's not really willing on his own to just totally call bullshit and talk about the farcical things that Democrats have done.

Like when they pulled the 15 dollar minimum wage out of the last reconciliation bill. And they said, God, this language drives me crazy. The parliamentarian has ruled or the parliamentarian has decreed. You mean the low level staffer whose job it is just to give you an advisory opinion on precedent? I hate even like giving her because it's easy to sort of like demonize her. Like she's wrong. But it's really it's not her.

She's sure she made a decision that, you know, we disagree with and Bernie disagrees with, et cetera. But the real villains here are the Democrats that are like, yeah, we're going to accept whatever you say as if it's, you know, the word of God. And we can't possibly because beyond it, because they didn't want the 15 dollar minimum wage. We know that at least seven or eight of them didn't want it because Bernie forced the vote. My understanding is that the big pushback on the $15 minimum wage is a secondary budgetary. No, is from from the senators is the tipped minimum wage that they're OK with the top line, but they are uncomfortable with increasing the tipped wage by that much. Why are they uncomfortable? Because of the restaurant lobby,

which is very influential in Washington and all of these states. I buy that that's their excuse. Well, no, that's not an excuse. I don't consider that excuse. I don't consider that a good reason that some lobbyists convince you it's not a good thing. No, but I'm saying even that is, they're trying to portray themselves

looking even better than they are because I think in reality, they're also just against a $15 minimum wage. I think that, you know, it's not just the restaurant lobby that pays them money. How many giant multinational corporations pay them money? Who pay the minimum wage? Right. A lot of them. So they might say, oh, I'm totally for it. But just this one little thing, right? It's the my ass cheek. Right. Well, they all hold out the like, oh, the small business owner in the restaurant and whatever. Which, by the way, I've made this point a thousand times on my show. Let's let's accept that criticism for a second., by the way, I've made this point a thousand times on my show. Let's accept that criticism for a second.

And by the way, it's a fair criticism. There are small businesses out there that might struggle to pay that. The answer to that is not to say scrap the whole idea of the $15 minimum wage. The answer to that is to come up with a subsidy program for small businesses or come up with a tax credit program for small businesses. But they don't want to do that. But they don't want to do that. Fucking exactly.

Don't give me that. Oh, the small businesses, which we care so much about. If you cared so much about them, you'd do $15 minimum wage. And then you'd also set up some other program to help offset the burden on those small businesses, which they'd never fucking do. Yep. Yep. So anyway, very interesting. Speaking of the senator, I really did appreciate that he took so much time.

And it was a very busy day. The infrastructure thing was going on. And I think it was pretty revealing to see how he's thinking and how he's sort of uncomfortably occupying this new role and just what a departure it is from who he's been and where he's been for the rest of his career. Yeah. You did a great job in the interview. There were some moments there where you really were able to checkmate him without breaking a sweat. He didn't realize he was getting checkmated in those moments. And yeah, I think the biggest takeaway from this interview, at least to me, is that he is living a contradiction right now. And on the one hand, he views his job as a cheerleader for his most positive image of Biden.

He views Biden as more the campaigning Biden who's a little more to the left. He views his job both as a cheerleader for that and a cheerleader for the policies that still remain in the bill and the negotiation. But he also views himself as an outsider who's still crusading for the principled original position. He wants to be the outsider that's not going to rock the boat. And those two things don't make much sense together. That's right. Yeah. All right, guys.

Thank you so much for watching. We have so many great interviews for you coming up. And tell the people how they can subscribe, Kyle. Yeah, so just go to Substack and if you want to see the video of all the interviews a day early on Friday, pay $5 a month for that. If you want to just sign up on Substack for free, you could also do that

and you get the audio version of the show a day later on Saturday. Pretty simple. And obviously we take zero ad dollars for this show and you have our word we will never take a single penny of ad money from anybody ever yep so um we do really appreciate anybody who pays the five dollars a month we know that you know people out there it's tough out there and a lot of people are struggling and a lot of people just can't swing it and i understand that we still love it we make the whole thing also completely free it's why it's free in audio form exactly but um if you do

support us we greatly appreciate it and um you know we're still trying to get in front of barry weiss so we can give you guys a tour of behind the scenes stuff for all the the paying members but you know we haven't i don't think you know gl Glenn made an interesting point about this. He was like, oh, because there's some like yearly update thing that happens where, you know, or since we started so much later than her, right? Didn't we start our show way later than her? I don't know. To be honest with you. He made some point where I was like, oh, okay, that makes sense.

His point was at some point you won't even realize it and it'll show that you leapfrogged her. That was his point. Okay. That was nice of him to say. I don't know if i buy that because you said we were we were way behind her even though we were just one behind her on the list yeah we were i'm not gonna look but okay all right we had ground we have to check at some point so we know when to do the video for people but okay i'll check but and we'll get back to you we'll have an update tune in next week for

an update on where we are in the bar Weiss fight. Yes. How about that? It's still shameful that we're not in front of her yet. We don't advocate for killing Palestinian babies, so support us on that alone. Yeah, there you go. There you go. All right, guys. Thanks for watching. Enjoy the week.

We'll see you next week. Camp Shane, one of America's longest-running weight-loss camps for kids, promised extraordinary results. But there were some dark truths behind Camp Shane's facade of happy, transformed children. Nothing about that camp was right. It was really actually like a horror movie. Enter Camp Shame, an eight-part series examining the rise and fall of Camp Shane and the culture that fueled its decades-long success. You can listen to all episodes of Camp Shame one week early and totally ad-free

on iHeart True Crime Plus. So don't wait. Head to Apple Podcasts and subscribe today. DNA test proves he is not the father. Now I'm taking the inheritance. Wait a minute, John. Who's not the father? and subscribe today. is irresponsible son, but I have DNA proof that could get the money back. Hold up. They could lose their family and millions of dollars. Yep. Find out how it ends by listening to the OK Storytime podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple podcast, or wherever you get your podcasts. Have you ever thought about going voiceover? I'm Hope Woodard, a comedian, creator, and seeker of male validation. I'm also the girl behind Boy Sober,

the movement that exploded in 2024. You might hear that term and think it's about celibacy, but to me, Boy Sober is about understanding yourself outside of sex and relationships. It's flexible, it's customizable, and it's a personal process. Singleness is not a waiting room. You are actually at the party right now. Let me hear it.

Listen to VoiceOver on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. This is an iHeart Podcast.