No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen - Democrats finally show teeth, take on Texas bounty law

Episode Date: December 19, 2021

Gavin Newsom moves to take on the Texas bounty law banning abortion, what the likely outcome will be and what other Democrats should do moving forward. Brian interviews the US Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy about the new omicron variant, the dangers posed by those who refuse to get vaccinated, and what this pandemic means for the US’s ability to be able to defeat viruses moving forward. And US Senate candidate for Utah, Evan McMullin, who’s running as an independent, joins to discuss the coalition he’s building to unseat Republican election denier Mike Lee in 2022, and the importance of passing voting rights for our democracy.To support Evan McMullin: www.evanmcmullin.comShop merch: https://briantylercohen.com/shopYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/briantylercohenTwitter: https://twitter.com/briantylercohenFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/briantylercohenInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/briantylercohenPatreon: https://www.patreon.com/briantylercohenNewsletter: https://www.briantylercohen.com/sign-upWritten by Brian Tyler CohenProduced by Sam GraberRecorded in Los Angeles, CASee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Today we're going to talk about Gavin Newsom's move to take on the Texas bounty law banning abortion, what the likely outcome will be, and what other Democrats should do moving forward. I interview the U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Morthy about the new Omicron variant, the dangers posed by those who refuse to get vaccinated, and what this pandemic means for the U.S.'s ability to be able to defeat viruses moving forward. And I'm joined by U.S. Senate candidate for Utah, Evan McMullen, who's running as an independent, about the coalition he's building to unseat Republican election denier Mike Lee in 2022, and the importance of passing voting rights for our democracy.

I'm Brian Tyler Cohen, and you're listening to No Lie. Finally, finally, we have a Democrat willing to fight back. This past week, California Governor Gavin Newsom announced that the state would move to allow private citizens to sue anyone who manufactures, distributes, or sells an assault weapon, or ghost gun kit, or parts in California. Newsom tweeted, Scotus is letting private citizens in Texas sue to stop abortion. If that's the precedent, then we'll let Californians sue those who put ghost guns and assault weapons on our streets.

If Texas can ban abortion and endanger lives, California can ban deadly weapons of war and save lives. Now, this comes in the aftermath of the Supreme Court allowing a loophole for Texas' six-week abortion ban to stand thanks to a law specifically designed to evade judicial review and instead create a system where the law is only enforced through private lawsuits. In other words, where you can basically cancel constitutional rights so long as you use this little workaround that even the Supreme Court justices know is a workaround designed to undermine the court and its precedent. But because they're hacks and they want that precedent

undermined, they want abortion to be outlawed, they allowed it to stand. And so Newsom saw that and basically called their bluff and said, okay, if you're going to allow a constitutional right to be skirted, because remember, access to a safe and legal abortion is a constitutional right thanks to Roe, then all you have to do is use this fun little trick. And by the way, even the court itself acknowledged that what Newsom is now doing in California could happen. During oral arguments, Kavanaugh admitted that another SB8-style law could be used to target Second Amendment rights. And the Gun Rights Group, Firearms Policy Coalition, filed an amicus brief for exactly that reason. They wrote, quote, this will easily become the model for suppression of other constitutional rights,

with Second Amendment rights being the most likely targets. And so why in the world wouldn't Democrats target gun rights? First of all, because we should, right? We're talking about a country that's seen almost 30 school shootings and almost 500 mass shootings just this year. the only country that deals with these rampages and also the only country that floods its own streets with guns. I wonder if there's a correlation. Also, the Second Amendment does not entitle you to any and all guns.

Antonin Scalia, arguably the most conservative justice on the bench in 2008, himself said in District of Columbia v. Heller, quote, like most rights, the rights secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. It's not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever, in any manner whatsoever, and for whatever purpose. meaning that common sense restrictions like those laid out Newsom's proposal are actually reasonable. But beyond those things, we do this because we have to. We have to fight back.

We have to do something. Democrats love to play this game where we pretend that we don't want to push the Republicans because think about how that could backfire on us. And so we have to tread lightly because we couldn't possibly risk the party that's abusing its power right now, abusing its power in the future. Think about how dangerous that might be. Like, what the Republicans are doing right now is already the worst-case scenario, meaning that Democrats can either cower at the prospect of angering them,

or we can fight fire with fire and show them that it works both ways. And frankly, don't stop at California. Every blue state in the country should take action. Already, Latisha James, the Attorney General of New York, announced that they would move to follow California's lead. Good, keep going. And don't just limit it to guns. If the Supreme Court thinks that ushering in an era of vigilante justice is the right move,

if they're that desperate to shoehorn in their anti-choice theology, then Democrats need to swiftly and decisively scare the shit out of Republicans until they realize that it's not. Now, of course, with that said, let's not bank on this Supreme Court recognizing that this sets off a dangerous precedent because this is a court that's already proven and it'll twist itself into pretzels to enact its own political agenda while blocking anything it opposes.

And so look, if and when the Supreme Court decides is going to allow the Texas abortion law using a bounty system to stand and then strike down California's gun restrictions using a bounty system, then that'll serve as all the proof we could possibly need that this is not a legitimate Supreme Court, that the conservative majority isn't bound by any adherence to the rule of law or the Constitution, they are bound by their political ideology. And so knowing that, there won't be any reason or excuse not to expand the court.

Think about it. They're not ruling on cases in a legitimate matter, so why do we have to pretend to ourselves that the court is legitimate? Why do we have to be bound by the idea of the sanctity of the court, while the court itself isn't even bound by it? When the court proves itself to be a bunch of partisan hacks, then they shouldn't get to enjoy the benefit of the doubt that normally comes with being neutral. And look, I know it is damn near impossible to get Democrats to do anything that would go

against precedent or decorum or history, but dear God, it's about time that they realize that they're the only ones playing this game. Honestly, how many different ways do Democrats have to watch Republicans destroy every facet of our democracy before they acknowledge that this self-imposed neutering is just giving Republicans carte blanche to do whatever they want. Republicans know that they're not going to get an ounce of pushback because Democrats are more concerned with respecting precedent than the actual legislation, more concerned with respecting procedural tools than the actual people, the constituents that those tools are supposed to serve. And granted, actually expending the court relies on having

enough votes in the Senate to eliminate the filibuster, which we don't have. And so instead, right now, and we have to not be afraid to use what we do have. Even if those laws get struck down, it doesn't matter because what we can't do is refuse to fight back. The only way that this stops is if Republicans recognize that these things work both ways and that Democrats are actually willing to show them that. So good on Gavin Newsom, good on Latisha James,

and I am so looking forward to more Democrats showing up ready and willing to fight. Next step is my interview with the Surgeon General. Today we've got the U.S. Surgeon General, Dr. Vivek-Morthy. Thanks so much for taking the time. Hey, good to be with you, Brian. So first things first. Obviously, we've got a new COVID-vari in Amicron. In the UK, they're seeing record cases already. That seems to be true. In other places where Amicron has spread. So what do we know in terms of its transmissibility and its lethality? Well, Brian, it's a good question because there are, in fact, three critical questions that we've been searching for answers for with Amacron. One is, is it more transmissible? Two, is it more.

or does it cause more severe disease? And three, does it, is it shortchanged, if you will, in terms of protection against, you know, through our vaccines and therapeutics? And here's what we found so far. We've certainly seen that there has been extraordinarily rapid spread in the UK, in South Africa and other countries, which really do seem to indicate that this is, this is, in fact, probably more transmissible, although I should say that there's a component here also that may have to do with immunovation. We know that many people who are previously, infected with COVID-19 are getting sick in South Africa with this variant. We're seeing that in Europe as well.

So how much of that rapid spread is due to intrinsic increases in transmission transmissibility versus immune escape? Hard to say, but it's likely a combination of the two that are leading that is going to be in spread. Severeity, you know, there's been some preliminary data from South Africa indicating that they're seeing lower hospitalization rates. So that's promising we're keeping our fingers crossed that continues to be the key. case elsewhere. Keep in mind, though, that South Africa has a very high what we call seroprevalence

liver rate, which means that the number of people who have been either previously infected or vaccinated is very high, and it's primarily driven by the prior infection rates being very high in South Africa. And so the lower rates of hospitalization they're seeing, it's not 100% clear if that's because the virus itself is a lot less severe, or if that's because people have at least some protection against severe illness from prior infection and vaccines. And finally, there's a question of do our vaccines still work? And here there is some good news. We found that, you know, if you get two doses of the MRNA vaccines, for example,

that you will still have some decent protection against severe illness and hospitalization and death, there is a drop in terms of protection there, but it still holds at a fairly high level. Where there is a challenge is in your level of protection against mild and moderate illness, because that protection does drop. The good news is that if you get boosted, then you can actually really increase your protection against all kinds of infection, mild, moderate and severe infection. Now we've seen that not just in the laboratory, but in real world clinical studies. So that's why we're encouraging people get boosted as soon as you can. Certainly if you're not vaccinated, it's more urgent than ever to get

vaccinated and double down also on the precautions that you're taking, particularly around masking in public indoor spaces. Now, should we expect COVID to be endemic? And if so, what will that look like? Will it be a flu shot situation every year? Or will there just be a perpetual baseline of people on ventilators for the foreseeable future? A good question, Brian. And so let's talk about what endemic means. Because sometimes when people hear the idea that we have to live with COVID, they think, oh my God, it's going to be as bad as it is right now and has been over the last years for the rest of our lives. And that's actually not what we're talking about. There are many viruses that we live

with and they either don't affect us, you know, or don't affect very few of us in terms of severe disease or we're able to blunt their transmission. So think, for example, about the common cold, right? We know that a lot of people get the cold, but very few people end up getting severely ill because of the common cold. And so what we've been looking at is recognizing that COVID will likely be around for years to come. How can we blunt the severity of its impact and reduce it's transmission. And the good news is that we've actually been building tools to be able to do that. So vaccines help on both fronts. They both reduce severity and they also reduce the likelihood that you'll get sick and transmitted to others. There are therapeutics. Monoclonal antibodies are one

example, but these oral medicines, which are now in the pipeline, if you will, and one of which from Pfizer, for example, is one really promising results and may get, is going through the FDA authorization evaluation process. These are medications that can help reduce the severity once people actually do get ill. In the case of the Pfizer, drug, their studies have shown an 89% reduction in hospitalization. So the bottom line is that with a combination of vaccines and oral and IV therapeutics and mitigation measures, this include using masks judiciously, using testing judiciously, we can actually find ways to live with COVID while significantly reducing the number of people we lose to COVID-19. And that's ultimately how we're going to get back

to our way of life. Now, we have large swaths of the population who are refusing to get that vaccine. To what extent does that facilitate the possibility of mutations that will then prolong the pandemic? Brian, the more people who are not vaccinated, the more people who are likely to get infected. And the more people who are infected, the more chances the virus has to mutate and for harmful variants to develop. That's why it's so important that we vaccinated, not just people in America, but people around the world. And it's why the U.S. has worked hard to make sure that we're donating doses to other countries and that we're pulling out the stops to make sure that folks in our country have every opportunity to get vaccinated. We've done that by making

vaccines free, by making them available in many, many locations, by providing a lot of additional supports from free rides to free child care to enabling people to actually get, take time off and get that vaccine. So it's critically important. But I also finally just want to remind people that we've made a lot of progress actually in vaccinating our country. So while there are still millions of people who are not yet vaccinated, around approximately 50 million folks who are not yet vaccinated as far as eligible adults, we actually have 200 million people in our country who are now fully vaccinated. Millions more who have gotten one shot and now are on their way. hopefully to getting that second shot so that is good news we've made and this has all happened

actually in just a year so we've got more ways to go but i'm hopeful that people don't forget about the incredible progress we've made because every one of those people fully vaccinated is a person whose chances of getting seriously ill are much much lower yeah you've been in public health for a long time and a lot of the successes of public health efforts rely on a cooperative and well-informed population. We've defeated other crippling diseases in the past, like polio, because of that cooperation. But now that public health has effectively been politicized, how does it change our ability to be able to confront otherwise containable diseases? And like, will the U.S. have lost its ability to defeat these diseases that we have defeated

in the past? Well, I am very worried about this. I'm worried about the fact that in the last couple of years, we have seen two critical things, which have undermined our COVID response. We've seen public health politicized, and it should never be politicized. It should be driven by science and by public interest. But we've also seen just the extraordinary spread of misinformation. And that has really compromised people's ability to make decisions for themselves and their families that are in their best interests. And I believe that everyone is the right to make their own decisions, but I also believe

that everyone has the right to have accurate information to make those decisions with. So those two forces are creating a serious threat, not just to our COVID response, but to our response to future pandemics. And I do deeply worry about that. If we want to make sure as a country that we learn the lessons of COVID-19, we've got to, once again, empower public health leaders and scientists. We've got to support them. We've got to invest in public health, and we've got to get back to this idea that public health

is in everyone's interests. It is something that should be a source of bipartisan support. We should be speaking with one voice about what science guides us to in terms of. of what's going to ultimately save people's lives and prevent them from infection. Well, you know, to that point, a lot of the misinformation and disinformation that we're seeing right now is coming from only a few sources, a few outlets. But the problem is that because these media environments are generally closed-loop ecosystems, feedback loops, really, how do you, A, reach those people who've been cut off from hearing

accurate information, and B, how do you deal with those bad actors who are putting people's lives at risk? Well, it's an important question because you're right in the current ecosystem in which people take in their information. There are, it's not actually one ecosystem. There are multiple fractured ecosystems which don't always talk to each other where sort of up is down and down is up depending on which ecosystem you're in. And each ecosystem in some ways has its own facts and set of facts. And that can be extraordinarily damaging because there's no sort of baseline truth that people can get together on and can rely on. So I think there are a few things that we've got to do.

I think, number one, we have to track down where this misinformation is coming from and understand how to hold platforms accountable, the technology platforms that are driving so much of the misinformation spread. Now, they may not be intentionally driving that, and I actually don't think that they are. But by allowing this misinformation to proliferate on their sites, they're subjecting people in the United States and around the world to extraordinary harm. And they're doing so with little accountability at this moment and really

with very little transparency. That can't be allowed to continue because it's putting everyone's health at risk. I do think that part of what they have to do, the platforms, is take aggressive action against people who are intentionally spreading misinformation. And we call that disinformation, right, misinformation that's willfully spread. And there are a limited number of actors who are having an outsized impact, you know, on people's health in an adverse way. But finally, you know, I think the way to reach people in this ecosystem, which isn't, by the way, unfortunately, going to change overnight. The way to reach people is actually through the people they trust. And that's why in a moment like this, we have millions of more people that we need

to reach and get vaccinated. We've got millions who need to get boosted and get boosted quickly. It's important that we empower moms and dads, you know, grandparents, friends, you know, around the country with the information that they can use to talk to their family and friends because that's how you save a life right now. You talk to your family and friends, you make sure that they got vaccinated and if they're vaccinated that they got boosted,

and especially with Omicron coming, potentially much more transmissible version of COVID-19. Getting that shot is more important now than it ever has been. And your voice as a family member of friend, that could make the difference. And I don't just say that theoretically. I've seen this make a difference, Brian. I've like, you know, talk to people

I just talked to a gentleman actually recently from Wisconsin, who was skeptical about getting vaccinated. He and I had about a half hour or so conversation, worked through what his questions were. He ultimately made the decision to get vaccinated, but he didn't just stop there. He went back to his hometown, and he spoke to many people there in his workplace and in his community. And now many of them have made the decision to get vaccinated because the information came from somebody they knew and trusted. That's the power of what one voice can do. Yeah, that's a great point. Now, is there anything positive from the pandemic that we can take after it's over, like QR code menus, for example?

Well, actually, you know, this is the thing that really gives me hope, Brian, is I think the more I watch humanity go through crises, whether it's COVID-19, whether it was the Ebola or Zika crises that were when I was a surgeon gentleman in the Obama administration, whether it was a Boston marathon bombing, you know, which happened when I lived in Boston years ago, whether it was 9-11. which took place when I was in graduate school. All of these struggles have been painful. But as humankind, we've learned from them, and we've actually, in many ways, gotten better as a result. So with COVID-19, there are many innovations, actually, that people have developed that I think will hold. Taking health care, for example,

many people adopted telemedicine, the process of actually getting healthcare consultations virtually during the pandemic. Now, you can't do that for everything. You can't have virtual surgery. But you can have a virtual consultation with your mental health provider. You can have a consultation with your primary care provider for certain conditions or for follow-ups. And that's incredibly helpful.

And I hope that that will not only stay, but expand. But one of the many things I'll mention one more, Brian, I think that's really important. I think many people have come through this pandemic with a deeper appreciation for how important their relationships are with one another. You know, sometimes you have to have something taken away from you to realize how important it is. And during the pandemic, many people weren't able to see their family and friends and gather in the way they used to, not just family and friends, but they weren't able to see coworkers. They weren't even able to bump into strangers in a coffee shop. And we realized how much of that human interaction really mattered to us and to our mental health. And so my hope is that coming out of this pandemic that many people will do what I see a growing number of people starting to do already, which is to start making decisions in their life to design their life around relationships, rather than designing it entirely around work or are there concerned.

considerations. Building a people-centered life could be one of the most important takeaways from this pandemic that we have. Well, I do want to dig into that a little bit, the issue of mental health. America's young people were already experiencing unprecedented mental health challenges before COVID, you know, thanks to social media because of school shootings and so on. But COVID really exacerbated those problems, and we're seeing a lot of that play out right now. How do we address that? Well, it's a critical question right now for exactly what you mentioned.

You know, our kids are struggling right now during COVID, but they were not in a good place before COVID. And when I think about some of the numbers that concern me most, one of them is a statistic about high school students, about the fact that one in three high school students in 2019 before the pandemic said that they felt persistent feelings of hopelessness and sadness. You know, high schools should be like an incredibly exciting time in your life when you're starting off and their great opportunity. trinities opening for you. But a third of high school students are feeling persistent sadness.

And the thing is, that was a 40% increase from the over the prior decade. We've seen a significant increase in suicide rates in the 10 years preceding the pandemic. And then, of course, a pandemic has worsened anxiety and depression for many kids. So the reason I issued an advisory on youth mental health just recently was because there are steps we can take to address this crisis. In fact, we laid out concrete steps that 11 different sectors could take from school. schools, to tech companies, individuals, to local government, to health care workers. And here are just a few of them. We know that investing and expanding access to treatment, especially treatment that's integrated

with primary care is so important. A lot of people can get the care that they need. Second, we know that schools can invest in social emotional learning curricula, and we also need to support schools in getting more mental health counselors, you know, in schools themselves, so they are available to help kids. We know that tech companies have a responsibility here as well. to be transparent with the data on how tech platforms are actually impacting our children,

particularly social media platforms. We know that some kids actually are benefited from their use of social media, but other kids are actually harmed and can feel more lonely, worse about themselves, more anxious, more depressed after using social media. We need to understand who those children are who are at risk so we can best help them,

and that's where we need the tech companies to step up. But finally, and perhaps most importantly, we all have a role that we can play in changing the culture around mental health and how we think about mental health. Because unfortunately, there's still a lot of stigma, as you know, Brian, around mental health concerns. And that stigma prevents people from admitting their struggling and from seeking help. And so we can change how we think about and talk about mental health. We can do that by starting conversations with family members, by sharing our own story, which is often one of the most powerful ways to desigmatized mental illness.

We do these things together, Brian. We can make a massive difference in the lives of kids all across America. Yeah. Before you go, I know that you lost a number of family members during this pandemic. I just wanted to check in and see how you and your family are doing. Gosh, that's so kind of you to ask, Brian. I appreciate that. We did.

We lost 10 family members during the COVID-19 pandemic here in the United States and in India, where my parents grew up. And most of them, if not all of them, died before they had the opportunity to access a vaccine. And that's heartbreaking for us because, you know, we now know, thankfully, there are vaccines available here in our country in abundance. More and more of other countries are getting access to the vaccine. And we so wish that those relatives of ours who we lost had lived to see this day. And hopefully if they had gotten vaccinated, their lives could have been saved. So it's been tough for us.

But, you know, we've tried to do what my parents taught me when I was a kid, which is that when you are suffering, that one of the best ways to get through that suffering. And so not only give yourself some time, but also to reach out and serve others, because sometimes in our service to others, we find our own salvation. And we have found that in applying ourselves to the work of addressing COVID-19, trying to get more people vaccinated, get them more accurate information so they can make the decisions for their families, that's helped us heal during these difficult times. And I really appreciate you asking. Yeah, well, as far as the rest of us go, you know, everybody is grateful for the work that you're doing. And there's no doubt that it's saving a lot of other lives around the country and the world.

So with that said, Dr. Morthy, thank you so much for taking the time and for the work that you've been doing thus far. Well, thank you so much, Brian. And thank you for everything you're doing to help get accurate information out there. I'm sure you are saving lives as well. So grateful for you. Thanks again to Dr. Morthy. Now we have a candidate for the U.S. Senate in Utah.

Evan McMullen, thanks so much for coming on. Great to be with you, Brian. So you're running for the U.S. Senate in Utah as an. independent. This is a pretty damn red seat. Why do you believe you can win not as a Republican? Well, I'm running against Mike Lee, who is a far-right senator in Utah. Many have learned about him recently as he has opposed our last election or tried to overturn it and then been exposed as having knowledge of the administration's broader effort on that front. And he's somebody who has to be replaced. I mean, he has to be replaced because he is one of the most destructive members of

the Senate for efforts to overturn our democracy. But certainly on other fronts, he's shut the government down before and has threatened to do it again, gets very, very little done, engages in tremendously divisive politics and appeals to the extremes in our politics and just does a lot of damage and doesn't get a lot done for Utah. So we've got to replace him. And a majority of Utahans want to replace him. But the interesting thing about that is that that majority is divided into different factions. Those factions are, of course, Democrats, independence, and then I would say principled or sensible Republicans who also want to make a change. And so traditionally, you would, you might challenge him or I might as a former Republican through the Republican primary.

But the reality is, is that Republicans who want to replace Mike Lee, they're somewhere between a third and maybe 40 percent, just don't have the votes to get it done in the primary. And so in order to replace him, we've got to mobilize this cross-partisan coalition, which again includes Republicans, Democrats, and independents. And the best way to do that in Utah is as an independent. Democrats are not competitive in statewide races, and unfortunately for them in Utah, that I think could change over time. But for now, that's the case. And so this majority that wants to replace Mike Lee, it's cross-partisan. And we have to run in such a way that we can unite those factions and achieve our goal. Now, regarding Mike Lee, I mean, you'd mentioned that he was divisive, that he is pushing the big lie that he knew about the efforts to overturn the election.

In a lot of states for these Republican senators, that works. That's what Republican voters want to see from their elected officials. Why do you think Utah is different? You know, I think we just have a different expectation for our leaders in Utah. We expect them to do the right thing. You know, we expect people to do the right thing in their daily lives. It's part of all our culture. Now, certainly there are plenty who have gotten on board with the big lie and with him.

But again, a majority do not. Mike Lee is underwater in Utah. He's pulling at 45% support, and most of that is very, very soft. And so there's a recognition that he hasn't served Utah well. And because of that, you have this majority that wants to replace him. And you see a strong movement even among Republicans for that effort. Now, Republicans who want to replace Mike Lee are still in the minority. But they're about a third of the party at least, which is significant enough to get the job done with other Utahans in the general election. Right. And in terms of building this coalition that you would need to oust a sitting Republican

senator in what is largely a Republican state, you know, a lot of Democrats, by that token, a lot of Democrats feel like they shouldn't settle for someone who isn't promising bold progressive change, you know, that it's been status quo for so long and look where it's got us. What's your message to those on the left who may recognize the importance of getting Mike Lee out of office, but don't feel inspired to turn out by someone who isn't proposing a progressive agenda? Well, I would say a couple of things. First of all, I think that we have got to act quickly to protect our Democratic Republic. I think we're under tremendous risk right now. You see the far-right advancing legislation in states around the country to make it more

difficult for people to vote, putting more power in the hands of far-right partisans and legislatures, some of which now have the authority to overturn elections. We'll see how that stands up in court if it comes to that. But we have an anti-democracy far-right movement that is threatening our democracy. We saw that on January 6th. We saw what happened in the years before it, leading up to that. We've seen things only get worse since then. And there's a real risk that if the far right comes to power again, that it will gut American democracy. And I think that's a clear and present danger to our country right now. So I think we've got it, first of all, we've got to put that first, the defense of our democracy. And for me,

that includes ensuring people's voting rights, ensuring that we have fair competition, fighting back against gerrymandering, all of these things. I think there's a tremendous amount of common ground between Republican refugees, independents, and Democrats on that front. But I also think there's a lot of other common ground, too. I mean, look, in Utah right now, we're in a historic drought. Cities are trucking in water. Our reservoirs are empty. We are in the middle also of a period of especially terrible air quality. It's long been a problem, but it's only getting worse. So there's recognition that we need to do more to protect our air and water. And that's the way disaffected Republicans talk about it. On the left, they talk about it as fighting back

against climate change. But there is tremendous common ground on that front and on many other issues. And so I think that, you know, the other thing I'll add is something very interesting happened in the Czech Republic in October. They had a far-right prime minister who kept defeating the pro-democracy movement. The pro-democracy movement included people on the center-right, to the center, to the center-to-the-center left, to the progressive side of politics, and they were divided and kept getting beaten by this guy in his movement. But finally, in October, they decided to unite, and they were able to defeat this far-right prime minister and protect their democracy. That is a model, I think, for us in America.

It certainly is a model for us in campaigning to replace Mike Lee. But I think it's a model for the rest of the country to defend our democracy. Yeah, that's a great point. You brought up climate change. I thought it was interesting because, you know, when we see climate change happen, it doesn't care if you're a Republican or Democrat. It's still going to impact you. We see that, you know, with these extreme weather events like the tornado that just hit the state of Kentucky.

It doesn't care if you're a red state or a blue state. it's still going to have a devastating impact on you. Where do you stand on a lot of these major issues, on climate change, on health care, on reproductive rights, and so on. Well, on climate change, you know, we've got serious problems in Utah. Like, you're pointing out other places, I mean, this terrible, you know, tornado that, you know, ripped through, you know, many of our communities and have destroyed lives and homes and businesses.

You know, we've got different problems in Utah, but nevertheless, we've got serious problems that we need to confront. And I think they're becoming so tangible now that we have an opportunity to build a cross-partisan coalition to solve those problems. And for us in Utah, in the immediate term, it's got to mean better forest management across the West, because forest fires not only in our state, but in other states are making our air quality at times the worst in the world. It's shocking to say that, but it's true. But it also, you know, on the water side in the immediate term, we've got to have more conservation efforts.

But in the longer term, obviously, we've got to cut back on carbon emissions and we've got to find a way to achieve that. And I think that's through more investment in clean technologies. But it's also through working with our private sector to encourage more conservation on that front too. And there are a bunch of ideas about how to do that.

And I think increasing bipartisan support for that. So I'm there. I want to be part of that solution. We need to be in Utah. So that'll be something I work on. The other issues you mentioned on our democracy, for example, we've got to defend voting rights. I mean, I believe that our, you know, that we are born inherently free and equal. And because of that, we need to have a government that's accountable to us. And that all begins with our ability to vote and for there to be free and fair elections in this country. And so, you know, I will vote, you know, I will probably be one of the most, you know, one of the strongest advocates in the Senate, if elected, for measures to protect our democracy.

Obviously, we have a very thorny issue, you know, right now on reproductive rights and the fight between pro-life and pro-choice Americans. I would say that I believe there's tremendous common ground even on this issue. And politicians never talk about it. And we're tearing each other apart on this issue. And obviously, it's a very important one, and people have very deeply held views that come from their life experiences, their, their moral positions, their religious backgrounds, all of that. But this is the common ground, Brian, that I see in our way forward. Our way forward is the reality that no one is, no one I know at least, is pro-abortion or pro-herting women or children. I think there are people out there who care, who don't care enough about women, frankly, or children.

But most of us care about women, care about children, no one is pro-abortion. That is tremendous common ground. And actually what a lot of people don't realize is that the abortion rates in America have been going down for decades. And they've been on the decline. Why? Because we've been doing more to help women and children. And so I think that's where we ought to focus. That addresses the underlying concern.

Let's invest in policies that are friendly to women, children, and families. That's what's better for our country. It's better for women, better for children, better for families. Let's do that. That's what's working. Right now we have a never-ending tug-of-war on the laws. You know, extremist laws being advanced by, you know, the extremes in our politics that want to turn Americans against each other and, you know, punish,

punish women and i think do great harm to families and children and i think you know we will have that tug of war forever on the law unless we invest more sensibly on common ground in addressing the underlying with issue which is that you know in many cases women need help children need help families need help let's be there for them let's have a little less judgment and a lot more you know and extend a helping hand and we we can move forward on this productively. Now, I want to switch gears a little bit and talk about your background. You obviously were an officer in the CIA. What did that work include? Well, my main job in the agency was to recruit foreign assets, as with the official word for it, but basically recruit people who would

be spies for the U.S. government against hostile nations and terrorist groups and organized criminals around the world. And so that's what I did. I was an undercover operative, which would meant that I had, you know, a cover, you know, cover jobs. Just working the quote unquote state department? Well, I'm not allowed. I did various things, but I'm not allowed to say what those things are. That's part of the deal I have with the agency is that I can say that I work there and I can say what my job was and broadly what my job was, what it entailed. But I can't say what my cover jobs were because then people would know what the agency uses for their cover jobs.

But it's a good question. But I traveled around the world and recruited people to help us defeat Al-Qaeda and to stand up to foreign authoritarian regimes who were seeking to weaken free nations and attack free people around the world. Now, how is the ongoing issue of January 6th, then, as the CIA, officer influencing your campaign you know i i view the january sixth attack as um as as as a tragic event in american history that is on on par with nine eleven now did did people as many people die in january six as did on on on september 11th 2001 no not even close of course um but its political

significance was that great. I mean, it was something that we never thought we would see in America, a violent effort, a violent attempt to overturn our democracy. You know, we have to take it seriously. Just like 9-11, if we don't hold those accountable for it, we will see it again. And I really believe it. We've got to hold those accountable. And I'm talking about people who were there, who trespassed and who broke into the U.S. Capitol and who threatened to hang our public officials, whether it's Mike Pence. I'm no fan of Mike Pence, but people who threatened to hang him and Democratic and Republican members of Congress, they need to be held accountable. Certainly members of Congress who aided and abetted this violent effort to overturned our election,

they need to be held accountable too. And I'll point out that Mike Lee was a part of the effort to overturn the election. He was a part of it. And he advised it. He defended it and then protected the insurrectionist after the fact. He was given the plan in a memo before January 6th, and he kept it silent. He didn't go to the FBI. He didn't go to the public.

Here he is a so-called constitutional conservative. And when the barbarians were at the gate to overturn. our democracy when it really mattered he was on the side of those who wanted to destroy our republic and so that's a big big deal and so i just see the rise of extremism here in the united states following a similar pattern we as as what i've seen overseas and we've got to stop it before it gets as bad as i've seen it elsewhere it certainly is an ongoing threat to our democracy Brian. I'll just say this. Lastly, in answering your question, if we don't hold those accountable for what happened on January 6th, they will do it again. And it may not look exactly like January 6th,

but they will, and I believe they are already finding ways to undermine and I think ultimately dismantle our republic. And I think we've got to take it very seriously. Well, I'll end with this. is building on exactly that. This is something I'm having trouble understanding. And that is that we watched Trump. We watched as a wannabe authoritarian tried to stage a coup on January 6th. We know that he asked Georgia's Secretary of State for 11,780 votes, exactly one more vote than he actually got. And that was with the express purpose of anointing himself, the winner of Georgia. We know he was coordinating with lawmakers and people like Mike Lee and state legislatures to send separate slates of electors to Congress.

We know that they had a PowerPoint with instructions to undermine the election. So, you know, I'm asking this not as a Democrat, but as someone with two eyes who can see anti-democratic overt corruption, but why has Trump faced no accountability? And as a former CIA officer, what should happen to him? Well, you know, I was a CIA officer, not a, you know, a legal expert or, you know, a law enforcement officer those are those are you know we're different but but but i focus mostly on the political side of this i mean i look i think if laws were broken people have to be held held accountable we believe i think i hope still in the rule of law in america and and people need to be held accountable

according to the law period you know impartially uh applied um but i'm i'm i'm more in the political realm you know holding people accountable in the political realm and i'll tell you brian that am a firm believer that our Democratic Republic continues to be at risk. There are those who want to dismantle it. Those of us who are on the side of American democracy, we have to unite on that issue because all of the other issues that we care about, some of them, we have a lot of common ground on. Others are different. We have differences, certainly. One of those issues will be resolved if we don't have a functioning democracy, if we don't have a democracy at all.

And so that is why I'm such a big advocate of uniting the disaffected Republicans, independents, and Democrats into a majority coalition that can defend our republic and solve problems. And that's what we're doing in Utah. Mike Lee is unpopular. A majority of Utahans want to replace him.

The Democrats don't have the votes on their own. The Republicans don't have the votes on their own and the independents don't have the votes on their own. But together, they have a majority. And that is what we've got to do in this country. Yes, we're doing it in Utah. But if we're going to save American democracy,

it's going to be because Americans who are committed to our foundational ideals to truth, to reason, to decency, just decided to put those things first and unite. And Brian, I think in the process of doing that, we're going to find, and I know, this to be true. There's tremendous common ground between the disaffected right, you know, some of them still Republicans and Democrats and independents. We can build this majority coalition, not only build it, but strengthen it and mobilize it to protect our democracy and then help solve all kinds of problems that the country's facing now. And that's what gets me excited. And that's the way we can hold these people who seek to destroy our republic accountable. Really well said. Evan, for those of us who want to help, how can we do that? So we invite everyone to join us. The only way we can be successful is through uniting Republicans,

Democrats, and independents to replace Mike Lee, defend our Democratic Republicans solve problems. And so I would encourage, you know, everyone in your audience to come to our website, Evan McMullen.com and support us, join us. Donate to us if you're able. but we invite all to join this cause. Great. And we'll put that link in the episode notes of this show here, whether it's on the podcast or on YouTube or anything like that. So Evan, thank you so much for taking the time. I appreciate it. Thank you, Brian.

Thanks again to Evan McMullen. That's it for this episode. Talk to you next week. You've been listening to No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen. Produced by Sam Graber, music by Wellesie, interviews captured and edited for YouTube and Facebook by Nicholas Nicotera and recorded in Los Angeles, California. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe on your preferred podcast app. Feel free to leave a five-star rating and a review, and check out Brian Tyler Cohen.com for links to all of my other channels.