No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen - Democrats now in striking distance of a surprise Senate flip

Episode Date: October 23, 2022

Republicans try to redirect the national conversation to crime and it backfires in pretty spectacular fashion. Brian interviews Democratic nominee for the US Senate in Iowa, Mike Franken, about a bombshell new poll showing him within striking distance of unseating Chuck Grassley, and whether Grassley’s age (he’d be 95 years old by the end of the term he’s running for right now) is a concern to him. The Democratic nominee for New York’s 10th congressional district and the lead counsel for Trump’s first impeachment trial, Daniel Goldman, also joins to discuss whether Trump will testify for the January 6 Committee, the consequences for failing to show up, and what it’ll mean for Republicans to have a Democratic prosecutor in Congress. Support Mike Franken: https://frankenforiowa.com/Shop 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 Republicans trying to redirect the narrative to crime and how that's backfiring in a pretty spectacular fashion. I interviewed Democratic nominee for the U.S. Senate in Iowa, Mike Franken, about a bombshell new poll showing him within striking distance of unseating Chuck Grassley, and whether Grassley's age, he'd be 95 by the end of the term he's running for right now, is a concern to him. I'm also joined by the Democratic nominee for New York's 10th congressional district and the lead counsel for Trump's first impeachment trial, Daniel Goldman, to discuss whether

Trump will testify for the January 6th committee, the consequences for failing to show up, and what it'll mean for Republicans to have a Democratic prosecutor in Congress. I'm Brian Tyler Cohen, and you're listening to No Lie. So we're a couple weeks out from Election Day. Voters are already turning out to vote early in a number of states, and so of course, on Q, Republicans are trying to redirect the national conversation to what else but crime, what else but scaring their base. Like if a family of Trump voters isn't hammering two-by-fours into their

door frames and sitting on their couch with a loaded shotgun, then the GOP hasn't done their job. And let's be clear, this isn't a surprise. Like, Republicans have run the same offense every single October of an election year for as long as I can remember. It's either crime, drugs, or migrant caravans, or migrant caravans bringing in crime and drugs, or drugs leading to crime and crime leading to drugs. The point is to scare people into thinking that suddenly, Democrats want full cities burned

down to the ground and are force-feeding children fentany. in Skittles bags, which, aside from not being true, probably wouldn't be the best electoral strategy for Democrats, and so I'm not sure why they would do that. But let's not let reality get in the way of Republicans' wishcasting. But at a debate this past week, the Democratic nominee for governor finally managed to turn this talking point on its head. Here's Joy Hoffmeister during her debate with incumbent Governor Kevin Stitt.

So let's talk about the facts. The fact is the rates of violent crime are higher in Oklahoma under your watch. than in New York and California. That's a fact. Well, we'll have that fact check by the frontier superintendent. It's also a fact that medical marijuana... Hang on. Oklahomaans, do you believe we have higher crime than New York or California? That's what she just said.

Safety and security is my top priority, and it will be as governor. And despite Kevin Stitt, like, laughing it off and asking if the audience really believes that there's more crime in Oklahoma than New York or California, she's right. The crime rate is higher in Oklahoma than in New York or California. According to the most recent data from the CDC, Oklahoma has a homicide rate of nine deaths per 100,000 compared with California's rate of 6.1 and New York's rate of 4.7. Oklahoma has a murder rate of more than 7 per 100,000 compared to California's murder rate of 5.5 and New York's of 4. Also, by now, you might have seen the study from Third Way, which says that per capita murder rates are on average 40% higher in the states that Trump won compared to those that Biden won,

and that eight of the top 10 worst murder rate per capita states voted for Trump in 2020. And then, of course, you know, Republicans will say, oh, well, it's actually the cities, and those are all Democrat run. Okay, well, Republican-led Tulsa, Oklahoma, with a murder rate of almost 20 per 100,000, and Oklahoma City, with a murder rate of over 11, both have per capita murder rates higher than New New York City, which is at 5.9. Bakersfield and Fresno and Jacksonville are all led by Republicans. All of them have higher per capita murder rates than Los Angeles or San Francisco. And so if those are the facts, then why would Kevin Stitt get away with scoffing at the very

notion that this could be true? And this is the effect of years of indoctrination by a right-wing media machine. We are all subjected to these right-wing talking points on an endless loop about how you can't walk out of your apartment in one of these Democrat-run cities without being stabbed or shot. That's what we hear every single day. But that's the point. They know that if they can build the perception that there's more crime in blue areas,

then they don't actually have to do anything to protect people in their own states and districts. And then when they are called out for their shortcomings, all they have to do is have a nice belly laugh on stage and ask the audience, do you really believe this? Because so long as they can rely on your preconceived notions that they themselves helped formulate,

then they can absolve themselves as a responsibility for their own failed policies. So look, you know, we've got an election coming up in two weeks and there's a lot to talk about, but I think that what the left has to get better at is owning these narratives. Republicans can get away with this because they repeat it. They say it over and over and over every night

on every conservative network, on every conservative outlet, to the point where even Democrats would have a hard time believing that Oklahoma has a higher rate of crime in New York or California. In our defense, I think some elected officials on the left are picking up on that. Here's Gavin Newsom on exactly that point.

Just a messaging problem, but a messaging problem that has persisted with our party for years and years. constantly on the defense. We allow these cultural wars to take shape, and we consist in there on the back end of them. Eight of the top ten states with the highest murder rates, all are Republican states.

How do Democrats not know that? In fact, it's really nine out of ten. Georgia went for Biden, but it's really a Republican state, or at least a red state. Eight out of ten. And we're losing that message? Crime is higher, as well as taxes here for the average citizen in Texas. It's higher crime, higher, violent crime and property crime.

than in the state of California, 67% higher gun death rate in Texas. Why don't we push back? And so the same way that the right hammers away at disinformation, we're actually on the right side of this issue. So the last thing we should be doing is running away from it. If Republicans want to make this election a referendum on crime, remind them that it's red states and Republican officials

who oversee the highest crime rates in this country. Like abortion, like health care, like gun safety, like climate change, they are on the wrong side of this issue. And so their only solution is to, lie. But we have the tools to rebut those lies. It's just a matter of whether we're willing to use them. Next up is my interview with Mike Franken. Now we've got the Democratic nominee for the U.S. Senate in Iowa. Admiral Mike Franken, thank you so much for taking the time. Right. Good to be here. Thank you. So big news out of Iowa, first off, a new Des Moines

register poll conducted by Anne Seltzer, who is among the most accurate, trusted pollsters in the country, showed you down only three points to Chuck Grassley, 46 to 43, and the that's a change from you being down eight points in the last poll that I believe was conducted in July. What's your reaction to this poll? Well, our internal to the campaign and just as you see as you travel around the state, and what we've been witnessing throughout the state is there's a sea change, as we would say in nautical terms, a movement where people just want something different. And, you know, in Iowa to use an agricultural reference, there's a growing season for everyone. And perhaps Senator Grassley's time has come. And it's the autumn. And my job is to just

represent Iowans to the best of my ability. And we saw the shift through the last few months that people are starting to coalesce around us. And that's been positive. And we expected it to be well into single digits and closing on parity. With that said, how do you flip those few percentage points of voters who are still undecided well so we're on tv throughout the state for much of the state anyway we're on now a 10-day trip and i don't believe my my opponent can stay with us in terms of our our op tempo or operational tempo of this we are availing ourselves to all citizens of iowa we don't just have a curated audience we we take all comers and uh we talk we to answer questions and I'm affable, I'm available, and I think I represent the future of Iowa, instead of just

negative ads, one after another, we actually talk about solutions and problems, and we recognize where Iowa needs to do better. And I think Iowans certainly know this and are appreciative the fact that we recognize the challenges ahead of us. With that said, what do you say to voters out there who look at Iowa, those Trump voters, for example, who look at Iowa and say, look, it's never going to happen. Like, how do you flip a state that Trump won by eight points in 2020 because you will need Republican voters? So, so how do you get, how do you get those people to not just independence, not just Democrats to turn out, but how do you actually flip people who've showed up for for Trump in 2020? Well, you know, Iowa is this state that does this large

pendulum swings. We were the first one to recognize Jimmy Carter. We were the first ones to recognize Barack Obama. And counties in Iowa went 20 points for Barack Obama and then four years later, 20 points for Donald Trump. Yeah. So there's some sensing, some, you've got to answer the demands of the constituency. They want to know that you are core to them. And this is what we're seeing throughout the state. So we've got a large contingent of Republicans for Franken. We far, far out distance Senator Grassley on the number of independents that come to our way by a factor of two, I think. And I would expect that's going to increase. You can't win in Iowa by being a strict Democrat, nor can you win as a strict Republican. You've got to be across the spectrum on the

various issues and answer the constituency. Chuck Grassley is very old. He's running for a term that would end when he is 95. How does that factor into this race as far as you're concerned? Well, I mean, it's not the reason I entered this race. It's not that I thought that was going to be the significant issue in this race. But it's a, it's an apparent issue for those of age. And I don't have to explain the implications of age to anybody in the state of Iowa, especially those of age. Everyone knows that it's not linear and the effects of time, time moves in one direction.

And the voting record of Senator Grassley is as it is, that can't be changed, nor can the passage of time. So a 70 year old knows that from 70 to 80, they expect something different from what it was from 60 to 70. So they want to, I think they want to be represented presented by someone who's a well with the times, who's got the technology underpinnings that has the empathy and the broad understanding

of the world. Senator Grassley's from Butler County. He's lived in Butler County in Washington, D.C. So Butler County, just a little bit of time in Butler and Washington, D.C. a lot since 1975. So his perspective is two. My perspective is multiple zip codes from around the world, multiple continents.

And that's a bigger perspective, a more broad-minded approach to what's the best of the breed, what's the best opportunities, what's the greatest good for the greatest number of people with a special emphasis for those that are most trying. And when I have these discussions, the Republicans walk up, grab one of our yard signs and says, thank you very much.

Now with regard to the issues in particular, I mean, you had mentioned before that you need independence, you need Republicans to win these. races. What issues have brought those people, those independents, those Republicans to your campaign versus that of Chuck Grassley? Immigration, certainly row for women throughout the state, regardless of your political affiliation. This is an affront on equality. It's as simple as that. And although they may very well be under the chapeau of pro-life, it's an affront that men are doing, again,

against women. Right. And they don't take kindly to that. They have daughters, they've got grandchildren. It's a disappointment. Environmental concerns, we need to generate a new generation of farmers. This morning I spent on a farm in Crawford County and a combine. It's expensive to be a farmer today, hugely expensive.

You can't just break into farming. So we need to develop a different type of agriculture in the state. These issues are all highly diverse. You can't be subscribed to whoever was your biggest donor in a corporate world. We don't do that in my campaign. We have individuals in health care. Iowa is an elderly state. You've got a political party who has stated quite clearly that they want to privatize

Social Security and Medicare. Well, this has not gone well. in the state of Iowa. This will not go well in the future and most people believe it's a it's a profit grab and benefits will go down and profits for those managing it will go up. And and historical precedence is true for that. There's a host of issues and I read the audience and I see what the topical issues are and then after I give my little spiel, I let people ask questions and inevitably those questions will lead to what's most on people's minds. With that said, you do have the advantage of speaking to an electorate because they are older,

those are the people who are more keyed into politics anyway. Do you find that, for example, the issue of Republicans broadcasting that they intend to eliminate Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, do you find that that's broken through to the electorate? Because obviously, messaging is always a huge issue. But, I mean, you're speaking to an electorate that's mostly keyed in anyway. So do you find that that message has gone through, that people know that Republicans do intend to eliminate Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, if they can?

Well, I don't think it's been stated exceedingly clearly to them. And most people would be absolutely apoplectic at even the thought of it. Right. So, I mean, I think the general thought would be, are you kidding me? No way would they do this. Which, by the way, is exactly what they said about Roe, cut to, here we are, with Roe having been overturned, and now we're trying to scramble to figure out what, to do to protect women's reproductive rights.

So we ignore these things at our own peril. Or Citizens United or a host of other issues, the EPA. I mean, this Supreme Court is going to do a whole bunch of things yet to include, perhaps dictate who you can marry. I, you know, people should be fearful. And this is the first time we've had such a judiciary in my lifetime anyway, perhaps going back to the 1930s where it is this partisan. This is the lifeblood of.

Senator Grassland and Mitch McConnell, who have dictated this upon America. And when you talk about fairness, the basic element of fairness, what is proper with the Merrick Garland nomination or the Amy Comey Barrett nomination? What's really fair? And chances are they're going to say, you know what, that just was patently unfair. Or Judge Jackson, the fact that she's hugely qualified and she gets no votes by Senator It's ridiculous. Yeah.

And this is an affront to people's sensibilities. You served, I believe, 36 years in the Navy. As someone with military experience, can you speak to what we're seeing from the GOP these days? From January 6th to the continued assault on our democracy by virtue of elevating these election deniers throughout the U.S.? You know, that's really the coin of the realm here. We have a political party who attempted to overthrow the basic

the basic element of democracy, the value of your vote. And not only did they attempt to do this in a lie, cheat, steel manner, but they also took people's lives and the execution of that. So I have this odd situation in life where defending what is America, our rights, our way of life, not always were we right, that's for sure, internationally. But I swore an oath, so has Senator Grassley. perhaps about the right, the same number of times as I have, where it says, I swear I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States is against all enemies, foreign and domestic. And I now find it necessary to do my continuing duty against those threats to domestic

elements of our Constitution. And if anybody thinks this isn't an affront, or if anybody thinks that this is a one-shot wonder, by the republican party i would say think again because they're attempting to rationalize it institutionalize it uh and even codify it what's been the most memorable day on the campaign trail for you it will be the last day of the campaign yeah um you know one day we're driving to carroll iowa and uh on a you know back road and we stopped for a stop and shop or something to get gas and things and i said to the woman behind that the counter. I said, how much do you make? I don't mean to pry, but how much do you make?

Right away, she says, 9.50. I said, do you have a benefits package? No, right away, she responds. She didn't have a finger. I didn't have a ring or a ring on her finger. She was 40-ish and thereabouts. And, and I said, do you get 40 hours of work weekend? And she goes, yes, plus usually a day on the weekends, which, so if you titrate all that down, She's probably a single parent. She is probably, this is her only job, if not something in the evening. She is held rather captive in where she is because of the demands of God knows what. And she probably cannot remember the last time she's gone on a significant vacation,

gone to the dentist, had a nice evening out, or had at the end of the month some money to put into savings and that woman is one malady one fender bender one tornado

away from financial ruin and she's her life of dignity is a challenge in terms of climbing the social economic ladder And I and I and I and I and I and I and I looked there in the eye and we had a moment and I said I'll I'll try to do better for you. I'm glad you brought that up because I think so often what gets lost is like if you're running if you're running for office and you're not looking out to help the people who need your help and you're looking only to serve the people who don't need your help and like then what are you what are you doing?

You know what I mean? And so I think that gets lost in so much of this. And we talk about like, I mean, so much already so much of what we talk about in politics, our whole narrative on both sides is a bunch of bullshit anyway. But what gets lost is the people who are actually impacted by this and the people who need help and who need some dignity in their lives and not just tax cuts for people who don't need tax cuts. It's people who need some help because like you said, they haven't had a vacation in God knows how long. They're working every single day plus weekends.

they don't have a day off they're captive to their their jobs in from gas stations to cashiers to wherever it is and like i you know that that's that's the part that kind of like i i feel gets lost in so much of the bullshit talking points about about god knows what yeah so i'm going to be fine in life my wife's going to be fine in life um but you know this is this is about servant leadership and you should put country over party but more important important but all that, you should put all of those larger demands over yourself. You should be a ladder consideration. And the fact that we have developed a system where money from corporate entities, from

dark money, can dictate and erase it from being a meritocracy as to who gets elected, and then consequently generally own a person's vote for perpetuity, even though. though they have no understanding or deeper understanding other than doing what's what's what's the direction of this and this this organization that gives them money or pluses up they're already substantial standard of living yeah and in my world you got to help your neighbor you got to lift them up lighten their burden give them a path forward as best you can give them to health education clean food clean water supply, safety and environment, health care, so they can reach that first run of that ladder and climb up. I would expect that woman has no idea in the last time she's been to a dentist

and I bet even things like such simplistic things that's changing the oil in a car is something that gets neglected because she didn't have the money for it. Yeah. And imagine living like that. We can do better in America. We must do better in America. Mike, if you want people to take away one thing from hearing you, what would you want it to be? These are serious times, both domestically and internationally. This is not a time for partisan hacks. This is not a time for self-centered politicians.

This is a time for servant leaders and leaders with a high degree of empathy to make the right decisions for the future of our states, our nation, and humanity. We are, we are teetering, both domestically and internationally. I would urge people to be wide-eyed about this and vote for those individuals that will serve their best interest, that will serve their children's best interest and those around them, and live by this concept of supporting those you've never met as much as those you know. And in the end, be that person who plants the tree, whose shade you'll never use. Perfectly put.

Let's end with this. How can we help your campaign? Oh, well, frank and for Iowa.com is our website. I want to be a better, not a better politician as much as being more aware of the topics, being more broad-minded on the intricacies of things. I'm a policy won't. I'm an engineer. I'm a science person. I want to get into things and how to get them fixed. So do communicate and how we can be better. For now, the big deal is to get my word out in the state of Iowa, my name out. And to do that, we need to be on TV throughout

the state and radio, et cetera. So do in the state of Iowa and elsewhere come to our rallies, which we've got a series of them coming up and uh and i appreciate the donations to to make our get our word out as best we can and please as i did today vote we'll leave it there mike franken thank you so much for taking the time and best of luck on the campaign trail thank you sir now we've got the democratic nominee for new york's 10th congressional district dan goldman thanks for coming on thanks so much for having me bryd it's great to be here so you're a pretty unique situation because most candidates for office haven't already been front and center in an impeachment trial. You were the lead counsel for Trump's first impeachment, so you've

got pretty good insight into his criminality. Do you believe that he'll testify for the January 6th committee? No. I think there's pretty much no chance he will. I think he will pretend as if he wants to, just like he did with the Mueller investigation. And ultimately he'll then come up with some reason blaming, you know, the committee or other, you know, something else as to why, oh, I would, but I couldn't possibly because of their bias or whatever it is. Yeah. You know, I, I hope the January 6th committee calls his bluff and says, you want to come testify live? No problem. You can come testify however you want to testify because he won't. What are the consequences for ignoring a congressional subpoena here? Well, we've seen what happened. I mean, Steve Bannon ignored.

one, and he ultimately was held in criminal contempt and was prosecuted and convicted for that charge. That's a longer process that requires a full House vote that then, you know, in order to refer it to the Department of Justice. So I don't expect that to happen with, you know, a couple months left in this Congress. I wouldn't expect the Department of Justice would charge the former president with criminal contempt for violating or for, you know, rejecting or refusing to abide by a congressional subpoena. There are separation of powers issues. It's probably not something that the Department of Justice would want to do. And so really, at the end of the day, there's probably very little that Congress will do to enforce this. And I think that's quite clear.

Just on the DOJ front, if you have someone like Steve Bannon who the DOJ did move forward with an indictment for and you have Donald Trump and they're in the same ballpark, in the same arena, then what's to stop other than the perception because of who Donald Trump is, what's to stop the DOJ from not looking like it's enforcing one but not enforcing the other for what's effectively the same crime? Because Donald Trump is the former president of the United States, and there are open constitutional questions about whether Congress can subpoena a former president or about his conduct while he was president pursuant to their subpoena power, which arises from their legislative authority. So the subpoena power in Congress is not a constitutional power. And so there are murky and somewhat complicated potential constitutional questions. So it would be a different situation than Steve Bannon was in. Okay. So January

6th committee subpoena aside, just from a layman's perspective, it looks to me like the like the DOJ probe as far as Trump inciting January 6th has taken a long time thus far. Do you think that that's par for the course, and this is just a frustratingly slow process always, or is this taking an extraordinarily long time? I think both is the answer. So I think it took the Department of Justice too long to move from the charging those who were involved with the actual invasion of the Capitol on January 6th to the broader conspiracy that appears to have been, that appears to have existed with Donald Trump at the center of it in an effort to overturn the election that culminated in January 6th for the most part. So they did take too long, in my view,

to continue to move into that investigation, which was quite obvious that it needed to be investigated for pretty soon after January 6th itself. However, I do. They have obviously started it, and they are going full bore on it right now. And there are a lot of people who say, I just watched these January 6th committee hearings. Why isn't Donald Trump locked up right now in charge? And the answer to that is because it takes a lot more to prepare an indictment and to complete a criminal investigation where you have to deal with rules of evidence. you have to deal with the reality of cross-examination of witnesses,

and you have to deal with beyond a reasonable doubt, a different standard. So what happens in the courtroom is very different than what happens in a hearing room for a congressional committee hearing, and I've been in both. So I have a decent sense of it. What the DOJ needs to do is to take the information that we've seen in the January 6th committee hearings, they are going to have to run through all of the witnesses that had any impact, any influence, any association with any of the conduct, even ones that they wouldn't use for their affirmative case, but you have to really understand what every witness says so you know whether they're contradictory statements,

you want to make sure you're vetting all the witnesses that you will use. In order to dot all the eyes and cross all the T's, which you would want to do, if you charge a former president of the United States, it is an exhaustive and detailed and very time-intensive investigation. So last week I interviewed Glenn Kirshner, who I'm sure you know, and he mentioned that what he was most impressed by when he attended the last January 6th committee hearing is the way that the January 6th committee laid out their case in such a way that would make it easier for the DOJ, for prosecutors to then pick up where they left off all the language

they were using was basically intended to lend itself to a prosecution. Do you think, based on your experience, are there any holes in the DOJ's case? Is there any reason that they wouldn't be able to move forward with or be able to secure an indictment? So the problem with that is that we don't know the answer, and that there is no real way for us to know the answer unless we're on the inside reading the the FBI reports of the interviews that the Department of Justice does with these witnesses. I think it's important to remember that, and I heard rumblings, that, you know, there may be aspects of these, even the witnesses we saw, aspects of their testimony that were not played

that, you know, might not be helpful to a prosecution. So we got sort of the best of the best, so to speak, hearings, the strongest case that they could put forward. But there's no one on the other side to put up a defense case. There's no one on the other side to go through all the prior statements of that witness and say, well, wait a minute, you said this here, but you also said that there. Those are contradictory. What is that? And I think everybody needs to remember that cross-examination is the great truth teller in our system. And it's very important. What I like to say, say is two things. One, I think the January 6th committee has given us and given us what I call a rebuttable presumption that Donald Trump should be indicted, which is to say that based on

what we've seen, there's enough to indict him. It is possible that there's stuff we haven't seen that the DOJ has access to that rebuts the likelihood or the expectation that he would be charged. So it is completely possible that there's there's material, there's evidence, there are witnesses that we don't, we didn't see in the hearings that could contradict what the witnesses we did see. I think it's unlikely, but it's certainly possible and we just are not in a position to know that. But the other thing is I don't necessarily agree with Glenn that the January 6th committee has provided DOJ with a roadmap or something along those lines. What I think that the committee hearings have done, and they've been magnificent,

and it really makes me jealous to see what you can do when you don't have to deal with the five-minute rule of going back and forth. And you have two and a half hours to make a great presentation, which they really have done. But what they've done is they've brought to life what will ultimately be an indictment. So if we didn't have the January 6th committee hearings and the Department of Justice charged this, we would have a document. You know, it would be dozens of pages, laying out the evidence, some of the evidence, laying out the case. But it would be written on a page. And the vast majority of Americans would not read it. And it would be very hard to sort of imagine what it is that they're talking about.

The January 6th commemorings gave us a visual view of what that indictment will likely charge. And it makes it very, it makes it easy. on the Department of Justice to be able to explain and for the American public to understand what the Department of Justice is charging because for those of us who have watched the January 6th committee hearings, we saw it. We saw the witness testimony. We saw video. We saw video of January 6th. I mean, we've seen all sorts of different, you know, we saw surveillance video that we hadn't seen. We saw the Nancy Pelosi's daughter's documentary last time around. So there's a lot that we have seen now about that time. that will be very helpful in painting a picture to the American people of what's in an indictment, which would not come out until a trial a year, two years after. Right. Yeah. Now, you're a former prosecutor. You're basically assured to end up in Congress. At the same time, we've seen a degree of lawlessness from the right that we haven't seen before. Is there a degree to which your presence in Congress will mostly be about oversight of government,

like to protect government from within that government? Perhaps not just federal government, but if you include state governments, you know, I think that's a huge part of what we need to be focused on the next two years. And part of the reason I ran for Congress is I have a tremendous fear as to what the Republican legislatures around this country are doing and passing laws designed to allow elected officials, partisan elected officials, in all cases, Republican in those states. overturn the will of the people. And, you know, that is incredibly scary. They are trying to fix what they believe the problems were in 2020 that prevented Donald Trump from overturning the election. And they're trying to cure that by changing the laws to allow them to do that. I think the federal government and the electoral reform, electoral count reform act of their versions, both in the House and the Senate, will help greatly to prevent that from happening again.

is a huge, huge threat to our foundational democratic values, to our voting rights, to our free and fair elections, which our whole system is based on. So yes, there will be a fair amount of investigation and oversight, I think, to ensure that we keep our democracy. With that said, that kind of lends itself to my next question, which is, what would you like to see happen in Congress

that's unique to you? So aside from codifying row and all that kind of stuff, is there anything that is specifically and personally important to you? Oh, there are tremendous number of things that are important to me. Obviously, making sure that we continue to have a robust and full democracy where the rule of law is followed and our institutions are supported and respected and separation of powers exists.

I mean, all of our foundational values of our constitutional republic. I mean, like a- If you're talking policy. Yeah. Yeah. So, you know, for me, I've got a number of things that I want to focus on probably too many because you can't do everything. But certainly given my background, having been involved in the criminal justice reform movement and having been a contributor to Michelle Alexander's book, the new Jim Crow, which is the seminal book on mass incarceration and the discriminatory impact of our criminal justice system.

And then having been a prosecutor, federal prosecutor for 10 years, I have a deep understanding of the criminal justice system. and I would like to dive in to criminal justice reform. I think there are a lot of things that we can do to make our system fairer, to reduce incarceration while also making everybody safer. So that's certainly an area. I want to focus on early childhood education and early childhood development, including universal daycare. The data shows that young, young children, zero to three,

who get access to high-quality daycare, to books, to early childhood education have outcomes that are far greater than what they would get without those. And it also helps to allow parents to continue to work and not to lose their jobs because they can go back to work right after childbirth. And then in my district here in New York, house as well as around the country, but there's a true housing crisis. I happen to live in the district with the most public housing, but there's also just an affordable housing crisis. And so I want to spend a good amount of time focusing on that and trying to figure out a way that we can provide more housing, more transitional housing, more supportive housing to not only get

homeless people off our streets, but to give them the dignity of living in their own home, which studies show is, and those who believe in housing first, as I do, that you get people shelter over their head, they take on, they assume a lot more responsibility over their life. and they're able to get jobs and to be self-sufficient and self-sustaining from there. Now, on the flip side of all of that very good, all those very good legislative proposals is that if Republicans are able to take the House,

we're certain to see investigations from here until the end of the earth on Hunter Biden and Hugo Chavez and whatever else they can cook up. What's your response to these threats by Kevin McCarthy and the GOP if they're to take the House? Well, I think they have to be very careful about overreaching, reaching. The reaction to the Bill Clinton impeachment was that his poll number skyrocketed, because people felt like he should not have been impeached for, you know, lying about his sex life.

And I think that the Republicans should take note of that, that if they go down that road, there very well may be a backlash. I think what you describe will certainly have it, but I also think that Joe Biden will be impeached or you know Alexander Mayorkas will be impeached and they will be impeached purely based on policy disputes not based on any constitutional crime that they may have committed such as abuse of power that Donald Trump did in the impeachment that I did where he used the power of the presidency for his personal gain or or obviously in the second impeachment where you know, he incited a coup and an insurrection and tried to overturn an election. I think if that is not impeachable, I don't know what is.

But there's no question. I think the House will do whatever it can to get retribution on the Democrats and to get revenge. And, you know, that that's something that we need to be prepared for. What's your message to Republican and independent voters amid the prospect of a Republican House majority, you know, where they would impeach Joe Biden for the crime of not being a Republican. Look, the message to them is the same as the message now, but it will just be borne out with their frivolous investigations that soak up, take up so much time, and their refusal to actually govern, their refusal to negotiate, their refusal to agree to any kind of legislation,

which I fully expect. And that message is they're no longer, the Republican Party under Donald Trump's control is no longer a good faith actor in the governance of our country. They are bad faith actors trying solely to gain power or to operate in their own personal interest, not in the interest of the party, of the country, or even of their constituents. And I think what they will show, based on their conduct that we fully expect, they will show Republicans, they will show independence that they are bad faith actors and that they should be voted out if they are voted in this time and i would add to that like by virtue of spending all of this wasting all of this time

investigating bullshit leads just just by virtue of them wanting to punish democrats all of the legislation that democrats were able to pass in the last two years like funding for for climate change and allowing the government to go to negotiate lower drug prices and the bipartisan infrastructure package in the American Rescue Plan, for giving student loan debt, all of these things, those would be put to the wayside just to make way for investigations that are just going to be fodder for Fox News. So, you know, I think like even just putting that tribalism aside, it's just what do you want Congress to be able to do for you? It's do you want them to be able to combat climate change and protect reproductive rights and continue making healthcare more

affordable? Or do you just want, you know, more red meat for the Hannity and Laura Ingram crowd? So. And you're right. And, I think the, you know, the best example of what I'm trying to say that you're, you're, I think, smartly adding on to is, you know, you look at the bipartisan infrastructure bill. There were a few Republicans who voted for it, but the vast majority did not. Those Republicans then go home and tout the infrastructure bill and the money that their districts are getting from the infrastructure bill, even though they voted against it. That is bad faith acting.

And that happens all around the country. You know, the Chipsville, which was the, you know, Chinese competition semiconductor technology bill, got 24 Republican votes in the House. Every group, every trade group, both the Chamber of Commerce, business, labor unions, everybody supported this, every special interest. But the Republicans couldn't bring themselves to,

most of them couldn't bring themselves to support something that the Democrats might get some benefit from because they are all about power. They're not about governing. They're not about improving the lives of Americans. And you can guarantee yourself that when all of these plants open up in a place like Wisconsin, every single Wisconsin Republican is going to be there cutting tape with, you know, big scissors and taking all the applause in. Okay, let's finish off with this. What does a candidate in your position, you know, running in a deep blue district, but who's already won the primary, what do you do in terms of helping other candidates?

it's now as we inch closer toward November 8th? Well, that's basically what I'm doing right now, especially in New York, where there are about eight very close races. There are several things that I have been doing. One is I've been going and going to fundraisers on behalf of my friends and fellow candidates. I opened, they created a leadership pack where I'm raising money so that I could give money to those in the New York delegation who are running for office, but also others around the country. I've been devoting most of my time. I've been out in the field trying to help some of the

other candidates. I've been devoting most of my time to helping other Democrats win. Because as you point out, as we've just been discussing for the last 20 or so minutes, this election is so important to determine whether or not we will continue to make great progress in our policy prerogatives and our democratic values. And you mentioned so many, the American Rescue Plan, the infrastructure bill, you know, the gun control legislation, chips bill, obviously inflation reduction act. I mean, so many things that the Biden administration and the Democratic House and Senate have gotten done in the past two years will all go to the wayside.

If the Democrats are not in the majority, the Republicans will stall everything, everything will provide to a halt. So I'm doing everything I can to help us keep the majority. Well, great. We'll leave it there. Dan, thank you for taking the time and looking forward to having someone like you with your experience, your background in Congress. Thanks so much for having me, Brian.

Great to see you. Thanks again to Daniel Goldman. One last note, if you can vote early in your state, vote early. If you vote early, Democratic campaigns can then move their limited resources from turning out supporters like you to turning out less likely voters like young people and independence. So get it done. and bring a friend and help make it easier for these campaigns

to use those resources to turn out the next person. Okay, 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. Thank you.