No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen - Republicans get nightmare news in Texas

Episode Date: March 4, 2026

Republicans are facing the worst case scenario situation in Texas. Brian interviews Gavin Newsom, California attorney general Rob Bonta, and the Democrat running against Maryland state Senate president Bill Ferguson, Bobby LaPin.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.

Republicans are facing the worst-case scenario in Texas, and I've got three interviews, Gavin Newsom, California Attorney General Rob Banta, and the Democrat running against Maryland State Senate President Bill Ferguson, Bobby Lepin. I'm Brian Taylor Cohen, and you're listening to No Lie. I'm not sure that the Texas primary could have gone any worse for Republicans. So it looks like James Talariko will advance the general election. Dave Washerman called this race early on for James, which is usually all it takes for this thing to be completely over.

importantly, Taurico's path to victory was his overperformance among Latinos in South Texas and the Rio Grande Valley. And Latinos will not only have an outsized impact on the 26th election, they'll probably decide the 26 election, meaning it's helpful to have advanced a Democrat who is supported by the most important voting bloc in Texas. But the real problem for Republicans lies in what happened in their primary. Between John Cornyn and Ken Paxton, both candidates failed to reach that 50% threshold, which means the Republican primary is officially going into a runoff. So what does that mean? It means three more months of infighting between Paxton and Cornyn, which means their favorability ratings will only be driven further down after 90 days of infighting.

And also, importantly, more money is going to be set on fire for three months now. Already, this is the most expensive Senate primary ever. The Texas Senate primaries cost almost $130 million, with about $90 million of that on the Republican side. So now, instead of spending money going after Tel Rico, Republicans are going to dump God knows how much more money into the Senate Republican runoff. So that is an absolute nightmare scenario. And let's be clear, the fact that this much money is being spent in Texas, in Ruby Red, Texas is a testament to how bad the environment is right now for the GOP. If a hundred million bucks is being spent in that state, imagine what that means for North Carolina and Alaska and Maine and Ohio,

which are generally considered even closer than Texas. And by the way, we've got excellent candidates running there too. Mary Peltola, Sherrod Brown, Roy Cooper, and then either Graham Platner or Janet Mills, those people can win. All of those people can win. And they can definitely win in an environment where Democrats are overperforming 12, 14, 16 points compared to 2024. And let's be clear, things are only going to get more difficult for Trump and Republicans as time marches on because he seems only capable of doing things that drive down.

favorable for himself and his party. Whether it's the fact that costs are surging thanks to his trade war, the Epstein cover-up happening in real time, a new war in the Middle East that Trump said could last forever, the fact that said war is raising gas prices and crashing the stock market,

I mean, if you were to engineer actions that could depress turnout for your own party and drive up enthusiasm for the other party, it would look exactly like what the GOP is doing right now. So I want to be clear. The point of this isn't to make anybody complacent. It's actually the opposite. It is to show you that something that seemed impossible a few months ago is actually within reach. We could win statewide in Texas for the first time since

1994. We could win the Senate and we can own both chambers of Congress serving as the ultimate check on Trump's abuses. And we can transform what the Democratic Party looks like so that it is less establishment, younger, more dynamic, more progressive, more tech savvy, and better representative of their communities. That is how we fix the Democrats' brand problems. by ushering in a new party that's ready to meet this moment in a way that we haven't seen before. And we just took the first step toward doing exactly that. Next up are my interviews with Gavin Newsom, Rob Bonta, and Bobby Lippin. No Lie is brought to you by Rocket Money.

So what is the most ridiculous hidden fee or subscription that you discovered you were still paying for? For me, I've got music service subscriptions that I haven't logged into since like 2022 that I've been paying for every single month. I know that people watching have got Jim. memberships and streaming services, you name it, that you're charged for every month and you're not even using. Well, Rocket Money is a personal finance app that helps find and cancel your unwanted subscriptions, monitors your spending, and helps lower your bills so that you can grow your savings. Rocket Money allows you to track subscriptions and cancel them within the app with just a few taps, saving you time and helping you avoid charges. You can even categorize

automatic transactions across your accounts and customize categories with tags to help shed light on your spending patterns. Set budgets and goals, get personalized insights and regular reports on your spending habits, you can even receive real-time alerts for large transactions, upcoming bills, refunds, and low balances. Let Rocket Money help you reach your finance goals faster. Join at RocketMoney.com slash Brian. That's RocketMoney.com slash Brian. RocketMoney.com slash B-R-I-A-N. I'm joined now by the Governor of California, Gavin Newsom. Thanks for joining me. Good to be with you in person. Oh, I appreciate it. First, I have to ask a question to get this out of the way. Is there anything you want to let us know

about aliens. Any information you want to divul. Go viral. Go viral. You know, I actually, I prefer to keep that between myself and my state security team. Well, I feel like I'm obliged to ask a follow-up, so are you sure? There's only so much the public can absorb. I just want to be careful. I do have a serious question. If there was something, would you know? Would they tell you something? You know, that's just something I just wish not to discuss publicly. I don't want... You know, you giving this open-ended answer, I'm not going to help me.

I'll never forget. I asked some other presidents, some other living presidents, the same exact question. But I never got a good... You've got a much more revelatory answer from Obama than these others. They're tight-lipped. Tight-lipped.

You know, so I don't know. I don't know if that leads more conspiracies or eliminates. It does. It definitely does. Yeah, it definitely does. But I say people believe like chemtrails. So honestly, like, you're part of that conspiracy on control. Conspiracy leaders are the currency of the Internet right now.

So everything has... And by the way, including why, we're dressed exactly the same today, which... Yeah, we'll just leave it, leave it vague. Okay, so let's jump into news of the day right now. We obviously have a lot going on, but a major story that's kind of been circulating on both the left and the right side of the aisle is the issue, the continued issue of the DOJ's throttling of the investigation into... Jeffrey Epstein. Recently, James Comer decided to haul the Clintons in front of the Oversight Committee to testify. Do you think that Donald Trump should be in front of that committee testifying?

Well, I mean, what's good for the goose by definition? Come on. I mean, you know, they set the tone that Tenor, Homer's got to do it. Or if he doesn't do it, the next administration, the next oversight committee needs to do it. By definition. Come on. They set, they set the standard. They lowered the bar, raised the bar, depending on one's perspective. And they may, made a mistake in that respect. I mean, what they put out today and yesterday as relates to some of the videos and how Hillary Clinton, you know, ran circles around him.

Even Bill did is, you know, indicative of the mistake that Comer continues to make as relates to his oversight functions. But, you know, by definition, the guy who appears more than anyone else in the Epstein Piles. And he's more responsible in more ways and more days for more of the distrust and mistrust, the redactions and the questions, the president himself,

must appear and testify. Why do you think that Comer was so hell-bent on trying to bring Bill Clinton in front of the committee and Hillary Clinton from the committee? I mean, it's the pizza gay folks. Back to your conspiracy and the open question. These folks are just, they thrive and live in that muck in that sort of dark corner of the world we're living in. I mean, this sort of cue world, et cetera.

And so in many ways, it made sense. Plus, they want to embarrass the Clintons. They want to make this a democratic thing. They want to do it through the lens of the prism of a political dynamic. and they want to move the bright lights away from Donald Trump. They're doing his bidding, period, full stop. They're not supine. They are activists in the cause of protecting Trump and Trumpism and the Maga movement.

And he is, I mean, he's just so, he's so bad at it. That's the difference here. Well, he's hand-handed. Yeah, exactly. And he's just, I mean, he's flailing and he's only got a few more months. That's the saving grace here. Look out when the shoe's on the other foot. when you've got guys that are approximate to where we are, Robert Garcia and these others

that know what the hell they're doing. And so, you know, these folks better strap on. They better put, get ready for, you know, make sure they're not deleting anything. Make sure they got lawyers and make sure that they're prepared to testify because a hell a lot of people are going to be brought in, including the DOJ itself. What would your message be to all of these MAGAverse figures, the Cash Mattel's, Dan Boninos, Pam Bondys, Alina Habas, all of these members of Congress, these senators who all through their, even J.D. Vance, who threw their weight behind this idea that the only way to usher in some degree of transparency, some degree of accountability, was to elect Donald Trump because they were the ones who would expose this criminal cabal of pedophiles

who wrote to the highest levels of government. And then you've got Donald Trump in office. You have all these people who built their brands off of condemning what was happening in the government, who are then put in positions of power like Cash Patel and Dan Bungino. And all of a sudden, we are immersed in yet another government-wide cover-up, the very one that they claim to condemn. Yeah, the difference is their fingerpits are all over this, and they're caught in plain sight. So they're all going to be held to their own standards,

their own standards of accountability, the ones that they were purporting and promoting, those were trying to hold everyone else to. Now they are part of the problem. They're not on the outside looking at Bondino, what Bonino, whatever is. He's back on the outside. But he whiffed, failed.

And so he either was lying, knowingly lying the entire time. I mean, he's yet to apologize for a knowingly, blatantly lying about everything, or he's completely in on that cover-up. And that will be uncovered. The difference is there will be accountability on the other side. Now, the only thing that can stop that, and it's something we need to be open, our eyes wide open to, is the fact that these guys could all get presidential pardons on the way out.

And I could see a scenario where Trump right now is deleting everything, not just deleting things, literally removing any, just scrubbing everything. We already found out that there's three files that contain information about allegations against Trump himself that miraculously, conveniently didn't manage to get released. Yeah. So look, nothing about everything. It's not complicated. I mean, this is, it's just he has done everything he could to stop these things from being made public. So by definition, there are things in there that imply that he is part of the problem, something big.

something big is in those files. Period. Full size. It's not complicated. This is not, there's no other rational conclusion. And it's always about him. He doesn't mind laying everybody else out. He may be a little uncomfortable about it, particularly if they're business partners, particularly if there's part of the grift and they're going to be part of the larger

economic opportunities for him personally. But at the end of the day, it's always about him. So there's something in the files that implicate him in a profound and outsized way because Trump can absorb. a lot and figures he can shape shift, change the conversation, shock and awe, move to, you know, advance a different agenda and then move the media focus elsewhere. But even he recognizes whatever's in there is so immovable in terms of the impact and damage it would do to him that he cannot allow it to be made public. Well, it's interesting you say that because there

was some sound released by Marjor Tiller Green who kind of revealed that Donald Trump told her that his friends would get hurt. which struck me as bizarre because Trump's the main character in all of the activities that he participates in. Like he, since when has Donald Trump done anything to protect anybody else not named Donald Trump? And so when he tells Marjorie Taylor Green, we couldn't possibly release the files because I wouldn't want my dear friends to get hurt.

And so I'll, I'll fall on the grenade here. Like me, I'll, like, so do you buy that idea that Donald Trump? Unless, again, the only way I buy that as a component. part, a partial rationale is there's an economic interest that's tied to that. To your point, he'll lay anyone out. He'll run anyone over. But if there's an economic benefit of not doing it, if there's some residual damage that could incur from it, he won't. So it's, again, it's just not that complicated. We tend to overcomplicate these things. What's interesting is some members of the Republican Party are waking up to it and the fact that the Republican

Party itself, even at least what they did release, is remarkable because the public opinion is just so overwhelming that they could not even resist the reality of their political situation, and they had to buck their dear leader. So I want to switch gears a little bit here. You've written the new book, Young Man in a Hurry. Epstein is not in it. So if you were lucky for anything on Epstein, it's not in this book. And this is out for sale. So for anybody looking to purchase a copy, again, the title is Young Man in a Hurry, and you can get it anywhere books are sold. There's one particular excerpt that I wanted to read. Ten months earlier, Bush had made the decision to invade Iraq after his administration's historic campaign of lies, convinced the American

people that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. We could not extricate ourselves from that costly conflict for another 17 years. And yet here we are in March of 2026, finding ourselves on the doorsteps of another war in the Middle Eastern country. And so given what you've written about there and what we all live through during the Bush era, what do you What do you foresee happening as Donald Trump continues to kind of jump head first into this thing, clearly with no plan? Which is remarkable because how badly that was implemented, adopted, and initiated. At least there was some vague attempt at building a coalition and a rationale.

I forgot who it was. Somebody said at least Bush had the decency to have a better lie. A better lie, yeah. Or at least put someone else up there to do it. Poor pal. But he tried to build an alliance. he'd at least try to build a rationale and try to get the public behind him. Trump didn't do any of that.

And so it's consistent, by the way. As you know, he's had more military strikes than Biden did in his entire four years in his first year. Right. And that includes, I mean, there are military actions not just in Iran, but Venezuela, Somalia, Nigeria, Libya. Yeah, and people forget that. It's the guy who promoted none of that.

So once again, Trump is consistent in his inconsistency, the fact that he said he would never do something like this and lied about it. J.D. Vance did the same. People like Toltzegabbert did the same. You go through the list of all these mega guys. They lied. And so that's unsurprising. But here we are with now a regional war. We've got the Gulf states under attack. We've got our allies under attack. We now have oil prices starting to sky rock. We got straight Hermus, which has 20% of the world's oil passing through it with not a lot of activity. We've seen the market volatility. We're now going to pay the price. Six members of the military have lost their lives. Others likely are going to lose their lives. And again, Trump can't land on a rationale. No imminent

threat. Yes, there was an imminent threat. Oh, inevitably there would have been because Israel was going to go anyway, says Rubio. Then they shape shift again, say, well, no, it was about the nuclear problem. Wait, you just said it was obliterated. So that doesn't fall through. No, it's about the missiles. No, it's about the proxies and the militia. No, it's about the Navy. They cannot simply land on any rationale. And so it's a remarkable, remarkable expression of sort of this cluelessness in terms of foreign policy, but the profound consequences in real time, unintended and intended that we're all going to have to suffer through. Why do you presume he actually did this? So there's a few, look, if I was going to give my best attempt to sort of give a rational theory of the case,

you know, it wasn't. By the way, this might be imbueing rationality where there exists. Where there is it, that after October 7th and what's happened in terms of Israel, not just in Gaza, but the impact to Hamas and the impact to Hezbollah in some of the Iranian proxies, what happened in that 12-day war last year and the degradation of their nuclear program, not to obliteration, but the success of those early strikes. They had a degraded regime, and they had this sort of once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, at least once-in-37 years of the current former regime leader, 47 years overall, to hit them hard and finally deliver that punch.

You have Netanyahu who's facing elections, potentially facing corruption charges, has opportunity to move forward with an extreme agenda, sort of Israeli apartheid, with the annexation of the West Bank. He's trying to take over any, or most influence in the Supreme Court, his own political survival,

obviously prodding and pushing in this respect. And Trump had sort of set himself up by putting so many military assets, and I think it was Napoleon or someone said, the only use that you can't that it is not appropriate for a sword is sitting on it. And so he couldn't sit on those assets. And so they moved. And in some ways, that was not necessarily shocking,

particularly after Trump's sort of drunkenness in terms of his forays in the Western Hemisphere with Maduro and how they're going to try to do, you know, we'll see where they are adjacent to that in Cuba and this sense of purity as he came out of that, those military strikes on those on those nuclear sites. So, you know, from that position and his position of weakness domestically, is desire to always be the star, doesn't care of as the heel or the hero, the ease to which the executive branch can move those operations and challenge norms, traditions, even the War Powers Act, in that respect, it wasn't shocking. But beyond that, what is equally shocking is,

The fact that it's clear they didn't even think through who would operate. They said, well, oh, yeah, we killed, ah, that was the guy we were hoping would take over. We killed him as well. And, oh, that person too. And well, we'll see. Maybe the person he said today could be worse. I don't know. Jesus, this all happened, it could be worse.

Yeah. I mean, it's jaw-dropping the incompetency at full display. You know, I've gotten the question, and I'm sure you've seen this question floating around too, is this idea that, you know, while all of this stuff is happening at the hands of somebody who feels completely reckless, is this some entrance into World War III? And so what would you say to that? Somebody asked you that question. We can't allow that to happen.

And that's a pit in the stomach. We have agency. We can shape the future. Congress can shape the future. Being more assertive. More assertive. Well, at least members of our party. You have to have some assertiveness to be more assertiveness.

I know. I'm talking about not the majority, but at least members and the minority that are aggressively calling out, which I appreciate. Should they vote in favor of bringing? bringing back their own authority. I don't know. I mean, I've, I still vaguely remember, and I think it was eighth grade or freshman sophomore year high school, the Constitution. And this notion co-equal branches of government of war powers and war powers act. I mean, it's not that complicated.

And so by definition, that's an easy vote for Democrats. But look, the nature that this is now, and you're seeing the UAE, you're seeing it. Obviously, Lebanon's getting more and more serious. back and forth with Israel. The fact that this now is a regional war is alarming beyond words. And obviously, seeing where China is in relationship to this, the impacts on oil and any oil impacts are going to disproportionately hurt them and they're in Asian allies, the United States allies, at least in Asia, where this plays as it relates to Ukraine vis-a-vis Putin. I mean, Putin's 0 for 3 here. I mean, the only good thing, look, is Supreme Leader was a tyrant.

Unquestionable. That's just a fact. But there are a lot of tyrant. out there. So was Saddam. There's consequences. When you take out the tyrant, you take out the leader, and you try to impress upon this notion of a regime change. And so that's the consequence we're going to have to live with, and we have to contain that. And so I hope that Congress's public opinion in here is what really matters. The markets contain more rational thoughts, period. Bond market, stock market, and the oil markets. So you had mentioned Donald Trump's, trying to basically usurp some authority domestically as it relates to these foreign incursions. And one concern that I've had is we saw just a few days ago.

The Washington Post reported that the Trump administration was basically putting together a memo that would declare that they have extraordinary powers in the aftermath of what they say was China interfering in the 2020 election. This would allow them. And I think the word that the Washington Post used was to unlock extraordinary presidential powers over voting. And then, of course, once the bombing started in Iran, one of the first things Trump posted was Iran had interfered in the 2020 and 2024 elections, and this is the consequence of that. And so we've seen numerous instances where Trump is looking for some foreign scapegoat to give himself the pretext to declare, you know, extraordinary powers domestically as far as our elections are concerned. If he does issue some executive order as the governor of California, what do you do?

in the immediate aftermath of that. And there was some implication that he was trying to connect the Fulton County issues with Maduro as well. I mean, so we've seen this over and over. He tries to exercise these emergency powers so he can have more authoritarian opportunities to assert himself without any oversight and without any rational engagement with the co-equal branch of government. Only it stopped them ultimately are the courts, which is interesting.

There's a vague heartbeat. I don't want to oversell the U.S. Supreme Court right now. but there have been at least two decent opinions as it relates to terrorists and obviously the National Guard. So look, where we are is we're calling this out in real time. We continue to make the point.

Future happens here first when it comes to so many of these things that our America's coming to traction. We saw that in the federalization of the National Guard. We saw that Greg Bovino and his masked men, the secret police. We saw that as relates to what he tried to do on election day with the Bortak teams

to chill free expression and speech, what he did with the DOJ, what he did by saying this election was rigged before one vote was cast on election morning through social. We made the point in a lawsuit months ago before the lawsuit was highlighted in Minnesota related to the DOJ going after our voting rules, so we're in litigation. I was in Fulton County talking to their elections officials and what he's trying to do there to take over that. I mean, this guy is not screwing around. The federalization of or nationalization

rather, of the vote. And then looking at 15 states in particular. Why did we do Prop 50? It was all a relationship that he will go to the ends of the earth to rig the election, to steal this election in plain sight. So, yeah, we have to draw the line, litigation, formal authority, use our moral authority, continue to remind people what's at stake, call every one of these things out. None of this is, we're not overstating things here. We may be understating.

And that report only highlights that. this guy is not screwing around and this is it for us this is this is the whole whole game 26 it's the only thing that matters is getting Speaker Jeffries in office only thing that matters is that we put everything on the line to save this republic to save this democracy so we can celebrate 220 you know 251 years of this historic project when you went to Fulton county what did they have to say it's jaw dropping what's going on there I mean it's actually shocking beyond words. Was there a mechanism

wherein they don't allow Tulsi Gabbard to get the ballots? Because she was able to do that at the end of the day. They took everything and now what they're trying to do is potentially use again some authority,

some mysterious authority to then appoint their own election commissioners to oversee one of the most critical county's election in the next ballot. I mean, this is happening in plain sight. So it's not, they're not,

you know, we may, you know, people may tune in and say, geez, these guys are a little bit, you know, unhinged in their comments. No, no, we're, this guy's unhinged in his action. Yes. And it's happening with the complicit propaganda network and Fox in this media that's not hauling them out and a supine Congress, to your point. And as current speaker who's in on this and all of the folks out there

that in the national security and these sort of power agencies and these sort of, you know, the OJ, IRS, all these others that are all part of this larger effort to suppress free speech, free expression, and ultimately impact the outcome of the election. And remember, if it goes south, he'll likely suggest that it was rigged, and then the vote count will be in doubt, and the prospects of even Speaker Jeffries is going to be put into question because Speaker Johnson may play games on the back end of this. So I want to use something that you said to go into our last topic here, and that is you had mentioned the idea of a complicit media.

And of course, we're here in Los Angeles. And we just found out that moving forward is the merger between Paramount and Warner Brothers Discovery, beating out Netflix to do so, which means if it does go through that David Ellison, the Ellison family, the pro-Trump Ellison family, would consolidate even more of their hold on the entertainment industry. and specifically on the news, because it's not just CBS where Barry Weiss is in charge, but now we've got CNN, which would be under the thumb of the Ellison family as well. And so I've spoken to the Attorney General, Rob Banta, obviously he has some authority, he has some standing to challenge this if he decides to, you know,

that his investigation shows that there's grounds to do so. From what you've seen on your vantage, and I know that your office is different from his office, but just based on what you've seen, do you think that this is a violation of antitrust law? Well, they're going to, and look, they have a responsibility review. It's sort of other AGs, not just the state of California. No state's going to be more impacted than California. We're going to be impacted in many different ways. You can just go to the immediate reality of the creative community impacts

and the loss of jobs. We've seen with these mergers in the past, even the Fox Disney merger, the number of productions that were substantially reduced, the marketing teams, the cloud computing. And the cost for consumers? Going to also be impacted because you've got more consolidation, less competition in the space. We'll also have impact on real estate here in Southern California

and obviously the streaming components that are merging. But you saw car at the federal level already say, everything looks rosy and fine. And the fact that you began with saying the Ellis family, I mean, David, who I know. But, you know, he's there with Lindsey Graham at the state of the union. And they're not even faking it. They're not even faking it.

And so, you know, it's code red. you know, and no one wants to see this kind of consolidation. It's TikTok. Now it's CBS and CNN. I mean, do you think for a second, Trump is not going through the list of primetime candidates to replace the current prime time lineup at CNN? I mean, I was just at CNN a couple days ago with Anderson Cooper and doing his podcast. You felt the chill there.

Yeah. And I mean, this is a chill. And now that chill is also going to be reflected with what's not said. on CNN starting yesterday the day before the segments they don't produce as everyone's pre-inian auditioning right now just trying to keep their careers going to save their jobs where producers start moving everybody's in this shape-shifting space and that's what's so insidious about what's going on so yeah I'm glad Rob's taking a look at it he of course sent a letter even if Netflix was going to do this deal to both suitors saying he's taking a look at that's his legal response and

obligation. But I hope all this stuff gets the kind of vetting that the American people deserve before it's too late. So I know that that is more of a national issue. But as far as the entertainment industry in California, I want to go a little bit local here because, again, we are here in L.A. And over the last, you know, decade or so, the industry has been pretty decimated, not just, and we've spoken about this virtually every time that we have an interview, we speak about this issue, not just because other states have been able to grab business from Los Angeles, but now other countries are doing the same. And so what needs to be done to get work back to Los Angeles, to get the industry back into Los Angeles?

Well, I mean, obviously, if you had a magic wand. So doubling the tax credits was great. It was important, but it was a stopgap measure. We need to substantially streamline all of the local permitting, which is a huge issue. It remains a massive issue. You do not have the local permitting problems in a lot of other states that continue to persist here in Los Angeles and in the region. We have to have a simple one-stop shop as it relates to that, not just state permits, federal permits, the extent there are some overlays, but notably local permits. So localism is determinative in that respect. Number two, the debate about above the line as it relates to the tax credit.

The ability to get folks from overseas, particularly compete with the UK, you have to start looking above the line. New Jersey did a version. Their tax credits have actually produced some results in that respect. That has a lot of support and a lot of opposition. But again, I'm Magic Wand right now. So you start to address that. You combine those two things. You have a much more proactive and assertive combination of state, regional, and local support for the industry,

support for advocating to writers, to write scripts that are place-based, which is a critical component of this. One of the things we've seen with a lot of production that has landed here, it started with the writer that started drafting and writing in a landscape. So we just need every writer to place their projects on Sunset Boulevard, basically. You got it. And so it's a combination of all those factors. If you're able to say that, and by the way, I have a crew here that's looking at you and nodding as you're saying, the streamlining the permitting process, and I know how it goes in Los Angeles versus other cities, if it's so easy, for you to say that, why is it not easy enough for the city council, for example, to just enact it?

Well, this is exactly what I'm doing with. It comes to the rebuilding. I was just in the palisades talking about some of the continuing issues as it relates to permits and rebuild for the fires itself. You know, it's just, you know what it is? It's just layers and layers of jurisdiction and bureaucracy. L.A. County has 88 cities. We just think about the functionality or lack thereof as it relates to just different jurisdictions and how you navigate within the county when you're doing shoots in multiple cities within the county. So it starts from that labyrinth and that perspective. And so you've just got to break down all these damn barriers. And that's about local leadership at the end of the day. Yeah, we can assert ourselves. We have executive orders.

We can do the tax cuts as it relates to the film tax credits that we did at the state level. But localism, I'll say it again, is determinative in that respect. And it's getting everybody to understand how vulnerable this moment is in Los Angeles. You've got so many great things happening, so much built investment in capital. This merger sort of offers, you know, they're going to have to double down on Burbank in many respects. It's a huge real estate portfolio play as well, which is important. Netflix still plays an outside role in terms of production down here. We're seeing the industry shift, and obviously that shift has its downside, but also there's some opportunities there. And so this is a critical moment. The state will play its role.

but again, in terms of streamlining, reorganizing, recalibrating, deal with nimbism, not just from a housing mindset, but a filmmaking mindset. Everyone has to understand how vulnerable this moment is, how we can lose this. And I also hope that Trump, I'll end on this, also takes this opportunity to do something for American filmmaking by creating some incentives federally so that we can bring back these productions domestically, and that also is a big part of this. Right. Like you said, I mean, the UK has taken a lot of work. Canada has been taking work

for years and years and years. If you were so effective at mobilizing this state as it relates to Prop 50 and these maps to fight fire with fire and neutralize the power grab that we saw in Texas, is there that same fervor to cut through red tape and kind of, you know, we've spoken about the abundance agenda and actually making liberal governance work. Is there is there that same desire among you know, down-ballot leadership in this state to do exactly that

to make liberal governance work? Well, I think there is. I think the public's had it. They want liberalism that builds. I mean, that's why we got the holy grail housing reforms done last year. But of course, I had to put it in the budget. Still wasn't easy.

I had to link it, which is not where you do legislation, but it was on land use reforms and then ultimately what we refer to to as secret reforms. And it was profound. it will be profoundly consequential. It was interesting that people that opposed it initially, sort of protecting their local flank, were quietly supporting it, but publicly had to oppose it

because of the politics. But that said the politics is beginning to shift. And so, look, I've done 28 executive orders, just waving, you name it, I've waived it coming back to the rebuild of L.A. post the fires. And to the extent there's an executive order I can sign in this space, I'm happy to do it. If you're able to waive, if you're able to waive those things, as a relates to Pacific Palisades and the fire rebuild. What about statewide? It's all through an emergency lens. Back to Donald Trump in the manufacturing of emergencies.

So it's a cautionary point. But in that emergency mindset, of course, we had it at scale and COVID, and people can adjudicate the merits and demerits of that. But in these emergency frames, you have a lot more, sorry, but when you have these sort of slower deaths, as it were, that are, you know, sort of flashing yellow. lights, it's more difficult. But I think we're there with Hollywood and I think, look, everyone says the right things. Everyone I talk to in local government, all the members of the board, city council, all say the right things. It's just a question of leadership landing and doing the

right things and being accountable. Well, to that end, I'm going to read a couple of sentences from your book here to end off on that note. And that was a conversation, I'm going to read about a conversation that you had on the phone. It was, what the fuck are you doing here? Why do we work so hard to win if you can't do something bold. This is a short life, Gavin. Your time as a politician to get things done is just a blip. And so to that end, I mean, there is not that much time. And we have the opportunity to, you know, rebuild this state and rebuild this city. And I do hope that people take that to heart and use the power that they do have to do exactly that. I love that. And that was a relationship to same-sex marriage in 2004 before anyone was ready for it. And so, look,

that's the spirit that defines the time. It's the abundance mind. said, it's a spirit, look, that I think we have to, in closing, acknowledge that Trump is brought to the endeavor. He's stretched the mind of possibility of what can be done. It's just destruction is not strength. He's not a builder. He's a destroyer. We need to be builders. The Democratic Party needs to be builders. But with that same mindset of urgency that's reflected in that quote, and I think in the urgency of your question. Again, the book is Young Man in a Hurry by Gavin Newsom. Again, I'm going to put that link in the post description of this video and also on the screen. Governor Newsom, I appreciate taking the time.

It's good to be with you. No lie is brought to you by Huell. So my biggest problem in 2026 by a mile is that I have no time for even the basic stuff. Work is so busy and, as I'm sure all of you know, the first thing to fall by the wayside is meals. By the time I even realized that I missed breakfast, I've already missed lunch. I need something easy and fast and complete, which is why I drink Hewle ready to drink literally every day. Right now, I'm drinking chocolate peanut butter flavor. which is my favorite flavor of any drink, and this is delicious.

It also legit fills me up so I'm not immediately running back to the fridge to snack five minutes later, which makes sense because it has 35 grams of protein, 27 essential vitamins and minerals, no artificial sweeteners, colors, or flavors, it's gluten-free, all of which means that for under five bucks per meal, you get a complete meal that you can literally grab and go. I should also note that if you want to really control which ingredients are added, Heel also has a powder option so that you can add fruits or creatine, or peanut butter or anything you want. So either way, whether you're on the go with this ready to drink

or making it at home with the powder, you're all taken care of. So if you're trying to stay consistent, this combo makes it very easy. We've got a limited time offer. Get Hewled today with my exclusive offer of 15% off online with my code BTC at Hewle.com slash BTC. New customers only. Thank you to Hewle for partnering and supporting this show. I'm joined now by the Attorney General of California, Rob Bonta.

Thanks for joining me. My pleasure. Good to see you, Brian. So news just broke that Paramount will be merging with Warner Brothers Discovery, beating out Netflix for this merger. And it consolidates a lot of the media under the pro-Trump Ellison family. Obviously, this is what Trump wanted. He seemed hell-bent on making sure that Netflix didn't get this deal, that it would be Larry Ellison and David Ellison who actually got this deal so that they can turn CNN, for example, into what they've turned CBS into, which is a pro-Trump media outlet. But recognizing that this isn't going to face any pushback at the hands of the DOJ or the FTC, who obviously wants this deal and they exist as appendages of Trump himself, there still exist the possibility that state attorneys general can have some impact here. And nobody has more standing in terms of these two movie studios merging than California.

And so as the Attorney General of California, can you give some insight into the standing that you might have in terms of stopping this from happening? Absolutely. And first I'll say this is not a done deal to those who think it is. I say not so fast. There are regulatory hurdles, including my office's overview and review and on, you know, pending current investigation that need to be completed. And so we are looking at this merger and whether it violates antitrust law, whether it

has, whether it's anti-competitive, whether it is going to raise prices and lower wages for workers and reduce competition and quality and choice, all part of the analysis. And we have independent authority as a state. And there are other states who are interested in conducting a review as well, regardless of what the United States federal government does, regardless of what the US DOJ does. If the US DOJ approves the merger, we still have an opportunity to block the merger if we wish. You know, we have to finish the investigation and come to some final conclusions about what action is appropriate, maybe we will agree that the merger can go through. Maybe we think it should be

blocked or maybe something in between. But the main point is we have independent authority and we're going to exercise that authority. We're going to do it right. No politics, just looking at the law, looking at the facts, looking at the impacts that are appropriate to look at under an antitrust analysis, get our experts under the hood and make a decision. So we're engaged in that process now, and we will complete that process and make a final decision. In the event that you do find that this is a violation of antitrust law, who's the arbiter of whether or not that's true? Is it the California state system or is it the federal court system?

This is usually in federal court, but when we bring cases with the federal government or multi-states and we're asserting something under federal law like the Sherman Act or the Clayton Act, often we're in federal court. Not always. We have a case right now against Amazon where we have a state law antitrust claim under the Cartwright Act only, and we're in San Francisco Superior Court and state court. But more often than not, particularly when it's a multi-state action and when federal, there's what we call a federal question, a federal statute at issue, again, the Clayton Act or the Sherman Act, and we are in federal court, federal district court. I ask that question because the end of the line for the federal court system is obviously the U.S. Supreme Court, which is a political actor. I mean, they might claim that there's some neutral arbiter, but it is a political actor. And so does that play any role in the decision-making process as to where this whole case is going to end up? Like, could that play some role in terms of whether you look into violations of state versus federal law when you're determining where and how to bring this case? Generally not. It's something that we're not unaware of, I will say, recently some big victories for California and massive embarrassing losses for Trump in front of the U.S. Supreme Court where he has three of his appointed justice is serving, whether it be the National Guard case out of Illinois, the recent terrorist case last Friday, his centerpiece economic policy, or Prop 50 California's lawful partisan redistricting. measure, we want on all those in front of the U.S. Supreme Court. And Trump very much wanted the opposite outcome. So I think the Supreme Court can be a place where when we bring the law on

the facts and we bring in a compelling case, as we did in all those cases, we can prevail. But where we have like our live nation ticket master case in the District of New Jersey, our Amazon case is really unique in being in superior court. So it's more likely than not that we'd be in federal court. And these cases don't often get. to the U.S. Supreme Court. They're usually addressed at the district court level, sometimes with appeals, but

usually, you know, we have a judge assigned to the case, and, you know, we get to it and outcome on liability, and then, you know, we move to damages and potentially injunctive relief, and the U.S. Supreme Court doesn't usually have a role to play. And I do want to talk about those other cases that you have going on right now, including the case

against Amazon and the case against ticket master, obviously. The latter is a highly publicized, one because everybody knows what it's like to try and buy tickets these days. But I want to stick with the Paramount Warner Brothers Discovery merger for just another moment. In terms of the consolidation of these major media conglomerates, when we've seen other media companies merged together, what kind of an impact has that had on price? Because obviously, you know, the point of these antitrust laws is to make sure that it doesn't

result in higher prices for consumers. it would lend itself to reason that when these, you know, that when an already dwindling number of movie studios or media companies merged, they then have the ability to raise the, raise prices. And so I'm just curious in navigating this question right off the bat in previous murders, have you seen that exact behavior happen? Because that might lend some insight into whether or not what we're going to see right now could be legal or illegal. Yes. We have seen this before. Generally, when you're have corporate consolidation, prices go up. Quality goes down. Wages get lower. Choice is decreased.

And so, you know, there's less competition. We want high competition. We want affordable prices. We want choice for the consumer. And so corporate consolidation is antithetical to all those things. It could still be lawful. That's why we have to look. But there are some real red flags here based on the size of these, as you mentioned, these corporate conglomerates, they operate in multiple markets. They're not just studios. They also operate in the streaming market. As you mentioned, they also operate specifically in news.

And so there are massive impacts across multiple markets of a potential merger here. But generally, yes, when you see corporate consolidation, you also see prices going up along with it. Okay. So I want to zoom out to the other, to include the other cases that you see. spoke about. But before we get into the specifics on Amazon and Live Nation slash Ticketmaster, why is it the responsibility of attorneys general like yourself to take this on when, you know, isn't this exactly what the FTC should be doing at the federal level? Like, isn't it their job to make sure that especially in an administration that beat its chest about affordability,

that they're not creating anti-competitive behavior that only, to your exact point, raises the prices for consumers by allowing mergers like we're seeing right now. A very astute question. Yes, the federal government has traditionally played this role to enforce antitrust law, whether it be the United States Department of Justice or the FTC, as you mentioned. Both have big offices, big teams that have been able to do this work. These are high resource cases. They require economists and experts and large trial teams to present the case and apply the law. And traditionally, the federal government has been a central player, not the central player in these cases. In addition to the tariffs, which raise prices for

consumers across our nation, not enforcing antitrust law is perhaps the, you know, just as powerful or an additionally powerful driver of costs that the president is allowed. for a president who said he was going to reduce costs on day one. So if he didn't have his unlawful tariffs and just let them be struck down by the Supreme Court, or never implemented unlawful tariffs in the first place. And if he just did what every other antitrust, federal antitrust division did at the US DOJ and through the FTC and enforced the law, he would reduce prices. But he's going the opposite way, costs are going up.

So in the absence of the federal government doing their role, doing their job, states need to step up. fill that role and fill that gap. California is the largest state Department of Justice in the nation. The only Department of Justice larger than us is the U.S. DOJ. We have a big team that we focus on and prioritize antitrust work and we're prepared to do our due diligence on these cases, complete our investigations for the ones we're investigating, you know, go to trial if necessary or resolve the case in a way that's consistent with our demands if we're going to settle on all these cases. And we will. And we will. We're not likely going to be operating alone.

You know, our ticket master, Live Nation case is already a multi-state case with multiple states in it. And I know there's interest from other states in Paramount Warner Brothers as well. Can you talk about those two outstanding cases, the Ticket Master Live Nation case and the Amazon case? Sure. I mean, we have a, we filed a suit already, we being the federal government and multiple states in the district court of New Jersey against Live Nation Ticketmaster for violating

federal anti-trust law specifically the Sherman Act. So this one actually includes the DOJ along with the state AGs. Is that correct? It does. It does. And it started under Biden. They're in the live music, the live concert industry, ticket master live nation operates tickets, promotion and venue, all of them. And they're. And they, They leverage them against each other. They require sort of tying arrangements so that you have to use all three. And they stifle competition and they jack up prices. As you mentioned, this is an area where people who have been, you know,

have their own personal experience with Ticketmaster know these prices are just way too high and it doesn't make sense. So there's a lot of public sentiment behind this legal case. It's moving towards trial now. We believe that the federal. federal government might be not acting as we hope they would in staying strong and staying firm and having strong demands in a strong position for settlement. And if we can't get that in settlement, they're going to trial.

So it's looking more and more unfortunately like the states are going to have to carry the load, which we can and we will. But it is, to your point, very unfortunate that the federal government is asleep at the wheel when it comes to enforcing antitrust law and protecting consumers and protecting anti-competitive conduct by these biddy corporations. And then the Amazon case? Yes. Amazon is a case we brought on our own.

Just California, we were the only plaintiff. We're suing in California Superior Court in San Francisco. And we assert essentially a price fixing scheme where Amazon claims that they have the lowest price on their platform. But what they do is they actually raise prices when there was a, a vendor on their platform has the same product on another platform, another retailer's site, at a lower price, they demand that the vendor raised the price on the other platform. So it's the same as the higher price on Amazon.

And Amazon can then claim it's the lowest, you know, there's no lower price offered, but it's because they price fixed and raised prices across different retailer platforms. They might also ask the vendor to take their product off the other platform so there's no comparison price. And in this way, Amazon raises prices instead of lowers them by using their power, their leverage, their conduct to really squeeze these vendors who need Amazon to be able to sell their product and be able to be successful. So just this week, we filed a preliminary injunction motion.

During the course of our investigation, we found additional evidence supporting this scheme and providing additional documentary evidence to support it, and we are moving immediately to have that action and that conduct stopped. If you want to talk about, you know, lowering prices, this, you know, so many people who use Amazon, and Amazon is raising their prices through this illegal price fixing scheme, and we think this can make a real difference in everyday Americans' lives, and it's unlawful. In the event that California is successful, is there a way that other state AGs could copy the exact case that you've brought against Amazon and, you know, replicate it 49 other times so that they can either, you know, put Amazon in a situation

where they're going to lose 49 other times or recognize that if they're going to engage in monopolistic behavior or anti-competitive behavior, that it's going to cost them a lot more money. And so that might force them into a position where they preemptively change their ways, so that they're not, you know, so that there's some deterrent effect, basically. Yeah. You know, California drives markets a lot. Largest market in the nation, of course, fourth largest economy in the world if we were a nation. So it might be that Amazon should we prevail here and secure the relief that we believe is warranted, that they could change their practices throughout the United States of America.

Don't know that, but that's not impossible. If not, then, yes, we do. provide a sort of blueprint and a guide book for how others might pursue similar cases. They'll need to have a similar law like Gar-Cartrite Act here. We have our own antitrust law here, the state of California under state law. I don't think all states have that. So they would need to have the appropriate tool. But yes, either we are able to deliver the result nationwide on our own or other states can join in the effort. And that's a good point to other states to consider adopting legislation like the Cartwright Act so that in the event we have a Republican Party

in power that is perfectly content to engage in the cronyism that we're seeing right now. At least there is some bulwark at the state level like the one that we're lucky enough to take advantage of here in our home state of California. So with that said, Attorney General Bonta, as always, I appreciate the time. I appreciate it too. Thanks, Brian. Good to see you. I'm joined now by Bobby Lippin, who is running in Maryland's 46 Senate District.

Bobby, you are running against somebody who's been dubbed the most hated Democrat in America. You just found a way to get his attention in a way that you haven't been able to do before. Can you explain what you did? So coming into this race, you know, what pulled me into this race to give you background to understand where this came from? The guy that I'm running against twice killed a provision in a bill that would have prevented Maryland law enforcement cooperation with ICE, the call 287G agreements. I live in a pretty highly immigrant neighborhood, and so that really made me angry. I announced that I was running against him,

and just hours after I announced my candidacy, he turned his, he changed his position on 287G agreements. And we actually passed the ban in this session. It's been signed into law. So with redistricting, because redistricting is such an important issue, you know, you can't turn on the news, without seeing the horrible things that are happening in this country. And I try to use my voice, my social media,

you know, my volunteers, my supporters, to try to push redistricting into the point that in a representative democracy, where we elect people to go to represent us, the last thing that should happen with any type of bill that is popular or impactful is that it dies behind closed doors. So the redistricting bill in Maryland overwhelmingly passed in the House of Delegates. In fact, each district in Maryland has one senator, or three delegates. And the three delegates in the district that I'm running in,

basically the three delegates that work with my opponent, Bill Ferguson, all three of them voted for redistricting in the House of Delegates. When that bill was sent over to the Senate, Bill Ferguson used his power as Senate president to basically kill it in committee. Didn't have a hearing, didn't have a vote. So we started a petition to move on. And the petition basically said, you know, regardless of where you are in redistricting, you know, whether you're for it or against it. I think we can all agree on this. that in a representative democracy, that only works if the people we elect actually represent us. And so by my opponent disallowing the rest of the 46 senators in the state of Maryland,

from even having a debate or a vote on the floor, it literally attacks the foundations of democracy itself. So we had almost 7,000 signatures for that petition, basically requiring that there be a debate and a vote on the Senate floor. we got that in about a week and I delivered it personally to the State House. I wasn't allowed to see him because I wanted to give it to him personally face to face, you know, man to man

type of thing, but that wasn't accepted. So a nice police officer over there delivered it to his office for me. From that point, we heard nothing. The petition's still out there. It's getting more signatures, but in the reality of things, and I

guess this is the sad part here, because our deadline to Fawford candidacy in Maryland was Tuesday. And in order for redistricting to even be still an option, we would have to pass now a series of new laws in both the House of Delegates and the state Senate. Basically moving back the deadline to Fawford candidacy and also moving back our primary, which if we couldn't even get redistricting to have a simple debate in the Senate, it's just out of the question that these two additional laws will probably be introduced and voted on. Yeah. You know, Bobby, I think one of the biggest problems that Democrats are contending with is this idea that there are a lot of anti-democratic or undemocratic aspects of the party.

You know, it's been plaguing us for a decade now. I mean, we saw the super delegate situation with Bernie and Hillary. And even in this latest general election cycle, there always felt like there wasn't enough of a choice. What is this? What is something like what Bill Ferguson is doing here or has done here? How does that further add to the brand problems that the Democrats are contending with? It's a hundred percent. And I don't want to say it's all Democrats either. I just want to say that it's status quo establishment Democrats, you know, the corporate-backed Democrats, because there are a ton of people out there like me, progressives who aren't taking money from corporate packs,

who aren't taking money from developers, who are earnestly doing this because I'm a working person trying to fight for working person. And I feel both parties, Republicans and the establishment Democrats, aren't fighting for me and people like me, obviously. And the redistricting goes into this deeper conversation about what's happening in America. When I was a government teacher in high school, I used to tell my students that the biggest impact on your life is local government. You know, all government is local. And if you think about what's happening throughout this country, it is horrible. Obviously, we need to win back Congress. I want to say that that's so super important. We need to fight back

against authoritarianism. But while we're all focusing on Donald Trump, and everyone is focusing on DC, like all the Democrats, for the last decade, MAGA has quietly and methodically been looking at state races. They've been trying to take over school boards. They've been trying to take over city council races. They're trying to take over state legislators, legislatures. And meanwhile, the Democrat establishment is focusing so much on DC, so much on an organization that has than a 30% chance of actually passing meaningful legislation that working people by large amounts were to agree to in this country. It's literally Congress just seems like if I would running for Congress when I won, I would feel like I'm going to D.C. to just bat my head against the wall

because it doesn't seem, we've seen it all like nothing happens. And the best that we can rely on from this Congress is strongly worded letters to Donald Trump, you know? Yeah. Yeah. Well, also, also, I'm sure there's a post office or two getting renamed. So don't forget about it. Oh, yeah, right, right, right. And probably batterers going up and so on and so forth. But like, and this is what I mean.

And this is what I want people to understand because it's so super important to understand how local politics is. When Florida banned books, that wasn't Congress that did it, it was their state legislature. This week alone, we saw that transgender people in Kansas are being threatened with jail time. if they don't turn in their driver's license and their IDs and change it to their birth gender, literally you'll go to jail, either you out yourself or you go to jail, and that was a state-made legislature. You know, if we look at energy prices, if we look at the way SNAP is administered, if we look at how we spend money on education, that's all of your state legislature.

Even redistricting itself, let's be honest about this. Texas, California, Ohio, North Carolina here in Maryland, wasn't it. Congress, all state legislatures. And while it is important to win back Congress and it is important to support progressive candidates who are trying to shake up the party, the more you ignore the local and the state, your city councils, your county councils, that is how MAGA can have a lifetime hold on this country. I just want to remind people about them. I mean, look at the guy that I'm running against, okay? We already talked about that, you know, hundreds of Maryland families were deported because he failed to ban 287 agreements. Why? Because he said he was afraid of retaliation from

Donald Trump. I enter the race as a good work in person trying to do good by my community, and he changes his stance. I have, I have poor folks, brown and black folks all over Baltimore City that lived near a trash incinerator, a trash incinerator in which my candidate took money from. And meanwhile, it's causing $100 million worth of health damages each year for working people. And while everybody is focusing on Donald Trump and the Congress and so on and so forth, we have state legislators out there all throughout this country who are taking advantage of local people. That is where I really want to implore people that they have to pay attention. The biggest investment you can make in life, the biggest investment is investing in someone who will go to,

you know, whatever your state house is or whatever your city council is, and literally bring your voice with them, someone who is unbought by the corporations and only owes allegiance to the people, the working people of this country. Through Citizens United and through all of these things that we have seen, you know, in the past couple of years, you know, it feels hopeless out there, right? Brian, it feels hopeless. But here's the hope in this. Here's the hope in this. And I want to be clear about this. There's what, 537 elected federal politicians in D.C.

there's roughly 8,000 elected state representatives throughout this country. There are 165 million working people in this country. So although the billionaires can use their money to buy elections like they buy a yacht, and our media owned by the same billionaires are trying to keep us distracted by fighting each other over cultural wars while they're trying to win this class war, we have to remember the strength that people have. 165 million working people in this country, if we rise up together, if those people would find a guy like me and donate 27 bucks to a campaign, I'm running against the guy who's got two million. This is how we take our voices back.

By one city council district at a time, by one county council district at a time, by one state at a time, and then we'll take the federal government. That was perfectly put. I'm going to put the link to that point before we continue to donate to Bobby's campaign right here on the screen and also in the post description of this video. If you've got a few bucks and you're looking to help elevate the voice of somebody whose voice clearly needs to be elevated, please take this opportunity right now. It can have a big, it can have a big impact. And look, there is a reason that, you know, I don't interview a lot of state Senate candidates in various states across the country. In fact, I don't think I've interviewed any state Senate candidates in any state across the country. But there's a reason that I'm interviewing Bobby and that I've interviewed Bobby before. It's because his voice is one that we need to elevate. This is somebody who should be in a position of power. So again, if you have the opportunity to donate, please go ahead and do so. And I got to say Brian real quick. And it's not about me, man.

It's about all of us. Like, we all feel the same way. I'm just saying what everyone is saying at home in their living room. Everybody watching this video and your videos, everyone's saying the same thing. We were just fed up, you know? And, but yes, I do need the help. So make good change.com. I would appreciate you all if you can just pitch in what you can.

27 bucks for democracy, y'all. Bobby, to that end, what is the first? of your campaign. I know, I know what was the impetus to kind of jump in and join, but let's say you have the opportunity to represent your constituents in the 46th district in Maryland. What's going to be your priority? Affordability, 100%. I mean, it's, I think it's the, you know, we listened to that ridiculous state of the union the other day, right? This ridiculous state of the union that's trying to tell us, oh, yeah, the economy's great. Everything's good. The Dow's at $50,000. Um, but, Meanwhile, that doesn't really translate well into bread prices or, you know, the amount of money that we have in our bank accounts.

Right now in Maryland, and in most, in the 13 states in our energy grid, are facing incredibly high energy bills. I mean, energy bills that are so high that senior citizens are now choosing between keeping the lights on or buying their prescription medication working families are having to choose between going out and like taking their kids to a movie or paying their electricity bill. I mean, I'm talking about my electricity bill. I live like an 1100 square foot home. See, guys, I'm truly a working person. I live in an 1100 square foot home with my wife, and our electric bill was nearly $500 for one month. How is that even possible?

And in the end, you go back and you see that the guy I'm running against has taken over $100,000 as the Senate president from BGR, local utility monopoly. He's taken personally, you know, tens of thousands of dollars from utility companies. And then he comes to the people and he says, oh, I'm blaming BGE on all this. But how can you simply stand there and tell working people that, oh, the utility company is super, super bad? When literally, what were they paying you for, Bill?

What did they give you 25? In 2024, he hosted a $25,000 per ticket. Colorado getaway. We live in Maryland, okay? Colorado giveaway, of which the CEO of BGE attended and the CEO of Washington Gasolite and United Healthcare and Care First, $25,000 a ticket. And what's crazy is if you think about that, like $25,000 is a ton of money to me, you know, as a working person.

But if you step back and you look at how much profits, the utility companies, how much profit Exelon made in 2024, $25,000 to them is the equivalent of $7. Yeah. So for $7. sense, Bill Ferguson sold these senior citizens out, sold these working families out. It's struggling young people trying to just afford a life. You know, we have rent prices that are spiraling out of control. The American dream is dead. You know, like everyone is talking about rent stabilization and rent caps, and that is very much needed. But we also have to talk about this American dream

when people can own a home. You know, we're pushing so many young people and just being renters and no one is talking about, well, what should we do to make housing more affordable where young people can have that American dream that folks had decades ago? The pride of owning your own home and be able to have some spending cash in your pocket at the end of the day to go out to a movie, to go have a drink with friends, to go watch a football game. Affordability is the biggest thing. And for years from the beginning when they enslaved people to do the work of the rich,

Then the immigrants came to this country to do the work of the rich. All mistreated. All mistreated because the rich have always controlled the roost. But in the end of the day, the hope is this. 537 federal politicians, 8,000 state politicians, 1,165 million of us, hardworking Americans who built this country with our hands. That's the power, man. Perfectly put, Bobby.

I'm going to leave it there. He's running against Bill Ferguson, who has been dubbed the most hated Democrat in America we don't have to settle for bad Democrats. We don't have to settle for bought and sold Democrats. We have a solution here. It's right in front of us. I would ask if you have the opportunity to donate, donate, if you have the opportunity to volunteer for Bobby's campaign,

volunteer for the campaign. If you know anybody in Maryland, please send them this video, send them Bobby's information, subscribe to his social media and share his social media post with them. We don't have to settle for what we don't deserve here. So Bobby, best of luck in the campaign trail, as I've said before, and thanks for taking the time today. Hey, thank you, Brian.

Thank you for you using your voice too, man. I appreciate you. Thanks again to Gavin Newsom, Rob Bonta, and Bobby Lepin. That's it for this episode. Talk to you on Sunday. You've been listening to No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen. Produced by Sam Graber, music by Wellesie, and interviews edited for YouTube by Nicholas Nicotera.

If you want to support the show, please subscribe on your preferred podcast app and leave a five-star rating and a review. And as always, you can find me at Brian Tyler Cohen on all of my other channels, or you can go to bryantylarkoen.com to learn more.