No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen - Republicans' vile abortion scheme gets exposed

Episode Date: May 15, 2022

Republicans' insidious scheme to make you think abortions are safe gets exposed in devastating fashion. Brian interviews Planned Parenthood president Alexis McGill Johnson about to extent to which abortion bans actually stop abortion, how those same Republicans who wail about the sanctity of life fare when it comes to maternal mortality rates in red states, and what Planned Parenthood is doing to help. And NY Times Opinion writer Kara Swisher joins to discuss Elon Musk’s latest announcement that his Twitter purchase is “on hold” and whether she thinks Trump will actually come back to Twitter.Donate to the "Don't Be A Mitch" fund: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/dontbeamitchShop 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 the Republicans' backhanded effort to make you think abortions are safe and how that strategy backfired. I interview Planned Parenthood President Alexis McGill Johnson about the extent to which abortion ban stop abortion, how those same Republicans who wail about the sanctity of life fair when it comes to maternal mortality rates in their states, and what Planned Parenthood is doing to help right now. And I'm joined by New York Times opinion writer Kara Swisher to discuss Elon Musk's latest announcement that his Twitter purchase is on hold, and whether she thinks Trump will actually

come back to Twitter. I'm Brian Tyler Cohen, and you're listening to No Lie. So we spent the last week or so grappling with the reality that Roe will soon be overturned, and I want to be clear about what's coming next, because I think that if there's one thing we can all see now in retrospect, is that this was a long time coming, that the writing was on the wall. Now, that's not to say that it was a surprise to everyone, but I mean, even with a 6-3 conservative court, even with the state abortion bans, I honestly didn't think that it would actually happen. that it has, I think we need to be clear-eyed about what's next.

There are a few strategies being employed by Republicans here. We've got the one that I talked about at length last week, the Mitch McConnell strategy, demanding that we not speak about the merits of the road decision, but rather that goddamn it we focus on the leak. You need, it seems to me, excuse the lecture, to concentrate on what the news is today. Not a leaked draft, but the fact that the draft was leaked. Yeah, some real pay no attention to the man behind the curtain vibes on that one. And of course, the rationale is beyond obvious.

If Republicans can make you look at the shiny thing over there, then maybe you won't notice the fact that the GOP has stripped away one of the most popular and deeply rooted rights in American history. And then you've got a newer one, the Marsha Blackburn strategy. She had tweeted this past week, quote, overturning Roe v. Wade would not ban abortion. It would send the decision back to your state. The state's rights argument,

which unto itself would be bad enough. Like, states' rights is what these Republicans use as code because they know it would be too toxic to just come out and say the things that they stand for. Like, these are people who think that same-sex marriage shouldn't be banned necessarily. It should just be up to the states to decide. And then, of course, many of those states will ban it.

Like, the people who shilled for the Confederacy say that the Civil War wasn't about slavery, it was about state's rights. What they stopped short of saying is that it's states' rights to allow humans to be enslaved. So anyway, that's Marsha Blackburn's argument, that don't worry, it'll just become a state's issue, and then if you live in a state where it's legal, you'll be fine. And that if you want it to be legal, then just elect pro-choice representatives, blah, blah,

as if state legislatures weren't gerrymandered to within an inch of their lives. That whole argument would be bad enough unto itself. But of course, a number of Senate Republicans, including Marsha Blackburn, also went ahead and sponsored legislation called the Life at Conception Act, which would ban abortion nationwide, quote, at all stages of life, including from the moment of fertilization. In other words, she's out here saying, don't worry, it's not like this is nationwide, while simultaneously trying to ban abortion nationwide.

So the idea that we should ever give these people the benefit of the doubt is absolutely asinine, just like they swore up and down that Roe was settled law. Now they're out here swearing up and down that is just a state's rights issue. And then mark my words, the moment they get the majority in Congress, they'll introduce a nationwide ban on abortion. And I'm not sure if you remember my interview last week with Leah Lippman, but I asked her if the Supreme Court would uphold a nationwide ban on abortion. And here's what she said. They could invoke the idea that fetuses are people under the Constitution who are entitled to constitutional protection and therefore governments have to criminalize abortion.

There are seeds of that, frankly, in this draft majority opinion that was circulated. The opinion cited in a footnote in amicus brief by two scholars, John Finnis and Robert George, who have argued that fetuses are people who are entitled to. to constitutional protection. And under that theory, governments must prohibit abortion. The issue can't just be returned to the states. In theory, the Supreme Court could refuse to allow a law codifying row, but then they could allow a law of federal law banning abortions. Yep, absolutely. Under that theory, the federal government would not just be permitted to ban abortions, but probably required to do so. So when I say that they won't stop with abortion, that they won't stop with plan B, that they won't stop with birth control, this is why.

The goalposts will never stop moving, and they will have zero shame about it. The fact is that what happens in November will directly determine whether we see more abortion bans, contraception bans, and so on in the states. It'll also determine whether Republicans control the House, which, as we know, would refuse to certify any win in 2024 for a Democratic candidate, which will then, of course, directly impact whether a nationwide abortion ban gets signed into law or not depending on who the president is. So I don't think I have to explain how much is at stake in November.

And just as a quick aside, like I know that there are people who are going to say, look, we already voted. We have Democrats in charge in the House and the Senate in the White House. And you're right. And we're close. But we are only to vote short in the Senate of eliminating the filibuster. Once we get just two more senators, we can eliminate the filibuster and pass a law codifying abortion protections with a simple majority. And if the Supreme Court doesn't uphold it, then we expand the court. And by the way, that's not radical. What is radical here is allowing a court to undermine the will of 70% of Americans by stripping women of the reproductive freedom because it doesn't comport with their theology. So I know that it's easy to say

we already showed up, but just know that we are close. And the answer here is very clearly to push a little bit more and we can fix this, as opposed to, you know, giving up and letting the Republicans take control because they will undoubtedly ban abortion, ban contraception, ban whatever they don't want the moment they take power. That's our message right now. Give us two more pro-choice senators and your rights will be protected. But before that, Democrats and Congress should do their part by keeping this issue top of mind. I spoke about this last week, and crooked media's Brian Boitler also spoke about this in his newsletter. Schumer should be bringing a bill codifying row up for a vote every single month. And if and when that bill fails at the hands of Republicans,

then vote on a bill protecting birth control, and then vote on a bill offering federal protections for rape victims, and then a bill offering federal protections for insect victims, and then a bill protecting your rights across state lines for abortions and on and on and on. And if Republicans block them, then people will know, but make them take these votes. This isn't just a one and done thing. Republicans voted more than 70 times to repeal Obamacare, 70 times, for something that two-thirds of Americans opposed. And yet we should stop at one vote to actually protect a law that two-thirds of American support.

Come on now. Make them take these votes over and over and over again. And if you or your friends or your family or your neighbors miss the results, of that vote in May, then they'll see the ones in June. And if they miss that one in June, then they'll see the one in July or August or September or October. That is the point. We have to fight here. We have to get caught trying. This is what midterms are going to be about, but we have to be willing to do this all the way. Next step is my interview with the president of Planned Parenthood.

Now we have the President of Planned Parenthood, Alexis McGill Johnson. Thank you so much for coming on. Thank you so much for having me. So first of all, most importantly, because we're in such a period of uncertainty right now, can you speak on the fact that Roe is still the law as of right now? Yes, absolutely. What we saw last week was a draft opinion from the Supreme Court. They have not formally ruled. Roe is still the law of the land, which means that if you are waking up and you need an appointment

at an abortion provider in your state, check the local laws to make sure what the restrictions are, or go to abortion finder.com to help you understand how to navigate. But yes, abortion is still legal right now. Now, when abortion restrictions are put in place, to what extent does it stop abortions? And to what extent are they just pushed into other states or even underground? No abortion restrictions. Even the ones pre-1973 stopped people seeking access to abortion. I think in many cases, what they have, they stopped 50 years ago was access to safe abortion. What we have now is, you know, a patchwork of restrictions that have essentially pushed people further into a burden of trying to seek access to abortion, but they haven't stopped people

from actually accessing the procedure or the medication abortion that they need. Now, in terms of traveling to nearby states, if you live in southern Louisiana or Mississippi or Alabama or Florida, your closest state is either Kansas or North Carolina. Like Miami to North Carolina is a 12-hour drive. New Orleans to Wichita, Kansas is 13 hours. If you're in eastern Montana, you're looking at either 11 hours to go to Washington or eight hours to go to Minnesota. What happens to these women? Well, look, I mean, I think what you're pointing to is even now, right, with a number of restrictions that already exist while we have the right, right, means that access is very limited.

There are abortion provider deserts in many of the states that you were talking about, meaning that people are traveling four to five hours just to get access to abortion provider in their state. So when or if row is overturned, as we presume it will be, it means that people will now have to travel thousands of miles outside of their state, outside of perhaps their even comfort zone.

It means they will have to put their children in the car because most people who access abortion are already parents, it means that they will have to gather the resources necessary for gas money, for hotel money. And, you know, with the number of restrictions that already exist in place on accessing abortion, the number of restrictions that ask people essentially, you know, whether or not they trust the decision that they are making, it means that they're imposing significant burdens on them wherever they go. You know, we hear the anti-choice crowd well about the sanctity of life. And yet, none of that care or compassion actually exists once the baby is actually born. Can you speak on where the U.S. stands in terms of

these health metrics for maternal mortality rates and infant mortality rates and even newborn programs and care and funding compared with other developed countries? Yes, absolutely. Look, I mean, the same states that are enacting the most restrictive abortion bans are also the same States that have some of the worst maternal health outcomes in this country and the most significant restrictions on abortion provision. So, you know, you know, the maternal mortality rate in this country is somewhere between three to four times black women are more likely to die than white women after childbirth. We also see, you know, significant infert mortality rates where children in black communities are less likely to make it to a year than white.

families. And so, you know, the reality is these are states that have not elected to expand Medicaid, right, to accept the Affordable Care Act coverage. These are states that, that, you know, fight against, have fought against things like paid family leave. And so all of the things that you would expect to really help nurture a newborn are not things that actually exist in these states. And so the fact that they are also now creating more onerous abortion restrictions is just kind of mind-boggling. And not just that. I mean, we have early education funding, the child tax credit, universal pre-K, child care. I mean, every opportunity these people had to actually vote for the things that they, that would back up what they wail about on an endless

loop. They voted against it time and time again. So I think it just kind of puts on full display how much they actually care about the sanctity of life, that they're not even willing to put a single one of their votes or a single dime behind any of this stuff when it actually matters. Well, Sister Simone Campbell, an extraordinary Catholic nun often says that, you know, she's a pro-choice Catholic nun, as she describes herself. She says, all these people are pro-birth. They're not actually pro-child. Right.

I'm sure that you, of all people, have heard every story under the sun about why having safe and legal access to abortion is important. And could you share one example that you think kind of best illustrates why we need this? Like it's become so political that I feel like we kind of forget sometimes how personal it is. So I think having a story might help highlight that for people. You know, I mean, look, I hear a story every day. You know, when I tell people that I work for Planned Parenthood, you know, people open up and they share their personal story. They show their sister's story.

They share their parents' story, their mother's story, their cousin's story, all because they've understood. at some point, what this decision has made for them in their lives. One out of four people who could give birth has had an abortion in their lifetime. And so just the numerically normalization is so important. But I'll tell you a quick story of somebody I was on the plane with a couple of years back when I first stepped into this role. She was an amazing aeronautical engineer. And we happened to be going through some turbulence. And so to calm my nerves, she just explained to me what was happening in each vector as the plane turned. And at the end of our trip, I just said, thank you so much. Like, that was a great way to, you know, go through a really quite literally

turbulent time. And she said, no, no, thank you. Because if it weren't for the abortion that I had at 19, I would have never been able to continue my graduate career and end up in the role working for the FAA that I do now, right? And that is just an everyday story. I think sometimes we think about, you know, abortion care, the way it's been presented as, you know, it's always a, you know, dramatic, traumatic, traumatic experience for people. And I think for many people who are seeking access to care, it is a logical step in their own life journey of when they decide that it's right for them to become a parent or a parent again. And that's what we have to respect, Brian, right?

The fact that people can make decisions and we should trust decisions that they make about their own lives and their own journeys and their own careers and their own families and communities. And what people most don't want is to have a politician in the middle of that decision with them. Yeah, I think that's perfectly put. I mean, like we, you know, we go back and forth talking like extolling the virtues of this or decrying the, you know, the vices of that.

But at the end of the day, it's not our. choice. It's everybody's, it's everybody's own choice to have autonomy over their own body. And so I think that's like what gets forgotten or left out of so much of these political arguments. Okay, so by the time that this interview airs, there will have been marches in every state in the country this past Saturday. Can you talk about what you hope that these marches will accomplish and why they're important? Yes. I mean, look, on May 14th, I was in Los Angeles. There were, you know, 100,000 people who had RSVP to attend this rally and across the country, there were upwards of 200 events of folks assembling. And I think in this moment, we were two weeks past the draft opinion

being leaked and the reality setting in that the court is fully sure that they will likely overturn Roe v. Wade. And so I think it's a few things. One, it's so important to be together in a moment, right? We are literally mourning a right that we have lost. you know, or anticipate losing, one that we've held on to for 49 years. You know, two, I think it's important to demonstrate, right, that we are the collective supermajority of people who believe, right? The 80% of people who believe that Rose should be the law of the land, people that believe that we should be making these decisions about our own bodies, anything less than our

ability to do that is a function of the power and control of state lawmakers in federal lawmakers. And I think that, you know, three, these marches were about marching orders quite literally, right? Telling people like how to capture the rage, how to ensure that they understood kind of what was at stake and how we have to move this forward. So I think a lot of people are looking to help and not necessarily knowing how to be most helpful. What could people do right now? So as of right now, first, we want people to understand abortion is still legal, right? It is still they're right. It may not be the case in a few weeks. So what's really important right now is to keep up the momentum. What's really important right now is to make sure that people understand

your outrage and particularly elected officials because we know that when the federal protections are gone, if the court overturns for a V-Rade, it means that every state now will be making decisions on its own. And it is important for your state lawmakers. to hear where you stand, whether you are at a state that is going to restrict access. It means that you need to show up and let them know that you won't tolerate that. Or if a state where there's an opportunity to actually expand access to make sure that those states stay and remain free havens for people who need to access abortion. The second thing you can do is actually amplify abortion finder.org.

This is for people who are seeking care, for people who need travel, for people who need access to Planned Parenthood Health Centers, independent providers, you know, it ensures that we are both supporting the navigation of patient care. And the last thing you can do is support abortion funds. You can support local affiliates of Planned Parenthood. You can support independent providers at Keep Our Clinics.org or the national network of abortion funds. those are all places that will continue to help people get the care that they need. Politics aside, what's your message to the people of this country right now who are scared and looking at organizations like yours for help in light of what's become a really draconian turn of

events? You know, look, first I want to tell them we're clear, right? We will not go back. We will not back down. We're going to be here. fighting for this right for as long as we can. We know that the future state cannot be flying people across the country, putting people on buses to go thousands of miles just to seek access to care that they could very well have in their own zip code. That makes no sense. For 50 years almost, we've even enjoyed the ability to make these decisions, the privacy of our own homes and doctors offices down the street from where we live. We won't go back to what that state and fares will be, and we're going to be here fighting with them.

Okay, we'll leave it there. Alexis, thank you for the work that you do and the rest of Planned Parenthood. And, you know, best of luck as we keep trying to navigate what's become a really hellish situation, but glad to have you fighting. Thank you so much, Brian, for having me. Today we have the contributing writer for the New York Times opinion section and the host of two podcasts, Sway and Pivot. Kara Swisher, thanks for coming back on. Thanks very much. So we just heard from Elon Musk that his Twitter purchase is on hold. Obviously, the stock price for Tesla's and a bit of a free fall and his capital to buy Twitter is against his Tesla shares. Do you think that this thing ultimately goes through?

Do you believe that Elon owns Twitter at the end of this? I think he's trying to get a lower price. And we'll see. We'll see. There are a couple of elements. The government might intervene because he might think he's playing games here. He may pay the breakup fee, walk away, and then come back from the price is lower. Every other tech stock is off.

Twitter should be in the doldrums, just like everybody else, but it hasn't been because of this $5420 price, although it's been trading $10 below that. And so he wants a lower price. I don't care what he says about anything else, about bots and spam, whatever. It's about the price. Do you think that the government has any enforcement mechanism,

any teeth to actually, I mean, we've seen like a few instances of this market manipulation, if you can call it that, you know? I don't know what it is right now. I just wish the government would, you know, the disclosure thing they're looking into, allegedly. That's what the reports are, or the reports are that I assume they're correct, that the government is looking into the early disclosure thing that he didn't disclose. He was buying up Twitter. That's a problem.

He's obviously had many problems with the SEC before. I don't know what's happening here. Is he talking about bots, but he really is talking about price? I don't know. That's what government regulators and investigators are supposed to look into, and that's not my job. now Elon came out on Twitter and confirmed reporting that he would let Donald Trump back onto the platform. Do you agree with that decision? I said he'd do it three a month ago when he started it. So I don't agree or disagree. I mean, no, I don't think he should if I owned it,

but they permanently banned him at the rules of the time. He could change the rules if he owns the company. He doesn't own the company. But if he did, he can certainly do whatever he wants. I don't think it's a good idea. Where do you stand on this issue of like whether a person should be banned for spreading disinformation that could be as dangerous as rhetoric that led to January 6th or a million people dying of COVID. Where do I stand? Where do I stand on the guy that comes into a restaurant and poops on the floor? I don't think you should go to the restaurant again. I don't know what to say. Everyone tries to drag it into free speech. It's not free speech. He broke the rules of the platform about inciting

violence. That's usually a permanent ban under old Twitter rules. It could be changed under neutral rules. And everyone tries to make it about free speech and this and that. That's their rules. Them's the rules. And if you want to make rules that you can poop in a restaurant, you should do that in your restaurant. I don't think a lot of people would eat there. Maybe the government might have some problems with the cleanliness issues, but, you know, whatever. Yeah. I guess it changes things if there's really only a couple of restaurants in town and the other restaurants owned by Mark Zuckerberg. And so, yeah, whatever. I don't know. I just, whatever he wants to do, he should do. But the fact the matter is, Twitter was well within its rights to do what it did. And of course,

the right, because they virtue signal almost all the time, has to make it about free speech. It's not about free speech. It's their rules. They decided this guy was inciting violence on a very violent day and decided to put a stop to it. So, okay, they didn't want to be handmaid sedition. And a business can decide not to do that because they have free speech also, by the way, under citizens, you know, companies have free speech. And so they decided. their free speech said, we don't want this guy on our platform. They can bring them back if they want. They can change the rules.

And if Elon owns it, he certainly can do it. Now, the issue is Trump is not coming back because he's got all kinds of legal and other complications due to true social, which is a big bomb, essentially. But he's got to stay there for money and contractual and probably legal reasons would be my guess. And do you think Donald Trump can actually manage to suppress his insatiable appetite for affection? Like if he's able to get back onto the platform, if he's able, if he has, if there's nothing stopping him. You know, it may not be, there might not be a platform to get on by the time he gets back, by the way. This is really devastating to Twitter.

And they've been, they just fired a couple executives who I think are pretty good, but I don't know internally. But they've got enough problems as it was before all this mess. And now Elon has thrown a chaos bomb into the middle of it. So maybe that's what he wants to happen. Maybe he wants it to be chaos. Then he'll clean it up and look like a hero. I don't know. But, you know, it's got enough problems that it may not be the great platform that Donald Trump used it for to launch his political career.

Well, to that point, like he'd mentioned, Elon had mentioned timeouts for tweets that violate terms of service. But yeah, that makes sense. That's not really a deterrent if you're Trump and your only goal is to so disinformation. Well, if you have enough time, there might be like three timeouts and then you're off completely, three strikes. I don't know. I don't know what his rules are. I suppose if he did it three times, yes, or two times, or maybe they may bring them back on with some behavior. If you do it again, you're off permanently.

They might, they can make rules for anybody. Like, who cares? Like, they can do whatever they want. But they may have that. I don't know. There's no specifics. So I don't know. I would probably, my issue with the ban was that it was made by two people, Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey.

And probably, and these were important communications platforms. probably the concentration of power is the problem, not so much the platforms who could make any rules they want, is that there's no competitors to Facebook particularly. There hasn't been. There will be, but there hasn't been. And so the more places people can speak, the better. That's how you really protect free speech, is you don't let power concentrate into the hands of a small group of people.

Yeah. You know. I'm curious about this. And I haven't really like weighed in on or really cared about Elon's politics because Because I honestly thought that what he has done with Tesla and making EVs mainstream. I mean, for somebody that cares about climate, he's one of the most important people. And then I'd see these tweets that were just fucking annoying, but it's like not worth weighing in on. What do you think his politics are?

Because he positions himself as this like, as this disaffected liberal, but like all of his interactions are with Mike Cernovich and Tim Poole and the PisaGate guy. That's recent. That's recent. That's recent if you notice. He's speaking about virtue signaling. that's what he's doing to the right, right? By the way, they're so insecure and pathetic that any kind of hug from the cool guy, Elon, they're like, he's the best.

They suddenly become discerning about people. Give me a break. He's for climate change. Who knows what he's for? You know, I think he's one of these people who, I don't think he was a liberal. I think he was kind of a libertarian, and he's disaffected. For sure, he loved Obama. Big, good owner of the ACLU.

Doesn't like Biden, obviously, but Biden's not been the night. to him either, so why should he? Didn't like Trump, but sort of like some Trump policies, needs to do business with government, so he'll be nice to whatever government's in place. So, you know, I think it's all over the map with him. And it bothers people. That bothers people. And I think the stuff he's doing lately is just he's petting them.

He needs their help. And he pets them. And it works. You know, he's putting on his celebrity chomp or smile to everybody in the hopes that they'll, they'll, like, they slavishly follow anybody. So that's what he's doing. He's playing into their weird insecurities. His tweets do have like a Trumpian feel to them, not in their danger, but like in these like these decrees on all things and they're not.

He likes chocolate milk. Yeah. Like cocaine is going to be put cocaine back into Coca-Cola and just like these thoughts on everything. These like grand proclamations and, you know. He's trolling you. Just be, everything's a joke. Like keep that in mind when you're thinking about Elon Musk. many things are a joke to him and he's a brilliant man who has created amazing companies let's

just underscore that everyone else is working on such dumb stuff in silicon valley and this guy's working on big ideas rockets and climate change and boring holes and solar these are big ideas important ideas um and he also needs a needs to need to blow the steam off i guess when you're that brilliant and that you know you can feel it coming off of him like there's a lot of there's a lot of in his life. And so this is how he, you know, look, I watch ASMR sand cutting videos to calm myself down. He tweets and that you don't have to like it, but that's the way he is. Yeah. Does truth social work if there aren't liberals there for the fight of what Twitter is? Like it isn't exactly the fact that everyone's on Twitter what's made at a compelling platform?

I just, just badly done. Just like I'd say about any other badly made. and badly created. Piece of tech, it's badly done, badly created. And all part of a financial scheme, it looks like, that's what it looks like

to make Donald Trump some money. But too bad, the spec markets died. So, sorry, too late, Donald. Unless they paid him somehow, I don't know. So I want to switch over to, like,

the recent Roe decisions and the political stuff. You know, we have a Republican Party that's gone all in on overturning Ro, which is an issue that, what, 28% of Americans actually support the overturning of Roe. And yet they're not only a viable party. They're the favorites

heading into midterms. What's your takeaway from that? Well, you know, we've got a pandemic. We've got inflation. We've got, you know, these are all the repercussions of the pandemic and the stimulus and the supply chain all at once. You've got a war in Ukraine. There's a lot going on. And so Biden's got his hands full. I don't know if anybody could really play this hand very well. And the Republicans are appealing to the base, these base people that worry about the single trans athlete in their state that might take a medal away from their daughter or, you know, or they want Roe v. Way. Now, what's interesting is most of the country does not want that. If you look at the full polling, it's pretty positive. It's pretty in favor of Rovers' way.

But they don't care. They want to rule from a minority position. they realize they're moving into a minority position and their options are to convince more a wider demographic that they're great, which they're trying to do, that it's working among certain groups, or to solidify power through gerrymandering and minority rule. And that's what they're doing. So, and to exercise, they're about power. Let's be clear. That's what they're about. And so that's what they're going to do. I don't, you know, and this is something that appeals a lot to their base, this particular thing. And that's all they need to get to the primary. Now the question is what happens

when they get to the general election? Like look at Pennsylvania, looks like this one woman who is quite way off to the right might win over these two others that are battling it out that are more in the center. And what's really depressing about that particular fight is neither of those men really believe the things they're saying about the election or whatever. That's what's sad. The woman does, Seems to. Seems to. But everybody feels they have to do that for fealty towards Trump. That'll eventually stop. That is the question, isn't it? Because then we have someone like J.D. Vance, who is not the guy he purports to be, not the guy he's play acting at being. And yet he had to. Maybe he's become that guy. Maybe he's become that guy. Maybe he has. I've had relatives who

had a transformation. I think it's genuine. I do. I don't know about him, but I know my relatives are genuine and I don't I don't speak to them anymore so whatever you know I just I've had relatives who transforms like that they have they live in a fearful sad place where America is about like the crime is about to come down on their heads and no matter what you tell them I had one relative they were like you know they're coming to our town BLM I said nobody wants to come to your shitty town they're staying in the nice places like give me a break it the ability it's interesting because Barack Obama sort of focused on hope you know that was his thing. Fear works just as well. It works just as well. It's just sad and pathetic is what it is.

Do you worry that we just watched a coup attempt and not much happened? And so there's the possibility that, yeah, there's the possibility that Roe is going to be overturned and everything that comes with it in terms of the attacks on contraception and whatnot. And that Republicans will still eke out a win. Well, they'll try. Let me just say in history, if you look at history, it happens over and over again, this sort of slow move towards authoritarianism. That's said, guess what? That felt like that you're younger than I am. It felt like that during a lot of our previous eras, whether it was the Salem Witch Trials or McCarthyism or the Civil War, by the way. Someone was like, this is the worst time ever. I'm like, hmm, I'm going to go with a civil war on that one, right?

You know, where people were enslaved and there was a massive war. It's, we have been through things like this, including the Civil War. And they have lost almost always in the end, these kind of retrograde forces ultimately, which are always powerful. They're always there. You know, if you think I'm going to give back my rights that I got as a gay person, you got another thing coming. There's equally amounts of committed people on the other side. And so there's an expression in Tony Cushner's Angels in America. The world keeps spinning forward. I really believe that. It does. There's there's declines in retrograde, but always forward. And so they can try. Good luck. Good luck. You think we don't have some moves ourselves? That's ridiculous. And so, yeah, this is what they've said. They've always said they're going to do this. And they're going to keep trying. And we'll see how long they can hold on to power with their tiny-minded, pathetic, sad, fearful politics. Good luck. Good luck. Good luck. Godspeed. In any case, we'll see if Elon owns Twitter. He'll loan it for a lot less money if he owns it. I'll tell you that, which is a good thing for him.

As a member of, of like, the media, I mean, you work, you write for the New York Times in their opinion. There is no membership, but okay. All right. Where do you think that, like, members of the media should stand in terms of, like, a lot of the media is there to, I guess, just to be neutral and to report on what's happening and not imbue their own personal opinion on this stuff. But when the argument is between authoritarianism and not, and, I mean, the fourth estates, right to be there. I mean, like, existence is predicated on not having an authoritarian system. Do you think that, like, at some point, the transcription elements or the neutral elements of, like, of the media? I don't think the press is neutral. I never have thought it was. Look, go back to the

beginning of our, of the country, go watch that press. That press, there was a Jefferson press, there was a Hamilton press, there was a Madison press, which was close to the Jefferson Press. This has been, the idea of neutrality is a new, fresh one. There's always been sides. And they're always will be sides in New York Times as more sort of center, center left, right? I don't know. Sometimes it changes time to time. You know, you've got the Washington Post. Where are they precisely? You know, it just CNN, it's very, it's been clear. They've been a little, at the night, they're this way and today they're this way. So I think it's just, I think this argument is kind of pointless on some level because it's always been like this. And, you know, but there are facts. And that should, you know, news is news. This happened in Ukraine. This happened here. And those,

should be factual. And everyone who, especially the people, the forces of retrograde, would like to twist facts. And that should stay neutral. Opinions on those facts and what you think we should do about them and the direction we should go, everybody has a policy. I'm going to use the word policy versus opinion because my policy may be different from your policy. And then you hash it out in a democracy and get to a place where most people are happy. But I think the real problem is everybody thinks they're going to get exactly what they want in their lives, and they aren't. Nobody is. Let's finish off with this. What do you think is the Democrats' top message heading into midterms from the economy to attacks on democracy to row in other women's reproductive health issues?

What do you think is most resonant? Well, you know, it's interesting. So you think about George Bush when he was in trouble. And I think he did that message, I care. Remember that one? I don't remember that one. It was ridiculous. It was bad. because he had talked about taxes and they had to walk it back. This is what they say. We're going, we, we know, we acknowledge the problems. We've been trying it with the, this is what we've done. We have gotten us out of this pandemic.

We are trying to get the supply chains going. We are, we are for protecting a woman's reproductive rights. We are for this, you know, say what you're for. Say what you're going to do. Say, and say it forthrightly, right? And say, and we disagree. And by the way, Democrats, we disagree. Some of them over here want to do this.

This is where I stand. And I think people respect that, you know, and say, attacking them doesn't really work. Those people like that stuff. You know what I mean? Calling them stupid, they may be stupid. I think a lot of them are stupid. It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter.

They don't care. They don't care. They don't care. It's like they don't care. So just stop caring about them and start focusing on the things we're doing, the Democrats are doing to, to fix things and to make things better and paint a picture of hope because it is just as powerful as fear. It is. And move in that direction and try to win elections, hand-to-hand combat and I don't mean real combat, but real electoral combat where you really go out and listen to people

and what they want. I think Katie Porter, the congresswoman from California, just had a really great speech about that. It's like start to listen to people. and what they want and stop talking, I guess, which I will stop talking now. Perfect segue. We'll leave it there. Kara Swisher, thank you so much for taking the time. All right. Thanks, Brian. Thanks again to Kara. Just one last note.

If you're new to this podcast, please subscribe and consider throwing me a review and suggest it to a friend. Word of mouth is the best way to get new listeners. Okay. Appreciate your help. 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 briantylercoen.com for links to all of my other channels.