No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen - Trump has mask-off moment amid healthcare & food cuts

Episode Date: November 2, 2025

Trump has his mask-off moment, dropping all pretense that he’s focused on delivering for working Americans with his latest move. Brian is joined by CA governor Gavin Newsom to discuss the Trump shutdown, CA attorney general Rob Bonta to discuss how CA is fighting back against the deployment of DOJ poll watchers, ABC News’ Jonathan Karl to discuss his behind-the-scenes look at Mar-a-Lago, and Latino political consultant Mike Madrid to discuss the bottom falling out in Trump’s approval among latinos.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.

Donald Trump has his mask-off moment, dropping all pretense that he's focused on delivering for working Americans with his latest move. And I'm joined by California Governor Gavin Newsom to discuss the Trump shutdown. California Attorney General Rob Banta to discuss how California's fighting back against the deployment of DOJ poll watchers. ABC News is Jonathan Carl to discuss his behind-the-scenes look at Mar-a-Lago and Latino political consultant Mike Madrid to discuss the bottom falling out in Trump's approval among Latinos. I'm Brian Tyler Cohen, and you're listening to No Lie. One might think that when the government is shut down because you refuse to extend Affordable Care Act subsidies, when you put 42 million Americans at risk of not getting food assistance that they rely on to survive, that you might try just a tad bit harder to make

sure that you, the billionaire president of the United States, don't host a party at your exclusive resort where the theme is quite literally the Great Gatsby. I mean, like, talk about on the nose. Was the hunger games not available? And of course, this isn't a bug, it's a feature. We have a president broadcasting the extent to which he just doesn't care how out of touch he looks, doesn't care about the extent to which he is channeling Marie Antoinette. And it's not just his party celebrating the haves versus the have-nots. It is the fact that the day before that party, he posted,

I shit you not, 25 photos about his newly marbled bathroom renovation in the White House. It's the fact that he demolished the entire East Wing of the White House to build a $350 million ballroom for himself. It's the fact that he's using a billion dollars in taxpayer money to retrofit a jet that he gets to keep. It's the fact that he's a door in the Oval Office with enough gold to make Liberace blush. The fact that he's doubled his net worth in the last 10 months in office. The fact that the latest drone contract from the Pentagon went to Don Jr's drone company. And so we've got example after example after example of the fact that this guy has used the presidency to enrich himself and immerse himself in more and more opulence.

Which would be bad enough unto itself. But remember, this guy ran an entire campaign predicated on this idea that he actually gave a shit about working class people and their problems. He pandered for years about the cost of groceries, of housing, of rent, of eggs. He talked about manufacturing jobs. He talked about high inflation. He talked about wages. And yet now, housing is more expensive. Rent is more expensive.

Groceries are more expensive. Manufacturing is contracting. Inflation has been rising every month since March. wages are flat everyone is hurting and yet this guy has the balls to get in front of cameras and try to explain to people how what we needed as a country was a fucking ballroom and look trump isn't devoid of political strategy right he may have zero intention of keeping any of the promises from the campaign but he was still smart enough to deploy those promises because he knew they would work and they did so the guy's not stupid he understands optics

He understands marketing. If nothing else, he understands marketing. So the fact that he'll adorn his office with gold and post 25 pictures of his new marble bathroom and literally host a Gatsby-themed party at Marlago wasn't some accident. It's simply the result of the fact that he doesn't care. His priority is not and never was working class people.

It's himself. It's his family. It's his donors and rich friends. Those are the people who will ride on that new jet. Those are the people who are going to dine in his new ballroom. Those are the people who are going to admire the gold leafing in the Oval Office, all while millions of Americans across the country spend the following days hoping that their food assistance comes through. While they figure out how they're going to pay two, three, four, five times more

for health insurance in 2026 than they did in 2025, you don't have to listen to what I say, Trump's priorities are. You just have to look at what he's doing. He's broadcasting those priorities a hell of a lot better than I ever could. So I hope that his supporters and voters out there recognize, not just the Khan being perpetuated by Trump, but supported by his party. Remember, the GOP has full control of government.

They don't need to compromise with Democrats. This is their full agenda playing itself out. This is what you get with GOP control. They say all the right things during the campaign, but the moment they have power, it is about helping themselves. So remember this moment, because when they need to pander for your votes again in the future,

they're going to repeat the same populist platitudes that they did and lead up to this election, but remember that when it comes time to govern, their focus will always be on helping themselves. Next up are my interviews with Gavin Newsom, Rob Bonta, Jonathan Carl, and Mike Madrid. No Lie is brought to you by Uplift Desk. So I know prior to getting Uplift Desk for myself, my main problem was that I was sitting at my desk for 11, 12, 13 hours a day,

completely static, hunched over. It was leaving me feeling physically exhausted, emotionally drained, Since I've got an Uplift desk, I'm up and moving and in a completely different headspace than I was before. And now the all-new Uplift V3 standing desk transforms your desk into a productivity engine. So why sit still when you can stand out? The new Uplift V3 standing desk helps you move more and get more done. It's got fast assembly, industry-leading cable management, which I find especially helpful with all of my cables sprawled everywhere. It's got a smarter, more integrated design, and it has the ultimate customization, which I find the most helpful.

example, there are two different layers on my desk so I can have my monitor up on one different layer and keep all of that real estate for myself. Now you can transform your workspace and unlock your full potential with the all-new Uplift V-3 standing desk. Go to upliftdest.com slash BTC and use our code BTC to get four free accessories, free same-day shipping, free returns, and an industry-leading 15-year warranty that covers your entire desk plus an extra discount off your entire order. That's U.P-L-L-T-D-E-S-K dot com slash BTC for this exclusive offer. It's only available through our link. I'm joined now by Governor Newsom. Thanks so much for joining me. It's going to be back with you.

So right now we are at the Yes on 50 event, the rally here in California. A couple days from now, we're going to have this big election that we've been waiting for for a long time to finally fight fire with fire and neutralize what Republicans are doing in Texas, North Carolina, Missouri, and on and on. On November 5th, the day after this election, what does it look like if we see a blowout victory in California. We see Democratic wins in New Jersey and Virginia. We see a Supreme Court that stays 5'2 in Pennsylvania. Love that question.

It's the right question because it's the one everyone is going to be compelled to answer, including the Republicans. I think it's very interesting. Here we are on a Saturday at this event. Where's Donald Trump? He's not out here campaigning, no on 50. He's not campaigning for Republican candidates in New Jersey. in Virginia.

No one wants to be associated. No one wants to be seen with him. That's how historically weak Donald Trump is. And I think that will appear in vivid three-dimensional ways on November 5th, to your question. Democratic Party will not only have won those races, but by a margin that also sends a message.

And it also, I think, will reinvigorate, not just the base, but the leaders in the party, leader Schumer, leader Jeffries, in terms of the work they will do to have our backs as it relates to health care, food security, and the like. And I think we'll create a pathway, not just ending the shutdown,

but also a pathway to getting Speaker Jefferies back in the speakership or getting to the speakership. So I think it's a big day, big shift in narrative, Democrats not on their heels, on their front toes. You asked the question, where is Donald Trump? And in fact, he's answered that question because he's been posting up a storm about what his priorities are,

the latest being remarbling a bathroom in the White House, that comes in the aftermath of him renovating this, you know, building this $350 million ballroom, covering the Oval Office in Gold Leafing, retrofitting a $400 million jet to the tune of a billion dollars paid for by American taxpayers. And so what is your response, in light of the fact that this is a week where we expect to see tens of millions of Americans lose their food assistance, where tens of million Americans are unsure starting January 1st, what's going to happen with their health care, whether it's Medicaid, whether it's ACA subsidies. And this guy is just isolated inside of the White House,

surrounding himself with more gold, more opulence, and more wealth. Yeah, and or isolated down in Marlago where he had a roaring 20s party. Right. Think about that. A roaring 20s, great Gatsby, Halloween party, where he's posting this literally hours before 42 million people will not have any new money put in their EBD, their debit cards for foods. During the holidays, during Thanksgiving, at a time where Halloween candy just cost folks, 10.8% more than it did last year. A pound of beef has historically high, coffees at historic highs. Look, it's vulgar. There's a reason people are putting Marie Antoinette memes up there of Trump, let them eat cake.

Because that's how this feels. He's betraying his own voters. And the word betrayal is a word we need to use more often about Donald Trump. He's turned his back on his own voters. Red districts, red in rural counties, red states that disproportionately are the beneficiaries of food stamps, disproportionately are going to be impacted by a doubling and tripling in many cases of health care because of his recklessness and his total disregard for them in his obsession with one person only himself.

In the lead up to this whole fight about whether food assistance would be released to Americans, you have Mike Johnson saying every day that there is nothing we can do. We can't possibly touch this contingency fund because we need to make sure that's at some arbitrary point in the future that we have a contingency fund, some other emergency, but not this emergency.

So they brought this thing into court. There were two judges, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, both of whom said that you have to release these funds, that this is an emergency, just like any other emergency. would be people are going to go hungry right now and the Trump administration's response to that was to say we're going to appeal and so what is your reaction to the fact that even notwithstanding the fact that that fighting this battle

unto itself is bad enough when they could have been when they could have been releasing these funds alone on in the contingency fund but then to go into court and say we're not even going to take yes for an answer we're not even going to accept the political cover that the judges are giving us we're going to actually fight this to make sure that these funds don't go out How do we even unpack that? Everything he said is spot on. And by the way, we were really proud in California

to be one of the leads on that lawsuit and very proud of this judge to state the obvious who looked at the actual language that said the USDA shall appropriate contingency funds and that includes, by the way, considerations for exactly what occurred a government shutdown that literally on September 3,

30th, the USDA put out a press release saying these funds are available for precisely that use in case there is a government shutdown, only to see that disappear on their website. And now they're trying to erase any consciousness or memory or any sense of decency on behalf of the American people. Look, you'd expect that of Donald Trump. Let's push that aside. But you started that question with Mike Johnson. Right.

The most pious man in Washington, D.C. Like that word, pious. It's a good way to describe it. who's competing for bullshit, blowiation, and lies with Donald Trump. It's extraordinary what comes out of his mouth. Increasingly, it is beyond the pale. This is the indecency of a man of faith

of someone that literally, he read the same Bible I did. You look at Isaiah, you look at Luke, you look at Matthew, you look at Proverbs, Old Testament, New Testament. One of the central themes in the Bible, essential themes. It's not a suggestion. It's about the alignment to the Almighty to God. It's a question of hunger and food.

No decency, sir. Disproportionate number of people that will be impacted in his home district, let alone his own state. And so look, we can state the obvious, the state of mind of Donald Trump, the derangement that he's going to use hunger, starvation, to put families, children. During the holidays, the absurdity of that, as he's celebrating, as you suggest, no longer $300, it's likely to be $350 million

monstrosity of 90,000 square foot ballroom where he's demanding $230 million from the American people for some tithing because of his feeling to grieve about legal affairs in the past, where he's sitting there at Marlago around the roaring 20s as we are paying the highest taxes since the 1930s in terms of these tariff taxes. And we just paid more, as I said, for Halloween candy, and we'll pay record prices for toys in a matter of weeks for Christmas. I want to switch gears a little bit. We have heard that the Trump administration

is going to send poll monitors from the DOJ into a couple of states, California, New Jersey. As we look toward this process playing itself out, we know why this is going to happen. It's not because the Trump administration thinks, in good faith, that there's going to be some election irregularities.

It's because they want to use this as a pretext to be able to cry fraud. We've sent our poll monitors in there, and what do you know we found fraud? And so knowing that this is going to happen, knowing that this is the basis for them to send in these poll monitors in the first place, what's your plan not to rebut, but to prebut what's happening at the hands of the DOJ? So two things. Everything about that question is important. And I hope everybody heard what you just said. The pretext to accuse fraud. That is a preview of what you described of 2026 in the midterm elections. Wake up everybody. That is a preview. of 2026 but here's what we've done you may recall week or so ago i asked people to no longer send money in for proposition 50 i did that a few days later than i otherwise would for one reason

that we raised a little bit more money to then make sure that we have a legal defense team that we have a rapid response team that we're monitoring the monitors we're going to flood the zone in the five counties where he's sending the DOJ to monitor their activities to call all this out in real time. So we're going to pre-but the frame. We're going to in real time call this out. And soon as they start to move to create some doubt around the election results, we're going to flood the zones with voices, law, and reason. And that is exactly, I think, the approach we need to take all across this country next year, Democrats all across this country, I think we're going to have to take a similar approach.

One last question here, and that is that throughout this whole process, I've watched as you've been especially aggressive in terms of fighting on this Prop 50 front. And, you know, there were a few folks who came out and who said we wanted to practice good governance. And you've been really effective at swatting that down and showing why this is not about good governance. This is about fighting fire with fire and preserving our democracy. We have seen that California was the first state to move. We now seen some action in Virginia. As we look toward the other states,

we have a few possible weapons here. We're looking at Illinois. We're looking at Maryland. Maryland. There is one Democrat in Maryland, Bill Ferguson, who already came out in defiance of what Westmore, the governor has said, in defiance of what the House,

you know, the top Democrat in the House has said, both of whom have expressed that they're open to this. Bill Ferguson shut the door to it. And this is not going to move forward in Maryland without his okay, because he'll control what, goes to the floor. And so in light of that, what do you say, seeing the success that you've had in California, what do you say to somebody who's closing the door to this process

in Maryland? Well, I hope he feels very differently on Tuesday, and Tuesday night when those early results come in. I hope he feels very differently, considering what just happened in Missouri, what just happened in North Carolina, hope he feels very differently after they move from this special session in Indiana. I hope he wakes up to the fact the American people that he represents in his home state, the American people are waking up are going to demand more and better. I don't want to cast any aspersions on it because we need to convince them to move in our direction. I say our direction, we the people. It is not a democratic direction. It's not

a Republican direction. It's about our republic. It's not red or blue. It's red, white, and blue. And I say that sincerely. I hope he'll come to a deeper realization of what the hell is going on, not just with maps, but with mass men showing up in and around polling places, secret police. What's happened with the federalization of the National Guard, that will happen in his home state, unquestionably. And what's going to happen with DOJ monitored in his home state? If it doesn't happen this year, it's going to happen certainly in 2026. And actual last question here, and I have to ask this because we're in Los Angeles right now, and this question isn't the same gravity as all of the other questions we've been speaking

about, but it's important for the city that we're in here. First of all, a big thank you for your work in terms of increasing the tax credit that the film industry has gotten here in California. Now I'm going to be a real big pain in the ass and say that as we look toward what will, if I'm not mistaken, be your last budget next year. You want more? I want an uncapped tax credit. And so what's your openness to uncapping the tax credit? Look at your work in me. We just doubled it.

It just went to affect a few weeks ago. And I just doubled it. And I sat here. And I sat here and a half billion dollars over the next 10 years. And I sat here and said how great it was. Now it's time to look forward. I appreciate your advocacy. By the way, that is something that was considered last year.

But under the circumstances, we had to temper. And I was otherwise going to lose the ability to double it from 350 to over 750, more than double it. So we were always open argument, interested in evidence, and I recognize that's a big issue. Good job with the advocacy. All right, Governor Newsom, thanks so much for your time. Thank you. No Lie is brought to you by Armour Colostrum. So why are elite athletes, business moguls, and high performers all using Armour Calastrum?

Armour Colostrum is nature's first whole food with over 400 bioactive nutrients working at the cellular level to build lean muscle, accelerate recovery, and fuel performance, all without artificial stimulants or synthetic junk. So when you're running a business or training hard or just one an edge, Armour optimizes your body for peak out. put. Probiotics and other supplements are often touted as a gut health solution, but the reality is that most products in the market are dead before they even reach your gut. But Armour Colostrom naturally fortifies your entire gut wall system and optimizes your whole body microbiome, which helps guard against irritants that can trigger digestive issues that can compromise your immune system. Research has shown that Colostrom also helps enhance nutrient absorption. So let Armour Colostrom help you reach your goals by promoting lean muscle building and fueling better performance and

faster recovery. Colostrum bioactives have been shown to reactivate hair follicle stem cells and activate collagen production, which promotes hair growth and enhances skin radiance. We've worked out a special offer just for my audience. Receive 30% off your first subscription order. Go to armor.com BTC to get 30% off your first subscription order. That's A-R-M-R-A.com slash BTC. I'm joined now by California Attorney General Rob Bonta. Thanks so much for joining me. Thanks for having me, Brian. Good to see you again. So a major story right now that's been sweeping across the country is the fact that the DOJ, Donald Trump's Department of Justice, has announced that they're sending poll monitors, poll watchers into California and New Jersey. And obviously, there is a ton of room for them to be able to abuse the system by using, you know, folks from the federal government who are loyal to Donald Trump and his agenda.

But there is a response being put forward by you and the folks here in California. Can you explain what that is? Absolutely. And we got noticed last week that the U.S. DOJ was sending poll monitors to five different counties in California, L.A., in Orange, Riverside, Kern, Fresno. And in normal times, this is something that the U.S. DOJ does do when there's a history of violations and a sincere and good faith effort and desire to protect the rights of voters. But these are not normal times. And this has been a historic presidency, historically unlawful, historically unconstitutional, historically undemocratic and historically un-American.

And so trust is earned. It's not just given. And what they have done when it comes to voting rights in the last 10 months is attack them with an executive order that tries to undermine the right to vote when it comes to vote by mail or trying to attack vote by mail generally. That's something that Trump has said. He posted, you know, two days ago that we need to watch the outcome of this election on Prop 50 in California.

And he continues to maintain that he won the 2020 election, which obviously he did not. And there's no doubt or evidence to show it. So what we're doing is we're going to make sure that there are eyeballs in the room, that there are observers observing the monitors to make sure that they do what they are lawfully allowed to do and nothing more. And that they don't violate the rule. the rules that govern them, the law, that they don't interfere with the election process, they may observe, as may others.

And just to level set, there are many people who observe. There are members of the Republican Party, members of the Democratic Party. There are members of the Secretary of State's office, my office, the registrar of voters' members of the public, nonprofits, like good government groups, like League of Women Voters. Transparency is good. And we have nothing to hide. We are transparent. And when anyone looks at our elections process, they'll see that our, our,

Elections are safe, secure, accurate, reliable. So normally, this type of action is not particularly noteworthy, but it is when it's a state election only one thing on the ballot seems to be targeting of California once again. And I don't believe, unfortunately, that there's a sincere effort to protect the rights of voters. It seems like a precursor of more to come and concluding next year when the very important midterms are on the ballot. And we'll talk about that in just a moment, but I want to ask who specifically are the

California-based poll monitors that are being sent in, and will they have the same access as the DOJ officials will? Yes. There's a general set of observer rights that apply to anyone, members of the public, members of the U.S. DOJ, members of California DOJ, Secretary of State, registrar of voters. So the state-based ones, the non-US DOJ observers, will be from my office, from the the Secretary of State's office, also potentially from the registrar of voters in each county. Okay. Now, in terms of the White House's justification for doing this, what are we

looking at here? Do you think that, I mean, there is a clear reason that they're sending these folks into states that have blue governors, for example. I mean, they're not sending any poll monitors into Virginia. And so do you think that the only reason that they're choosing New Jersey and California is because there are enough Democratic officials in place that they can then use that as a pretext to be able to say, look, the Democrats are in control here. There was a rigged election. We've got folks who are monitoring this. They found all these discrepancies, all this nefarious behavior, and it's Democrats from top to bottom. The facts don't lie on this. And I wish the answer were different.

But the Trump administration has been targeting blue states because they're blue, blue cities because they're blue, deploying National Guard to blue cities and blue cities only in the biggest blue states. And that's by design. And he's clear about it. He's going after radical leftists and the Democrats. And so it is definitely a targeting of Democrats. And it's unfortunate that they're doing that, but that's clearly what their MO has been. And I do fear that there will be some invented or manufactured crisis that they create, something they say they observe that's problematic, which they try to rely on later next year, where they say requires more poll,

watchers at the polling stations, maybe even, you know, National Guard or others. So I don't put it past this administration, unfortunately, based on their past conduct. And that's exactly what I wanted to get into. Let's say, for example, that they send poll monitors in now and those poll monitors who, of course, are going to be answerable to Trump. And I can only imagine the type of people that Trump is going to be willing to deploy. And let's say that those people are going to validate Trump's most egregious lies as it relates to any inevitable whining about non-existent election fraud or election rigging. How could that manifest itself in 2026?

If he's given himself some, some, you know, thin pretext, some thin justification to think that it's okay to send in, to take extraordinary measures because he's told himself that there's some fraudulent activity going on, what could that look like? What's the worst case scenario in terms of how he could use that as a basis to do, you know, whatever he wants in an unhinged manner in 2026 or 28? Yeah, you know, and I just want to be clear here that there's no evidence at all in California that there's any widespread voter fraud or anything problematic. So the idea of the USDAOJ monitors coming in is, you know, seems pretextual.

And they were requested to come in at the request of the Republican Party. So the Republican Party sent a letter to USDAOJ and USDAJ jumped at the opportunity to respond to the Republican Party and come into the biggest blue state in the nation. But what we could see down the road is an escalation. This is a down payment, a precursor of more to come, potentially, hopefully not, but we can't be naive. We've got to be clear-eyed and sober about what this president has done. For example, he's deployed National Guard in L.A., Oregon, Chicago, and D.C. in the first nine months in office, relying on 10 U.S.C. 12406, which has only been relied once on once before in the history of the United States. He's relied on it three times already.

So he does unprecedented things. He escalates quickly. He justifies it in his own mind with figments of his imagination. He thinks he won the 2020 election. He thinks he was widespread voter fraud, or at least he says there is, in order to promote the lie. And he continues to promote that very dangerous lie. And I think he will, you know, as he does with the National Guard, he lies about the facts in order to justify the action. So I think he'll lie about the facts here again, a lie that there is some sort of voter

fraud and that he needs to, you know, bring in forces or people or resources into California to ensure that there is integrity in the voting process and that the elections are accurate and reliable. So having seen him operate before, you know, I don't wish this to happen. I hope it doesn't, but we have to be clear-eyed and sober about how this man thinks and how he acts, the big lies that he promotes, when he promotes them. He's doing it to justify action. And so we have to be very wary about what that action might be in the future. And it could be a mass escalation of deployment of federal personnel into California. And, of course, that would suppress the vote, that would intimidate, it would chill, it would prevent people from participating.

And what he might do on vote by mail is also of concern. He has criticized it and said it should end based on the strong recommendation of that champion of democracy, Vladimir Putin, who told him that we should. to get rid of vote my mail. Knowing how he operates and knowing that he's going to look for the thinnest pretext of all, baseless pretext even, to perpetuate whatever lies that he decides he wants to tell, and that he does it quickly, are you prepared to be able to fight back in the event that he decides to glom on to something on November 4th and say, look, you know, I mean, we saw a million instances of this,

votes in suitcases, whatever he lands on, whatever crazy excuse he lands on that night, Do you have the resources in place? Do you have a plan in place to be able to immediately push back on whatever lies he's going to push forward, knowing that those lies are eventually going to serve as some basis for him to do the escalation that we all know he wants to do? We're ready. We've always been ready. We've seen all of the different potential plays in the playbook.

We've added to it as he's channeled and projected other actions he might take. We read Project 2025. We listened to everything he says and we assume he's going to do it. So we're ready to move quickly. We have a rapid response team ready to move quickly if we need to go to court. Courts are still places where the facts matter, where you need to have the facts. You can't just make wild, reckless, irresponsible, untruthful statements like, unfortunately, this president does regularly. And courts are places where a judge will look at the actual facts and the claims of the president

and conclude that the president's version of the facts is untethered from the actual facts, which is what Judge Immergut in the District of Oregon said about Oregon's state of affairs on the ground when the president was saying it's war ravaged and war-torn. She said that that was untethered from the fact. So we have a plan. We're prepared to go in to block any attempts by the president or his administration to interfere with the reliable, safe, and secure elections here in the state of California. And finally, I want to switch gears to a different topic entirely. you and a number of other attorneys general across the country have waged a new lawsuit against

this Trump administration. Can you explain what that lawsuit is? Absolutely. We brought our 45th lawsuit in 40 weeks today. The state of California did proudly along with 25 other states, 23, all 23 Democratic Attorney General states, as well as three other states where there's a Republican AD, but a Democratic governor who wanted to protect their people and make sure that they got SNAP benefits, food assistance from the government. And we argue that the federal administration is unlawfully withholding billions of dollars in funding for the SNAP program, the supplemental nutrition assistance program, food stamps. There's a law, the SNAP Act, which says that funding, including funding in a contingency fund, which the government has, shall be spent. It's a shall

to support SNAP benefits when there was funding in that pot. And as recently as 2019, the last government shutdown, that's exactly what that funding was used for. The contingency fund was used to fund SNAP. So there's 41 million people that are going to be hurt across the nation in both blue states and red states. It's 5.5 million in California. We're going to lose $1.1 million in one month.

This is $8 billion a month in terms of the burn rate that's expended. on snap. So, and these are children who won't have enough to eat. These are seniors. These are the disabled. These are our most vulnerable. And when it comes to our most vulnerable, I believe our society should be treated on how, or judged, and how we treat our most vulnerable. And on that regard, in that regard, Trump gets an F because they do have the money. They can spend it. They are deliberately deciding not to, so that they can blame the Democrats. This is, they're trying to use it as a cudgel and a bludgeon in the negotiations over the government shutdown.

The fundings there, they can spend it, but they're not spending it on purpose, hurting people deliberately. Cruelty is the policy. Cruelty is the outcome. Cruelty is the desire. So then they can then try to blame it on the Democrats. And they already have on their SNAP website a statement that says, the well is dry, you know, blame the Senate Democrats essentially.

Right, right. I think you're exactly right in the sense that this is their governing philosophy. You know, their governing philosophy is just to help the folks who already have more than they could ever ask for and just help them consolidate more wealth, more power for themselves. And meanwhile, I think the philosophy that you have on the left is that the government should be there to assist the most vulnerable. And so you just have as clear a distinction as you could possibly have. And it does not help that the White House right now, as they're continuing to

cut these snap benefits for 41, 42 million Americans as they're continuing to cut Medicaid from 17 million Americans as they're looking to increase ACA subsidies for 24 million Americans that what they are focused on, what is getting done, is a $350 million ballroom that Donald Trump is going to be able to enjoy with his, with his, you know, pals and heads of state, giving Gulfstream jets to Christy Nome, retrofitting a $400 million dollar Qatari jet to the tune of a billion dollars paid for by American taxpayers, hosting crypto dinners so that he can double his net worth, and of course, adorning the Oval office in gold leafing. So he is putting on full display what his priorities are. And meanwhile,

you can see who's kind of getting left behind as the result of that. With that said, Attorney General Rob Bonta, thank you so much for taking the time. I appreciate it. Thanks, Brian. Great to see you. Thanks for having me. No Lie is brought to you by Factor. We're now in the fall season. That can kind of feel like a reset. There's a lot happening right now between back to school, between busier routines, and shorter days on top of all of that, which means finding time to actually cook can be tough. That's why I love Factor. Their chef-prepared, dietitian-approved meals can make it easy to stay on track and enjoy something comforting and delicious,

no matter how hectic the season gets. The reality is that with Factor, there's more variety and more meals. You can choose from a wider selection of meal options each week, including premium seafood options like salmon and shrimp, and those come at no extra cost. helps you support your wellness goals because right now you can enjoy even more GLP1 friendly meals and the new Mediterranean diet options that are packed with protein and good for you fats and you can enjoy global flavors because for the first time you have Asian-inspired meals with bold flavors that are influenced by China Thailand and more Factor has more choices and better nutrition which is

why 97% of customers say that Factor help them live a healthier lifestyle you can feel the difference no matter your routine and the reality is that for somebody like me my routine doesn't allow me to cook. And so I need to rely on Factor to make sure that I eat every day because if I didn't have Factor, I would probably skip a lot more meals than I do right now. And the most important thing for me is that what I eat tastes good and that it's good for me. I'm very careful about what I put into my body. Factor make sure that that is completely taken care of. You can eat smart at FactorMeals.com slash BTC 50 off and use code BTC 50 off to get 50% off your first box

plus free breakfast for a year. That's code BTC 50 off at Factor Meals.com for 50% off your first. box plus free breakfast for a year. Get delicious, ready to eat meals delivered with Factor. Offer only valid for new factor customers with code and qualifying auto-renewing subscription purchase. I'm joined now by Chief Washington correspondent and author of the new book, Retribution, Donald Trump and the Campaign That Changed America, Jonathan, thanks so much for joining me. Hey, thanks a lot for having me. All right. So this book is entitled Retribution. Obviously, we're seeing the extent to which that's playing out right now. We've seen indictments against James Comey, Letitia James, John Bolton.

Were these indictments surprising to you? And beyond that, do you think there is an extent to which Donald Trump is going to, at any point, curb his thirst for vengeance as he continues to move forward in his administration? I see no signs of curbing that thirst for vengeance. And it's not just the indictments. I mean, it's the way he's gone after the major law firms, the universities, the way that he has, you know, both courted and threatened the tech companies. You remember when he left the White House, he was effectively a pariah. He was banned on social media, major corporations

in this country were saying that they were not doing any donations to Republicans who supported him in overturning or trying to overturn the 2020 election. And of course, he faced all those criminal indictments, the impeachments, and all that. So his retribution is beyond D. OJ, D.O.J is a key part of it. Am I surprised? No. I mean, he made pretty clear this is what he wanted to do. And then he put into positions of authority people who had explicitly said that they were going to do this. You know, Cash Patel, first and foremost, as the director of the FBI. You know, so much of the Republican brand was predicated on this idea that they were against the weaponization of government. And now not only are they okay with weapons,

weaponization of government, but they're barreling ahead, to your exact point, having put people in power whose sole raison d'etra is basically to just seek vengeance against their political opponents. And so does there seem to be, in your conversations with folks you've spoken with, does there seem to be any bristling happening among folks on the right, among these Republican elected officials who, again, put so much of their brand into this idea that they were against it back when Democrats were in power? Certainly nothing, I mean, almost. nothing publicly. Privately, yes, some, you know, that there's some, mostly that it's not an effective political strategy, not that it's wrong or that it's, you know, an abuse of federal

power. Really what you hear is, you know, this is, you know, people want us to concentrate on the economy, on crime, on the border, on the, on the other things that Donald Trump talked on, you know, campaigned on. I mean, the thing is, he did campaign on retribution, not just in the beginning, you know, when he said, I am your retribution at that famous speech at CPAC shortly after he announced his campaign early 2023. He lost its first rally is at Waco, Texas, explicitly making the comparison, or I should say implicitly, but others talked about it explicitly, the comparison between what happened at Waco, Texas, with the federal showdown with the Branch Divideons, seen by the far right

as a great symbol of the federal abuse of power. I mean, this is core to what he campaigned on, and you certainly don't see anybody pushing back in any significant way in his administration. One thing that did happen was when the Comey indictment came down, before it came down, when it was in the process of coming down, the leadership of the Justice Department did gently push back and say this is not a fully baked case,

We shouldn't go forward, at least not at this time. That was Pambondi. It was Todd Blanche, number one and two at DOJ. But Trump barreled ahead. I mean, it was because of Trump that the, you know, that you now have Lindsey Halligan, the top prosecutor in one of the most important U.S. attorneys' offices in the country

and leading not just the indictment of Comey, but the indictment of Tish James, and the suggestion that there are a whole list of others that it could be indicted soon as well. Well, isn't this kind of a leopards-eating faces party type situation? Because the irony of all of this is that the reason that there won't be any pushback or any vocal pushback at least is because those very people who are enabling this retribution tour right now know that if they do speak out, that they'll be on the receiving

end of it. Yeah, I mean, because it's a very, you raise a very important point, which is the retribution, which right now we see, you know, aimed at Tish James. Also, Comey, Comey, let's not forget, as a Republican or always was a Republican administrations, also worked in Democratic administrations, but he is a lifelong, or was a lifelong Republican. But very high on the list of enemies for Donald Trump and explicitly placed out by, you know, Cash Patel famously in his book, are Republicans. I mean, one person that Steve Bannon has suggested recently should also be indicted is Bill Barr.

You know, Donald Trump's former... That crunchy liberal Bill Barr. I mean, first of all, there's nobody that Democrats hated more than Bill Barr, for God's sake, you know. But, I mean, look, he committed the cardinal sin of saying that Donald Trump's stolen election claims during the 2020 election were bullshit. He did the cardinal sin of telling the truth about the 2020 election and doing so without any hedging whatsoever. And that's why they want to actually, you know, indict him. Well, you know, you had spoken about a number of officials in the book who, who were instrumental in kind of playing a key role amid the infighting as as Trump built out

his administration from Mar-a-Lago. Can you talk about the role that Steve Bannon, Kevin McCarthy, and Pete Hegseth played? Yeah, I mean, I tried to really get the behind-the-scenes version of what was actually going on after Trump won, re-won the White House and began the transition, mostly headquartered out of Mar-a-Lago, which, by the way, is not a very big place. It's a private club. There's no office space to speak of at Mara Lago. Trump has an office.

That's kind of it. I mean, if there was office space, he probably wouldn't have put boxes of classified documents next to the toilet. Exactly. And there is a big Trump transition officer. There was, which was with the old campaign headquarters, a couple of miles away in West Palm Beach.

But Trump wasn't going to go there. And everybody knew that the only way to really make inroads in the transition to get a job, a significant job in the White House was going to be to go to Mara Lago and get FaceTime with Donald Trump. So I went and described this scene, which was, you know, there was a, first of all, I should say, there was a perception and there were some analysis early on, not very good analysis, I don't think, that Trump's second transition was so much more smoothly run than his first, you know, that Susie Wiles had really, you know, imposed some discipline.

they were getting their announcements out much earlier there was a real process in place i mean no i mean there was maybe less public drama um and susie wilds does a great job of limiting that um but it was it was the wild west uh in in at marlago of trump kind of making up his mind on the fly to make picks i mean you know you didn't mention gates uh you know matt gates was decided basically you know without even anybody, I mean, being in the loop on this. Trump just like, you know, that was a Steve Bannon thing. Steve Bannon had no role in the transition, but he was a monumental influence in that transition.

I mean, the reason why, a big reason why, Cash Patel is the FBI director, that Gates was chosen, obviously it failed, he ultimately drawed, withdrew was because of Bannon. Scott Besson was a major Steve Bannon guy, came on the scene through Bannon's war room you know, podcast. And, you know, Bannon, actually, I write about, I spent some time in Maralago during this time, obviously, and trying to, you know, think not just for the daily reporting,

but I knew I wanted to actually try to describe the scene that was going on. I described what some people down there called the alternative or the real transition, which was a group of real MAGA, you know, you know, hardcore Trump acolytes who operated off of a yacht just about a little ways away, the intercoastal waterway. The yacht was owned by a retired coal magnate. His name is John Rich. I actually visited this yacht, talk to people there. They would have meetings there. They would have after parties after dinner at Mar-a-Lago. And it was this little core of, you know, people pushing for various folks in the administration that was making. the case for, you know, some of the most, you know, hardcore, you know, MAGA right nominee

that Trump ultimately chose. Well, it sounds like there was a lot of, a lot of jockeying and trying to prove their loyalty to Donald Trump. I mean, look, you know, we had opened this conversation talking about the very concept of retribution, the title of the book, and I had asked kind of incredulously why people would, on the right in this movement that, again, stakes so much of their identity on, on their disdain, their purported disdain for the weaponization of government. But it sounds like the reason that they're okay with it is just because this administration was just built up of

people who had spent all of this time jockeying for position and showing their loyal, proving their loyalty to Donald Trump. And so that's why they're perfectly content to contract, you know, contract away all of their purported values and instead just do whatever Donald Trump tells them he wants them to do. I mean, the hypocrisy on this point is obvious. But But I think that a lot of these folks actually don't see the hypocrisy. I mean, some do, and they say, who cares? We're in a fight. We're going to use whatever tools we want.

But in the mindset, it is rooting out and punishing those who weaponized the government. So you're weaponizing the government to neutralize the people that weaponized the government. I mean, you kind of get you have to get into the mindset. And this is what, you know, this was the case that was made. by some of Trump's most loyal supporters, the few people that really stuck with him after, in the immediate aftermath of him leaving the White House, the problem here is not just, you know, the Democrats that impeached them. It's not just even the prosecutors that indicted him. It's the Republicans who didn't sufficiently defend him and who made this all

possible. Right. This is a message to other Republicans that he will accept total loyalty and nothing else. To that point, you know, is there any sense that these people truly believe that the government was weaponized against Trump or that what they're doing right now is actually being done in good faith? I mean, like, these people, these people have to be, have to be smart enough to understand that the objective reality that Trump didn't win the election. And, you know, there's a big part of me that also believes that Trump himself is smart enough to understand. Are they, is this K-fabe? Are they all, is this just a bit they're all playing so that they can kowtow to Trump?

Or did you get any sense, you know, in your interactions with these people, that they're true believers, that they really believe the 2020 election was stolen and that they have to take these extraordinary steps in order to neutralize those Democrats and Republicans who had been there looking to weaponize the government against Donald Trump, who was completely innocent? Don't underestimate the power of the reality distorting apparatus that has been built up over the last several years. Look, clearly there are people that know the gig. And by the way, one of the things the January 6th committee did with the power of being able to compel people to testify

was to get a whole long list of people around Trump to say under oath, that no the election was not stolen i didn't see any evidence the election was stolen um you know that that that's that includes people that were there with him at the white house that includes the people that were running his campaign um and they finally you know gig is up i'm under oath no i saw no evidence that the election was stolen by the way all of those people are gone they are not back those people are done and so you know now that you have to kind of go along with it so there's are people that are kind of cynically or you know just just saying I'm doing what I have to do but let's go one wrong beyond that I mean you go out and you talk to um Republican voters

people that really love Donald Trump who you know don't have a job at stake and and you find people who truly believe that the election was stolen the repeating of the lie over and over and over again has really sunk in and you have people say you really think that Joe Biden could have beaten Donald Trump you really believe that that there's no way I mean I mean it just it's it's in the head I'm not saying that they you know buy into some of the cuckier conspiracy theories about dead Venezuelans rigging voting machines but they think that the that the election was you know was was rigged in some way they buy into you know Trump's repeated you know allegations about paper ballots or whatever.

I mean, so I think that there are a lot of people in this country, and yes, some in the senior positions at the White House and the Justice Department who do actually believe this stuff. I'm not saying, I mean, there are clearly many that don't, but I think that the lie has taken hold, and it might, frankly, at this point, I cannot read Donald Trump's mind. I have strong evidence that after the election he knew he had lost in 2020, but I think that in his own head, he's now fully come to believe it.

Believe that he won. Yeah. Believe that he won. That was going to be my next question. You know, you had mentioned Steve Bannon and his outsides influence in building up this administration. You know, Steve Bannon came out a few days ago and suggested for the umpteenth time already that Donald Trump is going to be president in 2028,

that they're going to find some maneuver to get him in. Trump is since kind of, you know, flirted. with it and then walked back. I mean, you know, whatever Trump says about this issue, like all other issues, is just kind of the product of whatever, you know, the last person he spoke to or some fleeting, you know, errant synapse that fires in his brain, and that's just his decision for the day and it can change tomorrow or the next day. Do you believe that Steve Bannon is telling the truth? Do you have any concern that Donald Trump is going to, you know, move forward and seek a third term in some untoward way or some constitutionally subversive way?

I don't think that Trump actually intends to do that. Could the situation kind of spiral and, you know, enough people tell them, oh my God, that people want you, the people need you. You know, you got to do it again. I mean, I think that's possible, but I think that Trump's intention, right, it's matter, I know, because I've talked to people who are close to Trump who are actually, you know, friends with Donald Trump who say that he has said privately, you know, no, no, I'm done, I'm playing golf, you know, I'm not staying.

not sticking around. But, you know, I mean, Bannon's out there beating the drums on that. I think, by the way, that one of the reasons why Steve Bannon is saying that is not necessarily that he actually wants Trump to run for a third term, but he does not want J.D. Vance to get a head start at all. He's got a lot of this is public. He does not get along with J.D. Vance. So he wants to make it very difficult, if not impossible, for J.D. Vance, too, at some point, step forward and saying, you know, I'm starting my exploratory committee to run for president in 2020. If there's this general sense that Trump may still be the guy that effectively freezes the field. Yeah, it's betrayal. If Trump hasn't, you know, explicitly ruled it out and said, I'm retiring, you know, and you're saying, you're going to run. What? You're going to run? I mean, if he's wrong, what are you saying? So yes, it freezes the field.

And by the way, if you've noticed, maybe you haven't because you have to really kind of burrow in. And I spent a lot of time burrowing into these places. But the other thing that Bannon has been doing lately is he's been increasingly critical of Marco Rubio. Somebody who he had come to, you know, accept as a fellow populist, despite his history is, you know, a neo-conservative and his, you know, advocacy of immigration, amnesty and all those things that he did earlier in his. in his Senate career. But Bannon now has become increasingly critical of Marco Rubio over what is happening in Venezuela. Bannon as a, you know, America first, meaning essentially an isolationist foreign policy, is horrified to see a military buildup around Venezuela. It doesn't fit with what he believes in America first foreign policy is. And he blames not Donald Trump for that because

Bannon never blames Donald Trump for anything, he blames Marco Rubio, because Rubio is the biggest advocate for what's happening. At least that's the case Bannon's making. John, while you were writing this book, Retribution, what was the most striking part of it to write? Well, it was a couple of things. One was certainly that whole scene around the transition. And I found out, you know, as you'll see, there is some pretty wild report. about, you know, what was going on and then jockeying to put the other Trump cabinet. But the other thing is the actual Trump-Biden relationship, because I spent a great deal of time dissecting and reporting on the half-dozen or so times that Donald Trump and Joe Biden actually

interacted in privately, the first one, privately after the shooting in Butler. The first time was that day. A phone conversation I talked to, people that overheard the conversation. I have a very good sense of what happened in that phone call. I have a very good description, detailed description of their interactions when Trump came to the White House after the election. You remember he met for two and a half hours with Trump without any camera's presence in the Oval Office. And also there are interactions on three occasions on January 20th, the day of the inauguration. And, you know, Trump is as warm and friendly, like treating Biden like he's an old,

friend and he admires him and if it weren't for politics you know we'd be good friends uh you know very gracious towards jill Biden uh and by the way Joe Biden's also equally gracious back to Donald Trump completely at odds with what we were seeing play out and what we're seeing play out now in front of the cameras um so that that was quite interesting you know also the the interaction of Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama um as they were trying to find a way to deal with the fact that they and so many other Democrats believed that Biden just had to get out of the race, how they could nudge him out without doing it in a publicly frontal way, how they really wanted to avoid a coronation for Kamala Harris, and those interactions, absolutely fascinating.

Well, I highly recommend the book, Retribution, Donald Trump in the campaign that changed America. I'm going to put that link right here on the screen and also in the post description of this video. Jonathan Carl, thanks so much for taking the time. Hey, I really appreciate you having me on. And let's, we'll see you in person soon, I hope. I'm joined now by author of the Latino Century and Latino Political Consultant, Mike Madrid. Mike, thanks for joining me.

Brian, it's always great to be with you. Thanks for having me. So we have some pretty big news here as the bottom seems to have fallen out with Donald Trump and Latinos who were, of course, instrumental in his rise to power in this 2024 election cycle. So I'm going to put right here on the screen

that Donald Trump's approval rating among Hispanics from the AP, you can see that he's got 73% disapprove and 27% approval. That's an eight point gain in disapproval and a six point drop in approval. So some pretty staggering numbers there. First and foremost, what do you attribute this massive shift to? Well, that's exactly right. Let me just kind of put into context. This is very different from the last time we spoke, which was in the summer where he was

sitting at about a 33, 34% approval rating. They're now down into the 20s. This is getting back into a historical trend line for Republicans before Trump came on the scene. So this is very significant. It may sound a little bit nerdy, but from a technical perspective, Trump is actually falling through his base level fall of support downward and considerably. So it's a big deal. The question then becomes your next question, which is what's driving it? Donald Trump's collapse amongst Latinos began in April, early April, when he had this Liberation Day announcement on tariffs.

The economy is overwhelmingly driving this down. There's no question the ice raids are having a secondary impact and effect on this. That's absolutely true. But his drop and support levels, considerable drop, began six weeks before the ice raids in Los Angeles. It's important for listeners to understand because overwhelmingly and increasingly, the Latino voter is saying that it's affordability and the economy that is driving their voting behavior, not primarily the ice rates, not immigration. They're both working together to drive its support levels lower.

Its ice rates are clearly having an impact, but they're not the main driver. They're not the main impact of what's happening here. It's the economy, the economy, and the economy. So that would suggest that, you know, the Latino population, notwithstanding the fact that this is still not, it's not a homogenous block, but still, I think with some certainty,

you can say that the Latino population writ large follows the same trend lines as the rest of the population. Is that right? Because we're seeing the same trajectory among the non-Latino population that's being pulled. That's exactly right. I think the best way to look at it, and again, a lot of people are looking because this is a non-white constituency, is what is the racial or ethnic prism? What is the racial or ethnic issue that is driving these voters? And that's why this kind of stereotype of immigration comes into play. But that's not what the data has said for 30 years. And it's not what the data is saying now. What the data is telling us is that the one cultural characteristic is that this is a

blue-collar working class voter that is more price sensitive to things like inflation, to tariffs, which test very, very negatively with Latinos because they work in industries that are going to be the most impacted by them. So yes, it's fair to say, Brian, that this is not unlike voters overall, but most acutely as a lower-income, more price-sensitive voter, and it's why you're seeing these dramatic swings with Latinos more than any other group that we're testing and looking at right now. Okay, so clearly outsized influence for economic factors, but we've also seen among the whole population that the way the Trump has handled himself, behaved, comported himself as it relates to immigration, is also unpopular. And so what kind of an impact does

that have on the Latino population? Is it the same as the rest of the population? Or does it does it have any outsized impact among Latinos as well since look a lot of a lot of Trump's policies are aimed at people just for the crime of being brown correct that's and that's a great way to characterize it so the short answer is yes it's having an impact on Latino voters yes it's having a greater impact with Latinos than other non-latino constituencies that is absolutely quantifiably accurate but what I want people to realize to remember is it's not the primary mover. It's definitely become even more than just an immigration issue, not just for Latinos, but broadly, but certainly for Latinos, it's become a government overreach issue. The fact that the

government is doing these really egregious things, militarizing our streets, jackbooted, masked thugs, tearing children from their mother's arms, coming after teenagers, going into churches, hospital beds. Yes, it is having an outsized impact in the Latino community. And I don't want to suggest that it is not important and it is not cementing a political opinion because it absolutely is. But the two combined are really what explains this historic drop. Again, it's very rare to see Donald Trump go below a floor of support. Once you kind of get red-pilled and do this MAGA thing, it's hard to break through that fever, but the fever is breaking. Broadly amongst Americans, you're seeing support levels in the mid-30s now.

Even in COVID, Brian, we were not seeing mid-30s support. He was in the high 30s, low 40s. We're now seeing 37, 36, and a lot of polling. So something is transforming. Something is changing. One of the most significant shifts, again, is with Latino voters who are basically, we've seen all of the gains of the Trump era been completely wiped out. So you had mentioned something that I, that I'm particularly interested in, and that is this idea

of getting red-pilled. And I think for so much of the population, it feels like politicians are on a race to calcify these voters, however they may be polarized. And so you want voters to start to combine their identity with their political affiliation so that this time, you know, the next time there's an election and they have an R or a D next to the candidate's name and you've identified as a Republican or a Democrat, it's going to be that much easier to keep those people in your stable and, of course, to make them lifelong Democrats or Republicans. To what extent do you think that that phenomenon is happening or not happening among the

Latino population because this kind of movement suggests that there's pretty low calcification among, you know, the polarization of that electorate. Boy, that's a very astute observation and 100% accurate. A lot of people have erroneously suggested that we are witnessing a racial realignment. I have always pushed back against that narrative. There is very little, almost no evidence suggesting that Latino voters are becoming more conservative or more Republican. So why, Mike, if you say that, why are they voting more Republican? The best answer, the best explanation is what we're witnessing is a de-alignment. Economic populism

with Latinos is greater than it is with any other constituency. Again, a younger, poor, less college-educated group that stands to reason. But they're affiliating less with the Democratic party as they're affiliating less with both parties. And Democrats have a longer way down to go because they started from a stronger position of strength. So Latinos are the most likely ethnic group to have a no-party preference, to not affiliate with Democrats or Republicans. It is the swingiest vote in American politics by far. It's the only group that's essentially breaking 50-50 between the voter groups.

But as I was explaining to a reporter last night, it's not that half of Latinos are voting for Republicans and half are voting for Democrats. It's better explained by saying half of Latinos are. voting against Republicans and half are voting against Democrats. And once you understand that as a party, you can start to recapture these voters, there will be a return of a lot of these Trump curious Latinos from the Republican Party to the Democrats in the midterms. That will happen. The only question is how big it's going to be. So I know that labels are not particularly important. I know that real voters out there don't hew to the labels, you know, in the way that

people give them, that voters are weird and that, you know, we've seen plenty of election cycles where somebody's first choice will be, you know, Ted Cruz, their second choice will be Bernie Sanders, their third choice will be, you know, Pete Buttigieg and their fourth will be Donald Trump. So nobody really fits into these neat little buckets in the way that we think about them. But at the same time, you know, you had mentioned that this is a more economically populist group. And a lot of the Democratic candidates, especially who've been espousing economic populism are the farther left. Sometimes they'll put their own labels as democratic socialist or socialist. And that's breaking my mind a little bit because the way that we've

thought about the Latino population in the past is that the last thing that you want to be is have any or have is any adherence to socialism because that's been such a boogeyman in the past as it relates to the Latino community. And so how do you reconcile those two things that that at least in my mind, are seemingly in conflict. Well, again, another great question. So let me dispel the socialism myth here. The socialism, communism label works with a very small subset of Latinos. Those are Cubans and Venezuelans.

Combined, that's about 6% of the entire Latino electorate. More importantly, 90% of that is concentrated in the southern part of Florida. So it has never been something that is going to resonate with Mexican Americans, Central Americans, Dominicans, or certainly Puerto Ricans who are Americans by birth, those combined make up the massive amount of Latinos. So whenever you hear somebody trying to win or scare Latino voters by using the socialism moniker, they're not moving the needle at all. They're not even talking to the audience. Having said that, it's really important to listen to any of the vote any of the politicians in the democratic coalition that are using economic

populism as a tool and that runs from a zoron mom donnie who is winning back a lot of these new york city Latino working class voters who went who defected to trump just eight months ago are now coming back in droves to this candidate but they're also moving towards a rupin gallego in Arizona, who's setting the centrist, more conservative, if you will, flank in the Democratic Party. So why is it that both of these candidates and both these candidacies are appealing to these voters? The answer isn't just in the economics. It's in the populism. Both of these candidates were very critical and are still very critical of their own party's

establishment for not prioritizing these issues, whatever they are. They're clearly not ideological. Latinos are not ideological voters in the same way others are, but they're very anti-establishment voters. It's why Bernie Sanders was winning many of the same precincts that Donald Trump won in the Rio Grande Valley in Texas or the urban core of Los Angeles. These voters are saying we need help. They're not feeling that they're getting it from their own party and certainly not the system in American politics today. And so what would your recommendation be for any Democrat who's looking to bolster their flanks with the Latino population.

What would your recommendation for those folks be? It's going to sound a little bit peculiar, but I'm going to say lead with economics regardless of what your ideological persuasion is. Latino voters are so desperate to hear about economics that they're going to, again, a Mamdani, a Democratic socialist, a Bernie Sanders, a Donald Trump, a Rupin Gallego. The thing that all of these characters, all the four of these politicians have in common is, they're challenging the orthodoxy of their own establishment, of their own parties and saying, we need something different, and they're talking about through an economic lens. If you want to

win Latino voters, I'm not going to tell you that it's a silver bullet economic issue on the left, on the center, or the right. But what I am going to tell you is, if you characterize your own belief system in challenging the structures of both major parties and the American system broadly, you're going to see results. You will get traction because just focusing on it and making it the centerpiece is everything that this working class struggling, working poor community wants and have not received from either party from their estimation. Perfectly put. We'll leave it there. Mike, how can folks who are watching right now hear more from you? I write regularly on these topics. My substack on The Great Transformation is the name of my newsletter or follow me on X

at Madrid underscore Mike. Awesome. Mike, as always. Thanks so much for the time. I appreciate it. Appreciate you, Brian. Thanks for your good work out there. Thanks again to Gavin Newsom, Rob Bonta, Jonathan Carl, and Mike Madrid. 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, 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 in a review. And as always, you can find me at Brian Tyler Cohen on all of my other channels, or you can go to Brian Tyler. colorcoen.com to learn more.