No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen - Trump undermines his OWN trade war

Episode Date: April 13, 2025

Trump caves on the single most important element of his tariff policies. Brian interviews Senator Cory Booker about his 25 hour speech and the impact of Trump’s economic warfare; Senator Elizabeth Warren about the possibility of an insider trading scandal in the White House; Senator Brian Schatz about the move he pulled to slow down Republican progress; and journalist Ari Berman about what a spate of special elections suggests about midterms.Shop merch: https://briantylercohen.com/shopYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/briantylercohenTwitter: https://twitter.com/briantylercohenFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/briantylercohenInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/briantylercohenPatreon: https://www.patreon.com/briantylercohenNewsletter: https://www.briantylercohen.com/sign-upWritten by Brian Tyler CohenProduced by Sam GraberRecorded in Los Angeles, CASee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Today we're going to talk about Trump caving on the single most important element of his tariff policies. And I've got four interviews this week. I talked to Senator Cory Booker about his 25-hour speech and the impact of Trump's economic warfare on Americans. Senator Elizabeth Warren about the possibility of an insider trading scandal in the White House. Senator Brian Schatz about the move he pulled to slow down Republican progress. And journalist Ari Berman about what a spate of special election suggests about midterms. I'm Brian Tyler Cohen, and you're listening to No Lie. So I'm going to do something that I never do. I'm going to give Donald Trump the benefit of the doubt. I'm going to assume, if only for a moment, that he was telling the truth when he said that the whole point of this trade war and the subsequent economic crash was to take it to China and reshore American jobs and restore our greatness and to make America great again.

Humor me for this thought experiment and let's pretend for a moment that he is acting in good faith when he says that, sure, we've got to contend with a little bit of pain because it's just that important. to box out China and protect ourselves on the global stage. He seems to really mean it, right? After all, why else would you crash the global economy if you weren't absolutely bought in? Well, now enjoy this latest excerpt from an article in the New York Times. After more than a week of ratcheting up tariffs on products imported from China, the Trump administration issued a rule late Friday that spared smartphones, computers, semiconductors, and other electronics from some of the fees in a significant break for tech companies. companies like Apple and Dell and the prices of iPhones and other consumer electronics, a message posted late Friday by U.S. Customs and Border Protection included a long list of products that would not face the reciprocal tariffs President Trump imposed on recent days

on Chinese goods as part of a worsening trade war. The exclusions would also apply to modems, routers, flash drives, and other technology goods, which are largely not made in the United States. So, just want to make sure I'm understanding. Trump launched the trade war and cratered our markets and gutted everybody's 401ks because we apparently needed to reshore all of those lost jobs and bring back lost industries. And now, Trump is ceding advanced electronics manufacturing back to China, which means that we're still left with tariffs on, what, Madagascar's vanilla? What, are we in a recession now because Trump decided that we're going to grow coffee in the United States? That's what we did this for?

I mean, I'm sorry, but wasn't this the whole fucking point of the trade war to claw back advanced electronics manufacturing from China? And now that is quite literally what Trump exempted from his tariffs. Look, I would ask everybody if it was worth it, but I think the answer would be too obvious. And so if you want to know why he did this, there are two reasons. One, obviously, the global economy was cratering and specifically foreign countries were dumping our bonds, which are supposed to be the safest investment in the country in the world, right? And it basically broadcast to us that the world is losing faith in the U.S. and our dollar, which effectively undermines Trump's whole stated goal, which is to reinvest in the United States.

In other words, the guy is an idiot who shot himself in the foot, and so he had no choice but to cave. But the second reason is because think about who the China tariffs would hurt most. Says it right there in the New York Times article, Apple. But think about who cozied up to Trump and donated a million bucks to his inaugural fund and did the obligatory dinner at Mar-a-Lago and kissed his ass. Tim Cook. In other words, Tim Cook petition the king, and so he gets his carve-out. And that's how this works, because Trump only takes care of the people who first pledged something to him.

A couple weeks back on this podcast, I spoke about this concept of petitioning the king, where Trump would impose blanket tariffs, knowing full well that the only way that they could be removed is if people or companies or countries came groveling and offered him something financial or political in exchange for him lifting those tariffs, meaning he gets something. And of course, all the while, it's Americans who are the collateral damage who have to suffer the financial consequences of a crashing market, of gutted 401ks, of high cost, while Trump carries out all of these quid pro quos to help himself. And so in this case, Apple got its carve-out because Trump got a million bucks, and so they'll be fine, which basically tells you that,

A, Trump's default position is that he is perfectly willing to destroy our economy while he waits for his gifts and his political favors, and B, that while the apples of the world can afford to pay him off, it's the little guys who can't. It's the mom and pop shops, it's the small businesses that aren't the richest companies on earth, who can't afford to give million-dollar checks, and who can't petition the king for carve-outs who are going to die on the vine here. And frankly, Trump doesn't care because they can't give him anything anyway, and so if he doesn't get anything, then he's not interested. And this is the part worth paying attention to because Trump has coasted off his branding as some champion for American businesses,

but in reality, this is going to kill countless American businesses. This guy doesn't care about bolstering business. He cares about protecting himself and his own interests. He put America's small businesses out of business because he needed to set up a process by which the only way anyone could survive is if you have something of value to surrender to him. That is the danger of electing somebody whose first, second, and third priority is himself and himself alone. Next up our main interviews with Senators Booker, Warren, Schatz, and journalist Ari Berman. No Lie is brought to you by Uplift Desk. So if you work in front of a desk like I do,

I know that I often find myself discouraged that I spent yet another day sitting for long periods of time. I seriously thought that this would be a lasting problem until I found Uplift Desk. Uplift Desk is at the forefront of ergonomic solutions, promoting better. posture and health through adjustable standing desks designed to help you live a healthier lifestyle plus they have all kinds of accessories to keep you moving throughout the day even if you work only for a few hours at your desk I know for me personally there is a shelf that I like that I put my monitor on this way I have the full real estate from my desk standing while I work gives me the room to move and helps me get

the creative juices flowing moving throughout the day helps me focus and stay productive I'm way more alert when I'm using my standing desk and I have more energy also as far as health benefits are concerned a 45 degree bend in your neck can result in up to 50 pounds of gravitational force being placed on your neck muscles. The option to move while I work promotes better circulation, which can reduce all types of different health risks and repetitive strains. So look, a desk should fit the user, which is why Uplift Desk has a lot of customization options so you can build your perfect workspace. With more than 200,000 configurations, Uplift Desk allows you to tailor your workspace to perfectly suit your style and needs, empowering you to create an environment that inspires productivity and creativity.

Make this year yours by going to upliftdesk.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 and an extra discount off your entire order. That's Uplift-D-E-Sk.com slash BTC for a special offer, and it's only available at our link. Stand, Move, Thrive with Uplift Desk. I'm joined now by Senator Cory Booker. Thanks for joining me. Thank you for having me.

Your speech on the Senate floor, 25 hours, you know, nonstop without taking any breaks, obviously broke through in a huge way. And so how is the rest of the Senate Democratic caucus thinking about this in terms of, okay, it's not just what can we do that is the bare minimum, but what can we do that is the maximum? I mean, if you set the bar, how is the rest of the caucus thinking about this in terms of what everybody should be doing? Look, I think that the thing I tried to confess in my speech is that all of the, of us were struggling because we were hearing the really powerful demands, the legitimate

demands of our constituents saying, the crisis is so great, you need to do more. And none of us were doing enough. And I don't think that just goes for 47 senators in the Democratic caucus. But given the level of crisis, all of us should be asking that same question. And so what's great right now is I'm starting to see more creativity and all of us as a caucus to say, how do we rise and meet this? And even just throwing ideas out there about how to bring attention to, how to dramatize the level of the crisis.

So look, one of the best things that's happened is learning the tools that you've mastered is I had people that didn't have a TikTok account, didn't now have a TikTok account. And in their first days, there's such a hunger for voices, you know, seeing Mark Kelly get millions of views in his first days and how he is doing what I think is most important right now is to inform, engage, and activate the best power we have, which is the power of the people. What was that moment like for you to get to the 25th hour and to know that you had taken over the record

from somebody who himself made history by virtue of trying to prevent somebody like you from even being able to stand where you were standing? I think what I try to draw a lot right now is from the strength of our of history. And here's a guy, that was in power. He did have the votes. He did have the ability to block the whole civil rights movement. And yet here I stand as a black guy in the Senate as a testimony along with

people like Lisa Blunt, Rochester and Angela also Brooks and Warnock. We all stand as a testimony that they failed, even though they were powerful, demagogic leaders praying upon hate and division to stop justice from happening. And in many ways, I hope, for me, I took a a lot of strength from, that can't stand. These people don't win. They are in the ash heap of history as those people that were on the wrong side of history. And so for me at that moment, I cannot tell you how much I felt my ancestors present in that time. I was exhausted, dehydrated, dealing with muscle cramps and a lot of other challenges, but suddenly I just felt like I was riding on the spirit of people who came before. And I, and I, and I, and I,

And a line that I have to say to my team, Marissa, one of my members said to me, like, should we get there? Because we didn't know this. She just said, don't forget, Senator, that you're not there because of his speech. You weren't standing here to break his speech. You're here despite his speech. And I think that was so much truth to remember that, and I think this is the most important point is we didn't win the civil rights legislation because of anything that happened in that

chamber, because of any of the senators, if anything, they were, they did not have the power to overcome that filibuster and overcome that resistance. What changed that was the outside, was how many Americans were willing to march and sit in and do freedom rides and leave the comfort of their homes to go out and be a part of a larger movement that had black folks and white folks, Jewish folks and Muslim folks, people, unusual coalitions that came together to overcome that moment in history. And that is the story of America. and over and over again, from abolition to suffrage, to civil rights, to LGBTQ rights, from Selma to Stonewall to Seneca Falls.

That's the story of America that we need now more than ever to be living. And I think it was the beginning of what we're seeing in terms of a sea change for people not only recognizing that, A, it's important to break through, and we have to think of creative ways to break through, B, recognizing that in some of these instances, you've got to put your body on the line. And that's exactly what you did. And I think that people don't appreciate it until like, you know, sit down for six hours and try not to go to the bathroom. Sit down for eight hours and try not to eat anything. But, you know, that was followed then by this groundswell of energy and engagement over the weekend where we then saw millions of Americans take to the

streets. And I think that this is the beginning of, you know, what we're seeing, it feels a little bit different from where we were before, which is, you know, for months, everyone kind of licking their wounds and, you know, obviously a lot of introspection among the Democratic Party. So do you feel like it's a little bit different now in this moment as we've kind of gotten over the shock of the second Trump administration and had to change our perspective in terms of, okay, what do we do now? How do we actually, how do we actually fight back? How do we win? So I, there is something about the physicality of this when I was out in New Jersey. on a chilly day, rainy day, seeing people shaking and cold,

but still so noble and determined. When I went to a town hall and I saw a young man with autism who had a lot of anxiety about being in front of crowds, who insisted on coming out and in front of a thousand people with his voice, determined, resolute, but clearly halting from the fear of crowds, still speaking up. We posted today the story of a little girl during the disability's rights movement, trying to dramatize what is an everyday reality for her, but not a challenge for all of us, by crawling

up steps because of the lack of accessibility in so many public buildings. It was moments like that throughout our history that have changed opinions. And I'm still hearing about Joseph in my town hall and the power of his voice. So again, the question has to keep coming back to each and every one of us in this time where tens of millions of Americans have their health care on the line, where tons of our seniors have their health care or their retirement security or their nursing homes on the line. When pregnant mothers who 40 plus percent rely on Medicaid, all of this is on the line and I can keep going, what did you do in this moral moment and how much are you willing to

leave your comfort zone and put yourself out there? This is what the power of this moment is. And every person that does it sends out ripples not just of hope and light, but also ripples that carry other people to do more and more and more. Right. And I think to your exact point, as I said before, this is now the bar. And so what are the rest of your colleagues, for example, going to be doing, are they going to hold town halls?

Are they going to hold town halls in Red Districts? Are they going to go out somewhere and stand and get arrested if they need to? And so I think that this was an important moment in that respect. And it's never been more necessary because obviously we're seeing the, you know, the ways in which what the Trump administration is doing right now from the prescribed cuts that they're making, uh, advertently to the inadvertent, um, economic catastrophe that they're creating. And so how are you thinking about this in terms of the, the broader population and, and the, the, the economic consequences that are bearing down right now as the result of

this administration? Uh, you know, their hope is to overwhelm us, is to divide us. to demoralize us, is to use lies to obscure the truth, to exacerbate some of the lesser angels of our nature by saying, oh, don't worry, we're just attacking criminals and gang members that were disappearing off the street. But we're already seeing how, okay, they say that we're going to attack gang members, and it can start off that way on Monday, and then Tuesday there's somebody who is an accused gang member.

And then Wednesday, it's somebody who, you know, they said, okay, well, that person was actually as the result of an administrative error. And then it's students whose political ideology doesn't comport with yours. And so we're seeing, by the way, the same slippery slope that Republicans had for so long claimed that Democrats would engage in, but now it's happening in real time.

Yeah, and so that's the point is, are you willing to stop it now, or are you going to wait until it comes to you? This is what I say about the horrors of gun violence, the number one killer of our children. Are you going to wait to be activated until it's your public school? or is how many school shootings are enough

until you say, I'm willing to do more to stop this? But this is something like I've never imagined possible in the United States of America where we have a president with such sort of unchecked cruelty is using lies, misinformation, and the ability to overwhelm to challenge so many of the elements

of who we are as a democracy. And that's why I have left, less and less patience, and I'm trying to be somebody who is extending grace to people, but King, in a moment of utter frustration, said, what we have to repent for in our day and age is not just the vitriolic words and violent actions of the bad people, but the appalling silence and inaction of the good people. Whether we are successful and not in defending Medicaid, and defending food programs and defending Social Security

and defending the constitutional right to due process, the difference is not going to be how much Trump does. The difference is going to be how much we decide to do because we have one in the past but sometimes at great cost, sometimes a great sacrifice. Sometimes during the Red Scare, there were Jewish immigrants here being deported

because they were accused communists and they weren't. During the Red Scare, there were people's careers and lives. Some of the greatest artists were shut down and blacklisted. That went on for way too long until people finally had the courage to stand up. But what is at stake now could cost the lives, and this is not an exaggeration, could literally cost the lives of tens of thousands of our fellow Americans. And I'll give you an example, again, so much is going on right now that we don't think about it.

I think a lot about air pollution because I live in a community, inner city community that has four times the asthma rates of my suburban towns. my suburban towns. And I know that a black kid who has an asthma attack is 10 times more likely to die than a white kid that has an asthma attack because of health care issues and more. And so when he allowed, right when he got in, the worst polluters to pollute our air more, the particulate matter in the air is going up. Today I wake up and he's allowing, he's pushing for more coal production as he cuts back

the incentives for wind and solar. So he's literally making our air more toxic, and there will be people, if you look at the actuarial charts, more people of emphysema and asthma will die as a result. These are the things. I could go through so many examples that this is a life or death issue for your fellow Americans. And this is a call to patriotism, because patriotism is not a flag or a salute or a pledge. Patriotism is love, love of country, and you cannot love your country unless you love your fellow country men and women.

And love at the end of the day, if love is anything, it is saying that I will sacrifice myself for your well-being. That's what love is when you love your children, when you love your spouse. It's saying that I love you so much that I'm willing to make sacrifices for your well-being. And so how much do you love this country is the test now? This is a test for patriotism. And you are here. This is what's so offensive to me that my parents yelled at me to realize when I was in this

beautiful home and they say, don't walk around this house like you had a triple. You were born on third base. You drink from wells of freedom and liberty that you did not dig with your bare hands. You eat from banquet tables prepared for you by your ancestors. What will you do with these blessings? You cannot become so arrogant that think you deserve what you have. This was paid for by the blood, sweat, and tears of your ancestors. And the question is now, what will you do in your moral moment?

And so I have been inadequate in living up to what my parents said. I tried to show that I'm willing to break with that by doing something. that literally had my mom worried, but to me that is small measure for the person right now who is on her third shift at a diner because she cannot afford to lose money at a time that prices are going up,

that her family is more economically insecure, that the rent is going up, she's working a third shift, she's 24 hours on her feet because right now there's not enough of us pushing back on a president. This is our test. This is our moral moment.

And I pray to God that history, a year from now, says that we rose to this moment and stopped him from doing what he's doing. Perfectly put. Well, you know that Trump is going to point to this and say, patriotism is actually enduring this pain that I myself involuntarily causing because that will show that you're willing to sacrifice for what he would say is the greater good in this moment. And yet the irony of all of that is that by virtue of voluntarily crashing the economy, By virtue of voluntarily crashing the stock market, by virtue of voluntarily plummeting everybody's 401Ks, now there are people who, for example, we're expecting to retire at this moment and can't afford to.

There are people who can't afford just their daily expenses that we're seeing right now. And so what were your response to Trump's push back to that saying real patriotism is supporting what I'm doing in my efforts here to carry on this trade war? I mean, that is utter bullshit. And the reason why it's for a guy who spends the weekend on his golf course and brags to the media about him winning a tournament while the struggling and the suffering and the fear and the anxiety and the people that write to me about saying they can't sleep thinking about what a 10% or a 5% cut to Medicaid.

What he's just saying is endure pain. He's not enduring any pain. This is the kind of gross. arrogance of a Marie Antoinette saying, let them eat cake. This is the worst up for a billionaire to be lecturing us about suffering economic pain. When there is utterly no wisdom, strategy, economic formula that shows what he's doing is actually going to help this country in the long run. And we know this. Nobody's going to be building a factory right now. Businesses are telling me, I'm not making any investments in this climate of uncertainty with this president that is so chaotic

and so quixotic that you don't know what he's going to do. So screw him for telling people to accept pain. You know what? This pain has been going on a long time. Half of this country has been worse off economically. Half of us, while a very narrow margin has been doing better and better and better, the margin is him and his cabinet have been doing better and better. And they can suffer a little bit of increased prices because it's such a small, small blip on their economic screen. While increased prices for folks in all across America, from rural areas to urban areas who are barely making ends meet, this is a catastrophe for their lives. And screw him for not having the kind of empathy for the struggles of Americans right now because of the pain he is fundamentally singularly causing to people in America. Do you have any worry that we're not going to be able to get out of this?

Because Trump operates from this Roycone mentality, where any capitulation he views as a sign of weakness, And so even if what he's doing is 100% wrong, and I think we can all see that what he is doing is 100% wrong, he's still not going to relent. So he's going to double, triple, quadruple down because this is about his ego. It's not about the American people. And so even as he's going up against China and China has no plans to relent against him, they've said that we're going to fight until the end, which is quite literally she's words. And so is there any worry that we, that for as bad as it is right now, we're just going to get plunged even deeper into this crisis because now we've got, you know, a pissing contest between two people who are really focused on protecting their egos. Absolutely.

If this was a dictatorship, we would have power to do nothing. We would see yet another leader like we've seen with totalitarian leaders before because of their egos, driving a country over the cliff. But Congress has the power. It's spelled out in the Constitution of the United States. We could pass legislation. We got a piece of legislation out of the Senate that said no tariffs against Canada. And it shows we have the power.

And so the question is not what he's going to do. It's how are we going to turn a few senators here, four, or three in the House? It's really not that many. And we've done it before. These are bigger stakes affecting millions and millions more. But the ACA in 2017, the people of this country demanding change, change Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, and John McCain, and got them to vote differently and saved for about 20 million Americans that are access to health care.

Well, this is hundreds of millions of Americans now that are, going to suffer from this economy. This is tens of millions, 80, 90 millions Americans are facing health care crisis. These are millions of Americans facing a retirement crisis. And so the fundamental crossroads we're at right now is not what he's going to do. We know who he is. He has shown us who we are. Even the people that voted for him now, from his millionaire supporters you're hearing breaking with him, from conservative think tanks now breaking with him, he has shown us who he is. We now, this question is, are we going to show who we are? Or we are a nation that is going to tolerate this or a nation that's going to stand up? And as the great

Frederick Douglass said, the limits of tyrants are prescribed by the people that they seek to oppress. What is our endurance? By the endurance of those they choose to oppress? How much will we endure before we say enough is enough? I am going to give more. I'm going to march more. I'm going to speak out more. I'm going to stand up more. That's the test that we're in right now. It's a moral moment. How will you respond? I know there should keep pressure on your Democratic Congress people and senators to do more. Keep pressure on people that are in this edifice, the sacred civic space as the Capitol. But change has never come from Washington. It's always come to Washington by people that demand it. Again, Frederick Douglass, power concedes nothing without a demand. We all know that

If this was happening under a Democratic president, that your Republican colleagues would be apoplectic about all of this. And yet, because it's the God King, because it's Daddy Trump, they're not going to do anything to push back against this. But do you think that there is some appetite among your colleagues knowing that, okay, the pushing back against Trump for them when he is at his peak popularity feels existential because he can, for example, promote a primary challenge against them to the right, knowing full well that Elon Musk can fund it.

But now there's another existential risk for them in the sense that now their own constituents are feeling the pain of what's happening. And so it's not just, okay, my only worry is Donald Trump and some primary challenge. Now if I want to stay in office, I'm still accountable to, if you're in the House, 700,000 people or, you know,

if you're in the Senate, as many as 40 million people. And so do you think that we're going to see some sea changes? Are there any rumblings from your Republican colleagues beyond just the seven who signed on to that bill regarding Canada, but just more broadly, to rein in what, again, if this was happening under a Democratic president, they would be losing their minds over, and B, still doesn't even comport with, like, conservative ideology because there's nothing economic or fiscally responsible about this. No, no. And I just want to think one step back and say, we can't paint with a broad brush.

We know the names of Republicans that have spoken out already. I always say there's a reason why the book profiles and courage is such a thin volume. But we should point it out, from Liz Cheney to There are examples of people who were willing to sacrifice their offices and their positions to do the right thing in a moment of moral urgency. And so your question is really pointed. I hear in private conversation the disgruntled feelings of some of my Republican colleagues, but that's not enough. When are they going to step up and be willing to say, I may face a primary challenge.

Elon Musk may put $100 million against me, but I'm going to do the right thing by my people. And I am confident, and we just talked about that in a meeting with Hakeem Jeffries and others where House leadership and Senate leadership came together. We had an explicit conversation that there are a dozen or more House members that are in purple districts where overwhelmingly, whether they identify in that district as a Republican or a Democrat, they are against what Donald Trump is doing. And we've got to put a special pressure there so that those House Republicans realize that I fear my own community, my own constituents more than I fear.

Elon Musk and Donald Trump. And that's the pressure that's ultimately going to help us to win. I saw it in New Jersey, in the District 11, there was a long time a congressperson. I know him, he has decency and a famous family in our state, but he was siding with Trump over the interests of his community. And in this case, it was hospitals, which will close in rural areas, will suffer in urban areas if they cut Medicaid. And he stood with Trump and is considered said, enough is enough, and voted him out and voted in somebody else. That's the math that I think people are doing. It's not a moral math.

It's often a math of, like, who am I more afraid of? But whatever it takes right now, we've got to put that pressure on. Well, look, I think in terms of being able to put that pressure on, in terms of people recognizing their agency, what you did on the Senate floor gave people kind of the kick in the ass they need to recognize that we have it. And I think in no small part, you standing up there for 25 hours and you putting your body on the line really did serve as an impetus for just a few days later a lot of people to take to the streets and recognize that that you know we again have agency and what we're doing here

so you know I speak I know that I speak on behalf of a lot of people and thanking you for doing that and you know I don't I know that the question you've obviously been asked more than any other question I don't want to devalue this interview by asking about you know how how you were able to go 25 hours without using the restroom or anything but but how did you go 25 hours without using the rest. I did something, the fasting, intermittent fasting is something I do all the time. So I stopped eating days before, but the probably dumb thing that I don't recommend, and I've been yelled at by my doctors, was I just dehydrated myself for more than 24 hours before,

yeah. And I don't recommend that, but it worked. It worked a little too well, even after the 25 hours. The first thing I did was not run to the bathroom was get a banana, but I had to start ingesting a lot of watermelon fruit and something going to the bathroom. Are you this concerned about my biology? I come from a long line of Jewish women. I have to make sure you're okay. As you know, Jersey is filled with a lot of very concerned Jewish mothers, making sure that people are eating.

You know, my cousin, Pam Herbert, who literally, Chris Murphy was my godson, who stayed with me the 25 hours on the floor. But in the gallery, my cousin, who's an emergency room doctor, sat there in the gallery for me right in my sight line the entire time. And she meticulously noticed when I was in trouble a few times. Like in the first three hours, my feet got very numb. That's why I started shifting back and forth. So much so that one of my colleagues took a illegal picture,

so I'm not going to call them out. And I can't publish the picture. I'll show it to you of just how much the carpet was torn up because I was trying to get the blood to flow back to my feet. But she, thankfully, did not tell me the dangers. This is why do not dehydrate yourself for over an hour, especially she's just said all the things that could have happened in your body during that stress. But thank God I did not have to go to the bathroom and thank God the, and you know this. And people demonstrate this every day, especially people have the big whys, the people that stand in hospitals and do 24-hour shifts of people. that protect our streets that often do 24-hour shifts.

If you have a big enough why, you can do anything. And the body has limits, but the American spirit, the human spirit has no limits. And those last five hours, I was being carried by ancestors and the energies. My staff kept giving me notes about how many people were cheering me on to make it the last five hours. Well, again, it matters, I think, more than I can even say right now. So I appreciate you putting your body on the line. I appreciate you figuring out a way to break through and all the work that you're doing.

I appreciate you. I'm happy that we have actually an in real-life friendship now, but you've been one of those people that sources me and inspires me and informs me even. You have been so present. I know you live on the West Coast, but you actually have a lot of people probably envy us to your frequent flyer miles. You've been present here in the Capitol asking tough questions, but more importantly, I think informing people at a time.

There's a tradition here in D.C. that my parents relied on. personalities like you back then it was black radio and those folks sustained people during the toughest times in African American history informed people and entertain people too they were funny and the music of that my parents generation

they told me how powerful the arts were and then people in the media were and I think you're carrying on the best of those traditions so thank you for doing what you do I appreciate and thank you for taking the time thanks man No lie is brought to you by the Merchant's Payments Coalition. Credit card companies are ripping you off, and you don't even know it.

Every time you use a credit card, they charge a hidden swipe fee, which costs an average family more than $1,100 per year. Credit card companies and their Wall Street banking partners raked in a record $172 billion on those fees in 2023. $172 billion, with a B. Americans are paying the highest swipe fees in the world, and with no competition, swipe fees have nowhere to go but up. But the good news is that the House and Senate,

have a bipartisan bill to fix this problem. It's called the Credit Card Competition Act. The Credit Card Competition Act would make credit card companies and their Wall Street partners compete like every business is supposed to. It would save you, your family, everyone who swipes a credit card, hundreds or even thousands of dollars per year. So call your senators and representatives tell them to pass the Credit Card Competition Act. I'm joined now by the U.S. Senator from Massachusetts.

Elizabeth Warren, thank you so much for joining me. Oh, thank you for having me. So I wanted to talk to you today because right now we are kind of seeing what may very well be or what has the ingredients to be an insider trading scandal kind of unfold. That's obviously taken hold of the national conversation very quickly in light of the fact that there were, there is evidence that certain shares were bought in the minutes preceding Donald Trump's announcement that he would do a 90-day pause on the tariffs. So what happens now? What can you do? What can the Senate Democrats do in light of this happening to try and

gather some information here. So just think of it this way. Here's Donald Trump out there saying all kinds of stuff. He drives the market way down, goes totally into the toilet, gets flushed, moves through the pipes, and then he changes the whole thing, and it shoots way back up. Something happens in between those two points, and that he is right before he makes those announcements that make the markets say, yay, fabulous, he's not as crazy as we thought. a bunch of people buy shares of stock, and they buy what are called calls so that they can leverage

and buy even more shares of stock on very little money. The SEC ordinarily would just stop and investigate. They'd say, whoa, is this either insider trading, that is a few people were tipped off about what was going on, or is it just straight up market manipulation, even if it happens out in public. The SEC would ordinarily do that, but this is now Donald Trump's SEC. Right. So that's the real problem we've got here. Well, I guess now it becomes a fact-finding mission and the onus is really on the folks who are going to do the work. And I don't, I want to get back to that in just a moment because I don't want to let the DOJ, the FBI, and the SEC off the hook just because we know that they're going to act in a way that's corrupt,

that doesn't give them license to act in a way that's corrupt with impunity. But is there even a way to find out who bought the calls? For example, if there's folks in the administration, if there's folks in the House or the Senate. Yep. There are records on this. And that's how it is that the SEC and the Department of Justice actually go after people. And if you think they can't track this down, ask Martha Stewart. Right.

And remember. So, but do you need buy-in for? from the SEC to be able to do this? Is this something that a Congress has the power to do without buy-in from the SEC, and also that Senate Democrats would be able to do from the minority? So people who have access to the information of people who are in law enforcement, because the question here, the investigation we need, is into exactly the facts of what happened. So at the federal level, it's, like I said, it's Department of Justice, the FBI, the SEC, right? The folks who have law enforcement access.

But let me offer one more thought. Congress doesn't have that kind of access. And, yeah, in theory, we can subpoena and so on, but that would take a majority and we're back at the same, right? He's back at the same dead end with Republicans. Doesn't let them off the hook, but it just says, can we keep looking for something that might be more effective? state attorneys general also have an opportunity to look at the same, make the same, state attorneys general have the same opportunity to investigate, dig in, get what the facts are. So, for example, Letitia James, the attorney general of New York, which has jurisdiction

over the stock market and the trading that happens in New York, might decide she would take a look at this. And does that require buy-in from the SEC or does she have the power unto herself to be able to actually engage in a proper fact-finding mission that would really uncover some of the information that would be needed here? She has her own independent team and she hosts her own independent legal authority. Can I get your reaction just more broadly to the fact that at a moment where obviously the economy is in a free fall right now, the stock market has been plummeting. People's 401ks are in pretty dismal shape. And so, you know, for a lot of this country, this is money, especially when you're dealing with seniors,

for example, they're drawing money from their 401ks. They require every dollar that comes to them with the money that they've saved up throughout their lives, thinking that there wouldn't be some madman at the helm who is just playing, I guess, you know, playing chicken with their life savings. And so at the same time that this is the economic reality on the ground for most Americans, you've got, you've got video from Donald Trump standing in the Oval Office with Charles Schwab talking about laughing about how many billions of dollars they're able to make. And we already see evidence of the fact that folks knew about this in advance and they're buying these calls prior to the announcements actually being made. So people are getting rich

off of this and yucking it up and laughing as if it's just some big game so that somebody who's already worth billions can be even, can be worth even more billions. And yet you've got regular Americans who are the ones actually getting screwed over. Yeah. You know, this actually is the M.O. For the Trump administration. Can I just remind you of the echo of this that's also happening simultaneously? And that is just yesterday. The House of Representatives passed their budget, moving it forward. And what's the whole plan behind this budget? Literally, trillions of dollars in tax giveaways to billionaires and billionaire corporations. And how do they want to pay for it?

They want to pay for it by cutting health care for babies and for seniors in nursing homes. They want to pay for it by cutting access to social security. They want to pay for it by cutting the Veterans Administration. And they want to pay for it by cutting money for our public schools. So class sizes get bigger. So the little kid with a serious disability who needs an aid so that they can be in school loses the aid and loses the opportunity to go to public school. They want to cut out the after-school programs.

This is the Trump administration. Fabulous, fabulous, fabulous for the billionaires. Billionaires win. And everybody else loses. and they laugh about it. And by the way, that would be disqualifying enough unto itself. But what makes it even more egregious is that these guys ran this last campaign on this pretense that they actually cared about working class people, that they felt your pain,

that they understood how difficult it was that housing prices were high and rent prices were high and grocery prices were high and egg prices were high because egg prices were $1 more. Now they're pissing away everybody's 401Ks, pissing away all of the stock market gains, pissing away everybody's absolutely necessary Medicaid and food stamps and Social Security, all because they want to just help the people at the very top get just a little bit richer. Yeah. In fact, remember the direct quote. Donald Trump said repeatedly during the campaign that he would lower costs for families on day one, on day one. That was what he kept saying.

Right after he's elected, the very first interview he does, he's asked about this and he says, that's why I won, because I promised a lower cost on day one. Six weeks later, when he's in the middle of this whole tariff and starting into it, and somebody raises the question about starting a tariff war with Canada is going to drive up prices. Do you know what his quote was? Couldn't care less. That's what he said. He couldn't care less. And that's what's happened. Now that they've got their hands on the power, boy, they're using it. Isn't it big? Isn't it for the billionaires so they can stand there in the Oval Office and yuck it up about how much money they made while folks are really counting on those savings, while folks who are worried about inflation, meaning their costs go up, while folks who are worried about the companies that are already issuing pink slips, all of those folks, Donald Trump couldn't care less. Right, right. Well, I would say that in terms of where he's actually spending his time, rather than lowering costs, we do know.

that he's focused at least in the last 24 hours on sending troops into Panama, on trying to fix showerheads so that we have this elusive water pressure that apparently went away and on and on. So I don't know how that's going to lower the price of eggs, which ironically enough just today hit the highest point it's ever hit. But I digress. I did mention earlier in the interview that I don't want to let these people off the hook, that I know that the onus is going to be on Democrats in the House and the Senate and Democratic state officials to actually investigate this stuff. But just because we know, again, that the DOJ and the FBI and the SEC likely aren't going to do anything, it doesn't mean that we give them a free pass. So what would

your message be to these folks in leadership with regard to what we're seeing unfold at the prospect of a possible insider trading scandal? So look, we got to call this out all across the country. So this is, we've got to do this within Congress. We got to say we are not moving with you guys. This is not business as usual. this is not normal. We are drawing the lines in the sand here. We get it. We are in the minority. And there are certain rights that the majority has, but we're not given anything up for free. We have to stay in this fight. And we have to keep underscoring this corruption point. Because corruption, working for the billionaires, it's like the continuing theme of the Trump administration. So we have to talk about it. We

have to use whatever we've got left to try to slow up the Republicans, to make them turn square corners, not to give them anything. But we've all got to raise this. And we've got to keep talking about it. We can't get tired. We can't give up on this. We just can't. And that's a great segue into my last question here, because, you know, we have seen Democrats begin to recognize that there is a call that needs to be answered in terms of bringing this fight to the Republicans and meeting them on the same playing field that Republicans have brought the fight to Democrats on for so long. And we saw Cory Booker take to the Senate floor for 25 hours as a way to break through and get his message through in a immediate environment where it's difficult to get messages

through. I spoke with Senator Schatz a couple of days ago about how he's holding up 300 nominations for the Trump administration, which is obviously a tool that Republicans have employed in the past against Democrats. And so I wanted to ask you what you're doing to meet this moment, given the bar that's been created by some of your Senate colleagues? So I've done one of these now. So ordinarily, here it is, it's Thursday afternoon, everybody would have finished up business for the week and be back at the airports and flying home. But only if the Democrats give up what are called some time agreements. So the Republicans get to vote, even though the rules say they're not allowed to vote until a little later.

So my view on this is I'm holding them. I'm not giving up one inch. So we're all coming back here at one o'clock in the morning. And we're going to start a round of four votes. And yeah, one o'clock in the morning sucks. But you know what sucks more is to give in to Donald Trump and the Republicans and say, sure, we'll just stand by while you just roll these guys on through who are going to be more of your helpers. to try to destroy this economy, to try to cheat people, to try to build a country that works

even better for the billionaires while you laugh at everyone else. Well, I'm just not going along with that. Well, I appreciate you meeting this moment and figuring out how to fight. And look, not everything is going to be some grand sweeping change that's going to stop the Republican machine in its tracks. In some instances, it's going to be a major inconvenience for them. In some instances like with Cory Booker's speech, it's going to be a way that that captures the new cycle and takes it away from them for a day. But I think all of these steps showing the electorate out there who is hungry for Democrats to stand up and do whatever we can with the levers at our disposal. And again, there's not going to be a ton of levers that are

disposal from the minority, but finding what those levers are and making these Republicans as uncomfortable as possible in their efforts to run roughshadow over our democracy, I think, is exactly what we need to do. It's taking big swing. wings, wherever we can find it. It's making their lives as difficult as possible if they've shown that the tack they're going to take here is just to, you know, traffic and overt corruption. So I appreciate you doing that. You know, I just want to say on this, because you are so right, we don't have as much power as we want, but not having as much power as you want, it's not the same as having no power all. And we're going to use every bit of the power we've got.

That's what we've got to do. Senator Warren, I appreciate you taking time today. I appreciate you. I'm joined now by the U.S. Senator from Hawaii, Brian Schatz. Thanks so much for taking the time. Thank you, Brian. So we have some new news in terms of what you yourself are doing to push back against this administration. And I was really looking forward to talking to you about this today because we have been looking for Democrats to wield what tools we do have at our disposal from the minority. And you're doing exactly that.

So can you explain what you're doing? Well, we've now got 300 holds of individual, Trump administration nominees. Obviously, the Senate has to confirm every nominee that comes down that's subject to advice and consent. And a lot of these, frankly, go by unanimous consent. A lot of them go like in an evening and there's no vote taken. And that's a normal thing to do. And it's something that I've agreed to many, many times because that's kind of the way you have to govern. In a normal world. In a normal world. And that's the point here. And what I'm doing is holding all of this. them and requiring a roll call vote for all 300 of these nominees. Some of them in the State

Department jurisdiction, some of them in health education, labor, and pensions across the United States government. I just don't think we can make anything easy for them. I also would like to point out Ruben Gallego, Adam Schiff, Dick Blumenthal are also escalating their holds and their committees of jurisdiction. So there's a broad recognition that, you know, not everybody's going to give a 25-hour speech, like my very dear friend, Cory Booker. But everybody can do something. And so this is the something that I could do today. Of course, I had 250 holds and I just added another 50, but Rubin and others are also stepping up. There's a broader recognition that we should not give anything away for free, even if, frankly, some of these things are not objectionable

on their face. It may be a deputy administrator for a tech research agency that we have no particular objections to, but our point of view is, hey, everything takes time. And the one thing we can do to the majority party is make things take a little bit longer. And so we're going to do that. Well, first of all, hell yeah. Like I have been a huge proponent of using what levers we have at our disposal at like in the same way that Cory Booker went out there and spoke for 25 hours. What can everybody else do in their respective areas? So for you to be able to hold up 300 people unilaterally to push back against an administration that is steeped in corruption and lawlessness. Thank you. And I know I speak from my audience in saying that. What does the fact

that the Senate is going to be bogged down in advancing these nominations on an individualized basis? What does that do to the broader effort of the Republicans to be able to push legislation forward, for example, in the Senate? I mean, I want to be careful here, right? Because I can't unilaterally block them forever. I can only make them consume time. So if they consider a particular nominee important, they'll put them on the floor and have basically four hours consumed. But that means, you know, 300 times four, they can't do them all. And so it does slow them down. It does complicate their efforts. I will say that as it relates specifically to their efforts to cut Medicaid and provide a big tax cut for billionaire corporations, like they're going to

make time for that, right? That is their abiding priority, and we have to fight like hell against that, but we have to, you know, have no illusions about this is basically their reason for being is to cut Medicaid, potentially cut the Affordable Care Act, and use those revenues, in addition to the tariff revenue that everybody's paying out of pocket right now to provide a big tax cut for corporations. We're not, you know, there's no magic wants to stop these guys, but I think one of the things that Corey reminded us of is that we can all do something. And whatever it is that we're all in a position to do, that's the thing you're supposed to be doing. And the other thing, I mean, I talked at length before Corey took the floor.

And, you know, it was not part of some grand strategy that's been mapped out for the next six months. And I think that's one of the problems with Democrats is we want everything to be tight and organized and a grand strategic plan. And we're in a fight right now. And so we have to pick up whatever, this is rhetorical now, this is not physical. We have to pick up whatever rock we can find and start whipping it at the opposition and try to sort of strategic and tactical questions as we go along. But in the meantime, one premise should be our abiding approach to the Senate, which is nothing for free and nothing easy. Perfectly put. You know, I have been thinking a lot about the fact that, that, you know, you're doing this.

Corey stood up on the floor for 25 hours and used his power. that way. And so has there been a broader recognition from from Senate Democrats that everybody needs to be doing, not the bare minimum, but actually the maximum, that when you guys put forward these strategies to try and and either draw attention or eyeballs to what you're doing to slow down the processes of the Republican conference, it can't be the minimum that it has to be that what you all are doing has to be the maximum, that it has to, that what you're doing has to be the bar that your colleagues are then going to say, okay, how can I break through in this media environment? How can I most effectively fight back? How can I use my

platform in the biggest way possible? Has that been a discussion among you and the rest of the Democratic caucus? Yes, it's been a discussion, but I'd also say it's a little bit of soul searching because part of the problem here is we're 47 different people with different constituencies and different strengths and weaknesses. And so, like, not everybody can do 25 hours on the floor. Not everybody is the kind of procedural background that I have in terms of blocking nominees. But, you know, we have a lot of shadow hearings, which have been very compelling. Some people are going into House districts of Republican members who refuse to have a town hall. So I think one of the things we want to do is to say everybody should be doing something,

but we don't want to be too prescriptive about what it is, just like every citizen. may be in a position to do something. Some people may want to march physically. Some people may want to post. Some people may want to influence their families or do some other kind of organizing. And I think one of the things that is that needs to be fixed in the Democratic Coalition is we're a little fussy with each other

about which tactic is supposed to work and who's doing the best in their form of resistance. Like we should just sort of say, anybody who's helping in any way, think of it like a potluck. Someone comes in and they got a macaroni salad. Thank you very much. Someone's got Calby Ribs, thank you very much. Someone brought napkins, thank you very much, right?

Like everybody contributes something. And if everybody's kind of got a forward momentum and a belief in each other, then we're going to build this pluralistic, multicultural, people-powered movement to stop this all. And one of the things that Corey said that I thought was really right is that, you know, and Barack Obama said that I thought was very compelling is the most important office right now is the Office of Citizen. The challenge is that when you're an elected official in power and you're sort of like turning it back on citizens, it can ring a little hollow. It can sound like you're doing excuse making. And so we also have to lead by example and demonstrate, we understand this has to be

uncomfortable. This has to be politically uncomfortable. This has to be in some instances physically uncomfortable, but no business as usual. Now, do you find that maybe you have a little bit more political capital to expend given the, given, you know, the ways in which Donald Trump has taken a hatchet to the U.S. economy. And does that extend even over to your Republican colleagues? I mean, look, I don't know how much political capital I do or don't have to expend. But I would just say that one of the things that we've seen is that the frustration with Republicans for allowing this to happen and with Democrats for looking flat-footed in the first couple of months is sort of the same group of people, and they're not, like, I'm left-wing, but they're not all left-wing

people. There's a lot of moderates that think that Republicans have gone off a cliff, and Democrats are being too quiet. And so we don't want to characterize the desire for a ferocity of resistance as some uniquely progressive priority. It's also regular people watching their retirement savings get incinerated. People are pissed, and they want us to reflect that level. of alarm. Can I have your reaction more broadly to the fact that even in light of the fact that, you know, we're going on several days now of the stock market plummeting, we're seeing foreign countries who I think Donald Trump thought would just capitulate, probably because he's gotten so used to being surrounded by groveling obsequious yes men that he thought

everybody in the world was as weak as the people he surrounds himself with. And yet, we're watching the EU enact retaliatory tariffs. We're watching the Asian bloc. negotiate along with China at a time when we're supposed to be protecting American supremacy in the world. Instead, we're driving other countries into the arms of the exact country that we're trying to, that we're competing with. And so can I just get your reaction to the fact that in light of all of this, we're seeing Trump not restructure his strategy moving forward, but instead double, triple, quadruple down on this idea that tariffs are perfect. Everything that he's doing is, is, you know, A plus and don't change anything.

I mean, they're in a bubble, right? I mean, and I mean the White House in particular, there, you know, there were pretty valid criticisms of Democrats over the last, say, six years about being in a bubble, but I've never seen a bubble quite like this. And it goes to, like, White House staff, the whole Doge team, this group of young ideologues doing damage to various agencies. Like, they don't, they literally don't understand how anything works. They don't understand the importance of cancer research.

They don't understand the importance of preventing a baby from getting HIV AIDS from her mom, and they are in a bubble being reinforced. Eventually, those political bubbles burst. And I think our project collectively is to do two things. First, to try to make sure that we puncture that bubble as quickly as possible to minimize the damage to regular people and to the country and to the institutions that hold up this. country. But the other part of this is to make sure that voters know exactly how bad these outcomes are. And I was thinking about Friday night as we were, I think we finished at like 3 a.m.

I got asleep by like 4.30 a.m. And, you know, the truth is nobody was really paying attention to all of our votes on the House floor, or excuse me, the Senate floor, because their retirement savings, their college savings, their life savings were being incinerated. There's not much for us to say. there's no like phrasing that's going to make this worse or better for our party. What's happening is we have kind of moved from the phase of the Trump presidency where people were, they were pissed and worried, but they were mostly observing stuff on their screens about what was happening. And this week and last week were the first week where people were like, okay, this is no longer

like the way you kind of watch fantasy football and have a rooting interest in your side. This is more like, now you're talking about my money. This is my shit. This is my kids' college. This is my personal retirement. This is my mom's retirement. This is my mom's job. Things are getting very, very real.

And there's nothing you can do when you are living in an information bubble to prevent people from actually feeling the impact. So I think the politics are going to turn. The question is whether they turn quickly enough for us to minimize the damage. What do you make of the fact that you've got all these Republicans who are so quick, to back Donald Trump during the campaign or over the last few years. People like Megan McCain, for example, who came out and tweeted, inject every policy into my veins, who are now coming out, and Megan McCain is one of them. Dave Portnoy is another one, now coming out and basically, you know,

recognizing that they themselves are being impacted and so suddenly have an impetus to speak out. My view is welcome. And I mean that. I mean that with zero sarcasm with zero resentment. you know, people, a good buddy in mine used to say, people vote for you for their reasons, not yours. Yeah. The purpose of politics is not to winnow down your political coalition to a purer and purer group, but rather politics is addition, not subtraction. Dave Portnoy is a big deal. I still follow him exclusively for the pizza reviews. Yeah. And the Boston Celtics take. I'm in,

I'm in the same boat. I watch, I watch the pizza reviews and like, you know, so I get it. I, and I understand if If I'm watching him, even with all the biases I have on the political side, imagine what people who don't give a shit about politics are thinking. Yeah. And so, like, my view is, like, there's a little bit of a tendency in the Democratic coalition and the progressive coalition to go, like, now you're here. And why did you say this earlier? Who cares?

We have to not be such a scolding coalition. We have to basically say, hey, they fucked with your money and you're welcome, right? Come on in and either you were mistaken. But also, by the way, the other thing we've seen from polling, and this is not the recent polling is people start to misremember who they voted for because it's been a minute. And they may not remember that they voted for Donald Trump because they were torn in that moment. And so my view is we need to welcome as many of those types into our coalition as possible. There were a bunch of people who tolerated the, you know, kind of authoritarian tendencies and tolerated the kind of

overly conservative social views because they thought he was going to be good for the money. Right. Now he's good for the money and there are other people who tolerated this kind of like overly friendly with wall street stuff because they thought he was going to be you know sort of cruel to the people that they hated those people i don't think we're ever going to get back and but i do think like the reason we lost and we lost decisively on one level but still by one and a half percent so the reason we lost is some tiny little percentage of people said i don't like prices i don't like Biden because he's old, I don't like what I've been paying. And when I remember the Trump administration from the first time, I remember money in my pocket, right? And maybe they're misremembering, or maybe

they're remembering correctly because during COVID, we did have a bunch of cash payments out to people. So there were a bunch of people who were very low income, low asset levels, but they had seven grand in the bank. They were out of credit card debt, if only for six or 12 months. And they wanted to go back to that time. So once you start messing with people's money, I think we should not assume that there are any permanent realignments and those alignments only go against us, right? There was a bit of a realignment in the last election. It's a very real thing. But now we need to think about the veterans that have been laid off, the people who depend on social security, the parks workers, the FAA folks, the current and former military people, civilian and military,

and then anybody of the 60% of the Americans who've got money in the stock market, either individual stocks or mutual funds, 401Ks, 403Bs, everybody's welcome in our coalition. If you hate all this shit, you're part of the team. Right. I think that's the perfect point is that this isn't the time for a victory lap. This is a time where we have an opportunity to capitalize on a lot of folks who are, for whatever, you know, for whatever reason, it's not important to relitigate the 2024 election. It's over.

but we have the opportunity to get them back. And usually we aren't handed these opportunities on such a silver platter as we have now in the sense that Trump has crashed the stock market. He's destroyed people's 401Ks. He's gutting health care, firing veterans. I mean, again, if your goal is to just go around and finger-pointed people and lecture them

and beat your chest, that's one thing. But the goal really should be the work of persuasion. And we have an opportunity to get a lot of these people back and think about how much time and energy we put toward persuading people as we head up, head toward an election. If we have the chance to use some of those tools right now and bring those people back into the fold, we should use it. So to that point, I appreciate your perspective here

and appreciate the work you're doing and fighting back against this administration, Senator Schatz. Thank you, Brian. One final point, if you don't mind. Sure. The word welcome is such a powerful word, right? You come into someone's house to use that potluck analogy. You come into someone's house. If they open the door and you've got something in your hand

and they don't say the word welcome, you're kind of like, oh, this is a little awkward. You're still going to walk in. You're still going to put your plate down and you're still going to enjoy the party best you can. The word welcome is so powerful in life, but in particular in politics. So all of us have to get into the habit, even if it's just a tactical approach, even if you don't feel that in your heart of hearts, you should just welcome anyone into the coalition who wants to join you. and do not inquire as to, do not be too probing as to whether or not they're pure on every single issue or how they voted last year. If they want to join us, they are welcome because politics is addition, not subtraction. Perfectly put. Senator Schatz, appreciate your time. Thank you, Brian.

Now we've got national voting rights correspondent for Mother Jones and the author of the book Minority Rule Ari Berman. Ari, thanks for joining me again. Hey, Brian. Great to talk to again. Thank you. Let's take a look at the landscape here. Republicans lost two races in Pennsylvania. They underperforms by 16 points in Florida. They lost the Wisconsin Supreme Court race. That really was a referendum on Donald Trump and Elon Musk. And just this past weekend watched massive rallies in all 50 states turn out millions of people across the country. How much of a blinking red light is this for the Republican Party as we head toward midterms here? Brian, I think that Democrats and progressives are finally finding their voice and awakening from that slumber, you might say coma that they were in after November and realizing that they can fight back against Trump, both in symbolic and then in very real tangible ways.

And the best way to get over a hangover is to do something about it. you know, drink your electrolytes and go on to the next thing. And that's what they seem to be doing here. And so these special elections, and particularly the one in Wisconsin, which was a statewide election, really offered them an opportunity to have a new playbook and show that they figured out a way to fight Trump and all the unpopular things he's doing. I'm curious as we look at this in the context of whether Democrats have figured out a strategy forward or if you think that it's more a referendum on the unpopularity of this administration and whether that means that Democrats have fixed some of the existential problems that we were contending with as as we

have an introspective look at the 2024 election. Obviously, we've lost broad swaths of the electorate. Whether this fixes some of those problems, whether Democrats are helping redefine themselves after their brand took such a hit, or if it's just yet again relying on a lot of anti-Trump sentiment, which is not to minimize that. I mean, that was responsible for Democrats winning the House by the biggest margin in modern American history back in 2018. Well, it's like you have a house and the House got demolished, right? And then all you have is the foundation and you have to start rebuilding it frame by frame. And they've rebuilt some of it through what's happened. I don't think anyone believes that Democrats have their entire house

in order or they've fixed all the problems from 2024. I mean, that would be naive to think that right now. And I don't know any Democrat that would say that. But I do think that they've shown in these more targeted special elections, in these races that can be made into a referendum on Trump or in the case of Wisconsin, a referendum on Elon Musk, that they're starting to figure out at least how to motivate their own voters, which is a really big part of it because Democratic voters were totally demoralized, and many of them are still very angry with the National Party, and they want to do something about it. And they say, if they don't see Chuck Schumer or Hakeem Jeffrey's fighting, they want to see someone else fighting. And often those fights are

happening at the state and local level. And that was one of the big things that I heard when I visited Wisconsin was forget about what's happening in the National Party. If we can defeat Elon Musk in Wisconsin, we'll be able to send a message, to the national party, that there's a way to resist Trump in a tangible way and actually win. Ari, do you think that the Republicans view their national party apparatus as a drag in the same way that Democrats do? Like, I feel like Democrats bolster their credentials by being able to disparage or run away from the national party, whereas I don't necessarily know that it's the same sense

with Republicans as it relates to the RNC. No. I mean, I think that Republicans much more blindly follow whatever their leaders are doing. I mean, there's about 30,000 examples now of them blindly following Trump, even when he does things like tariffs that go against everything that they're supposed to believe as a party. Like crash the global economy, but yes, aside from that. Yeah. Crash the global economy and destroy the free market, which if you were believed in nothing else as a Republican, it was supposed to be the efficacy of the free market. Now, of course, they're trying to justify that. But I think we saw, interestingly enough, in the state Supreme Court race in Wisconsin,

the conservative candidate Brad Schimel tied himself very closely to Donald Trump and Elon Musk. And I think that was a mistake. And they were operating on the basis that if they could just get Trump voters to the polls, they could win that election. And they said over and over, if we get 60% of Trump voters to the polls will win. Well, it's interesting, they got 62% of Trump voters to the polls. And he lost by 10 points because the progressive candidate, Susan Crawford, got 77 percent of Harris voters to the polls, which is extraordinary to think that nearly 80 percent of the people who voted for Kamala Harris in November showed up again for a state Supreme Court race in April. So I think a lot of it's just going to be about mobilizing in these

elections in 2025 and 26. In 28, it's going to have to be a bigger picture thing to figure out what the Democratic Party stands for, who it's going to fight for, how to get back some of the voters that lost. All of those things are still they have to deal with. But a lot of what's going to happen in 2025 and 2026 is just mobilizing their own voters to turn out in future elections because that's one way they failed a lot in 2024. Well, we've obviously seen how there has been a shift in who turns out for these midterm cycles. Way back when, before I even started paying attention to politics, it was Republicans who had the edge because They appealed more to older voters who are more reliable voters.

And so in these special elections, in midterm elections, it's Republicans who would overperform. That's flipped since Democrats have really garnered more of a voting block that includes college-educated voters and whatnot. And so now it's Democrats who overperform in these special elections. I'm curious whether you think for the midterm cycle where Trump is not on the ballot, and that seems to be when Republicans really managed to overperform, when he's, he's not on the ballot. If you think that that will be a situation where this same trend will continue, Democrats will have a better performance and, you know, it's the general election cycle or when Trump specifically is on the ballot that Republicans have found their footing.

I think that it's going to be a problem for Republicans because Trump's unpopular policies will be on the ballot, but he will not be on the ballot. So that's kind of the worst possible thing for Republicans is they have a defender. You kind of lose like the cult effect, the people who will turn out for him regardless, but you do still shoulder all of the blame for what he's ushering in. Yeah, and Republicans are going to have to defend everything. I mean, there's a long time between now and November 2026, but I mean, they're going to have to defend the chaos, the dysfunction and the very real turmoil that people are now feeling in their everyday lives because of Trump, and they're going to have to defend why they rubber-stamped, what is an increasingly unpopular agenda.

And so I think it's going to be a problem for them. It's already been a problem for them in these special elections. And you look at what Democrats and progressives are doing, they are winning in these swing areas in these even Trump-leaning counties. When I look at the Wisconsin race and I saw that the progressive candidate Susan Crawford flipped 10 counties that voted for Donald Trump in November, that's very, very significant. If they start flipping those kind of areas, it puts a lot more seats in play right now. Because, I mean, you look at the House, Democrats could win five seats in the House and they can narrowly take it back or they could start performing like they did in special elections, right? And then you start talking about maybe winning 20, 30, 40 seats. So it's a total different ballgame if they can go in and win some of these more red-leaning or at least purple areas. All right. At the same time, you know, there was the North Carolina Appeals Court decision in favor of Jefferson Griffin. That's the conservative candidate for the, uh, the, the North Carolina Supreme Court, and that decision was in favor of discarding 68,000 ballots

unless they can be cured. And that kind of highlights a broader problem here, which is that the Republican Party is perfectly content and willing to just undermine free and fair elections. And so am I being naive here? Are we being naive here in thinking about this within the confines, within the framework of politics as usual? Like, we're talking about the midterms and kind of and kind of whistling past the graveyard here in the sense that Republicans have shown that if they need to go outside of the, outside of the rules, outside of the confines of the rules, that they're perfectly willing to do that. Yeah, and we already know that from what Trump tried to do in 2020. The big difference in North Carolina is Republicans might actually succeed

in stealing the election there. This is like January 6th without the insurrection. They have taken the Trump playbook from 2020 and are now using it to try to overturn an election in North Carolina in a case that I think is going to have major national ramifications. Because if they're able to overturn a Democratic victory in North Carolina, that's going to be the playbook they use in future elections, even more than the Trump playbook, because it's going to be a successful one, which is if you don't like the election result and it's close enough to be able to challenge the ballots. You can just essentially invent new rules for the election. Cherry pick who you're going to challenge, which votes you're going to throw out, and find a court system that is favorable

to you. Republicans control the courts in North Carolina. They have huge majorities on both the Court of Appeals, which has issued this decision and the state Supreme Court. And there's no real guardrails to hold them in effect other than maybe the federal courts getting involved here or voters being able to cure those ballots that are being challenged. But it's extraordinarily dangerous. It doesn't seem to be getting as much attention as what happened in Wisconsin because you don't have Trump or Musk directly involved. But I'm very, very worried what message it would send for democracy if Republicans are just able to outright steal a state Supreme Court election in North Carolina. What happens in North Carolina is not going to stop there.

Right. I mean, I interviewed Justice Riggs yesterday. I've had her on my show once every couple weeks here as we continue to work our way through this process. But the reality is that the appeals court ruled in favor of her opponent. Now it's going to get appealed up to the state Supreme Court, where because she had to recuse, now it's five Republicans and one Democrat who's going to be ruling on this case. And so even if you have a few conservative jurists who are willing to buck the party line, the reality is that Jefferson Griffin is probably going to win at the state Supreme Court, and then it's just a matter of, okay, will this thing be able to hop from the state court system

into the federal court system? And what happens in the federal court system? Because the final arbiter in the federal court system is the U.S. Supreme Court. And it doesn't exactly inspire confidence when you've got Clarence Thomas and Samuel Lito, you know, the final arbiters waiting to determine this thing at the end of the day. No, for sure. I mean, the federal courts aren't much better. I think the difference, though, is that the federal courts stop the effort to steal the 2020 election. And they have been willing in certain cases so far to rule against some of Trump's most extreme actions in terms of violating the Constitution. And I think that this is not that dissimilar from what happened in 2020, where Trump made all these wild claims of voter fraud

and people looked at the evidence and realized there was no there there. And in the same way, in North Carolina, Jefferson Griffin hasn't actually been able to point to any evidence, any instances of illegal voting. There's things he doesn't like. He doesn't like the fact that people may have been able to register with what he claims are incomplete registrations because of failures in the state's database or military voters didn't have to show ID when they cast ballots.

But those were all things that were agreed upon at the time. And to challenge those... So you have the Purcell doctrine comes into place, which I guess would prevent, you know, changes from being made too close to the election at this point. Yeah, and not only that, but I mean, there's really substantive federal due process concerns. Griffin is only challenging early and absentee ballots. So he's just not even challenging

ballots that were cast in Election Day because those are more Republican. He's challenging, for example, military ballots and overseas ballots only in one county in North Carolina, which voted overwhelmingly for Kamala Harris. So, I mean, he's going about this in a way that raises concerns for future elections and raises concerns under the Constitution in a way that that could be troubling for the federal courts. Because on the state level, what the state justices who are Republicans are trying to do, they just want to put their buddy on the bench, basically. And they're willing to bend any kind of law or precedent to be able to do that. But the federal courts could look at some of these bigger constitutional issues and say the state

court has gone too far in terms of what they've done. But, I mean, that is really the only recourse here unless there's this extraordinary effort to cure these ballots that are being challenged. And that's going to have to be done within a 15-day period. It's not gone into effect yet. But two weeks to fix 60,000 ballots, that's a pretty big organizing hall. Right. And hopefully we're in a situation where the federal courts will step in anyway to preclude this process from moving forward so that we don't have to engage in this, in this, you know, farcical process where we have to pretend all of a sudden that because, the Republican candidate doesn't like the outcome of the election that we're not supposed

to accept it. So, you know, obviously some good news here as it relates to Democratic overperformance in these elections and some bad news as it relates to Republican efforts to yet again undermine free and fair elections. So, Ari, I appreciate your work. I appreciate you talking to me today. And again, for those who are watching right now, if you want to support Ari or hear, see, or read more from him, check out Mother Jones or you can buy Minority Rule, which was a great read. Appreciate your time. Thanks so much, Brian. Great to talk to you again.

Thanks again, the Senator's Booker, Warren, Schatz, and Ari. 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 Cohen. com to learn more.