PBD Podcast - Political Consultant Paul Manafort | PBD Podcast | EP 151

Starting point is 00:00:00 Are you out of your mind? Here's the debate. You're upset. This is the night I thought that I don't want. Gentlemen, we're live. Fantastic. Okay, folks. Episode number 151 with Paul Manafort. Paul Manafort, if you don't know the name Probably in 2016 you couldn't have turned on the TV newspaper magazine

Starting point is 00:00:32 Anything if you turn on social media you would have seen his face all over the place non-stop And there was many different reasons for that. We'll talk about many of the reasons today We kind of want to hear from him, self as well. Background party campaign consultant, chaired the Trump presidential campaign from June to August of 2016. He served as an advisor for presidential campaigns of Republicans, Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan,

Starting point is 00:00:59 George H.W. Bush, and Bob Dole. And on top of that, in 1980, co-founded the Washington DC based lobby and firm black men for it and stone along with principles Charles R. Black and Roger Stone joined by Peter G Kelly in 1984. So we got a lot of stuff to cover with that being said thank you so much for being a G. S. On the podcast. Good to be here. And if I asked you correctly, this the first time you're doing a long form like this, you've not done a two hour one. Now, yeah, it's going to feel like five minutes. So, for the audience that doesn't know, because you've been away from it for a few years,

Starting point is 00:01:31 meaning not that you've been away from it, you've not been, the controversy's not been at this peak the last 12, 24, 36 months. But if people that know your name, the average person that knows your name, if they're from the Republican side, they think you were framed, they think they put you in jail, they think they came after you simply because you were associating with Trump,

Starting point is 00:01:53 and they think that Durham investigation that came out saying the fact that Hillary Clinton's dossier was all fake targeting, trying to get you guys to not get reelected, a form of revenge. On the other side, if you watch SNL, if you watch Rachel Maddow, Anderson Cooper, Donald Lamont, any of these other guys, they would say you had a connection to Russia and Putin and collusion and Trump and all of that and all

Starting point is 00:02:20 that's true. And that's actually not why you went away. But for the audience that doesn't know, maybe share with us a little bit about your background and how it came to the controversy in 2016. Sure. I guess I start with, I went to Georgetown University, graduated from the law center there as well, practice law for a few years, but then, you know, I always was interested in politics,

Starting point is 00:02:44 got involved in Republican politics very young. My father was mayor of my hometown. It was a blue collar town, very democratic town. He was a Republican, first one in his family. Became a Republican because he disagreed with what FDR did in Yalta. My father fought in the World War II and was in sense that Roseville gave away Central

Starting point is 00:03:09 Europe and Eastern Europe. And thought we fought for those freedoms. How could he just give that to a communist country that was impactful on him. And in talking to him as I was growing up, it became impactful on me. First campaigns I got really involved in were, when I was at Georgetown, I got involved with Nixon's reelection campaign and then Ford's campaign then began to be actively involved with national level, really, in Ford's campaign. Serving as part of the team that,

Starting point is 00:03:43 that ran it, working with Jim Baker, who was his first campaign. He and I became very good friends during that campaign. He's a good man. He's a very good man. I talked about in the book. I talked some of the stories about those early years when he was learning. Chief of Stafford, Jerry Ford, was a very green behind-the-years policy-want guy named Dick Cheney. It's so really early on in my career with that campaign, I got to know a number of people personally, and that became figures in the Republican Party for the next 40 years. During the, you know, after the 70, some of the six campaign got involved in Governor Reagan's campaign for president again

Starting point is 00:04:29 as part of the senior team and after he was elected, Roger Stone, Charlie Black and I started a political consulting firm which really became a lobbying for government affairs firm as well and that really began to change the model. And in the, you know, before 1980, most of the government affairs work was done by law firms. People were hired. Law firms were hired to deal with specific issues that made legislative issues or regulatory issues. And we decided to create it for model. We were interested in international affairs.

Starting point is 00:05:04 We were interested in international affairs. We were interested in in government affairs and so we thought it was a natural as grassroots politics was just beginning and we were on the cutting edge of some of that to bring some of the campaign skills into into Washington government affairs and the only public Inferment that time was a company called Timins and Company Bill Timins was the legislative director for Nixon and the White House. But he had a very different model. His model was to have

Starting point is 00:05:32 a 10 or 12 corporate clients and and to only represent that that group we saw ourselves as a much different concept. And in the firm group became probably one of the most powerful firms in the Washington scene during the Reagan and Bush years. During that time we expanded our work beyond just corporate 500 or two include a number of countries, represented a number of countries. Always I should

Starting point is 00:06:00 add with US foreign policy interest and heart and always in concert with the White House not with standing what Rachel Maddow and people like that have stood over the last few years. And in fact, if you look at our client, you will see that we are always involved in areas where the foreign policy issues were the issues affecting those countries, for example, in Angola. We were president Jonas Sivimbi, who was a freedom fighter for UNITA, and active in dealing with trying to end the Cuban concentrated and Soviet dominated Angola government. And we suddenly got involved in the Congo, got involved in Guinea, and we had a big African practice working with Reagan foreign policy and Bush foreign policy objectives in Africa. Again, in the course of the last five years, a lot of this

Starting point is 00:07:02 has been distorted. And we'll talk about this some of the shirts in my book as well, where the woke left up for one of a better term decided that they were just going to declare that I was pro-Russian pro-Putin. And never with any facts. I mean, because I represented an oligarch in Russia that became tanemow to anything and everything of my whole career. And he was an oligarch that we were not doing things in Russia on. Although he was concerned with bringing some changes to Russia as well, and I get into

Starting point is 00:07:41 that in the book. So it means over the course of the last 20 years, I got involved in Ukraine. I mean, I thought it was a very important country. The Soviet, well, the Russians were trying to, force Ukraine to not become part of Europe. I thought Ukraine should be a part of Europe. I elected a government that was from Eastern Ukraine. It was. You thought Ukraine should be part of Europe, I thought Ukraine should be a part of Europe. I elected a government that was from Eastern Ukraine. You thought Ukraine should be part of Europe? Absolutely, 100%. And in fact, my whole time there, and this is all people.

Starting point is 00:08:13 But you claimed they don't want that, though. No, that's not true. That's not true. And in fact, if you look at his presidency, you will see that the changes that were made in Ukraine over those three and a half years of his presidency, we changed the economic system, the legal system, and the regulatory system working with the European Union directly. And I was working with here, Peter and Dr. Legh. Are you talking about Yanukovych? Yeah, I'm talking about Yanukovych. And this is the part of the 1314 when this is he was elected president in 2010 right and

Starting point is 00:08:47 Immediately the first thing he did was go to Brussels and Commit himself to working with Brussels to become part of Ukraine When historically all previous incoming presidents went to Moscow first It was very controversial very controversial not went to Moscow first. It was very controversial, very controversial, not going to Moscow. He understood what he was doing. He understood the symbolism of it and sort of the Europeans and sort of the Americans and they started working with him. And if you look at, and this is all public information,

Starting point is 00:09:20 but it's not convenient facts, if you look at what he did during those three and a half years, he prepared Ukraine to become part of Europe. He even said that while he wasn't committed to make Ukraine part of Naderia, because that was too controversial of his decision inside Ukraine, he left that question open. And it was only when Putin realized that the negotiations for the trade agreement, which was the predecessor for the political association agreement, was about to be signed that Putin's threatened Yanukovych

Starting point is 00:09:54 publicly. Again, this is all public information. And it said to say, Yanukovych, that if you signed this trade agreement, I really immediately shut down all trade with Ukraine, which was approximately 70% of Ukraine's trade. And the trade agreement that we had negotiated with, you said that publicly. Oh yeah. And because the decision was made sudden, their celebration, everyone's outside, kids are waiting, college students are waiting, they're about to go out there and party hard,

Starting point is 00:10:19 you know the scene, you've seen it and all of a sudden boom, well, we're not going to do it, but there's a lot more to the story. And that's all, again, public information. Yeah, when Putin made that threat publicly, because he wanted to be created to be part of a trade association that he was creating, he put in, you know, he said, no. And in a cool, which said, we actually asked, uh, Bo Drones, the president of the European Union, for a subsidy to help Ukraine bridge the time frame when it was going to be signed the Association agreement because the way this document read, if you look at it, the Oli advantages in the first three to four years were favorable to European companies

Starting point is 00:11:05 because Ukraine was basically taking down its barriers and its trade barriers and its own tariffs and allowing it to be a part of a free-range association. And if Russia was going to shut 70% of their trade down of the country down, all of it's trade with Ukraine, but 70% of the of the foreign trade. Ukraine couldn't have survived that. And so it needed this subsidy. The Europeans said, no.

Starting point is 00:11:35 And in a code which then said, look, I can't sign this and share my country shut down if you're not willing to help me. But I'm not saying I'm not going to sign it. I've got to work out this problem because two, you know, a week before or whatever it was when he made this final statement, you create, you've brain learned that it was going to have its market shut down. That's when everything fell apart. That's when everything exploded. Did he, that he's shared that with his people? This is, this is public information. But what I'm trying to say is, in that moment when he said I can't

Starting point is 00:12:10 Did he share that with his people that 70% of our commerce that goes through Russia? We're gonna lose Wait, this was all public. Yes, absolutely 100% that's that's saying that's in you go back and you look At the international lose you look at what Putin threatened you look at the Ukrainian news of the impact of what that would be You look at what was being said you look at the Ukrainian news of the impact of what that would be, you look at what was being said to the European Union members. It was, this is all public information. So let me ask you, what's your opinion on Putin on the way he threatened? So in that situation, say it's 2013,

Starting point is 00:12:37 and the young Kovac is sitting there, and he's kinda like, I'm not saying his name, I'm calling him. He's sitting there and he's saying, hey listen, I'd love to do this and join you. But if I do our number one guy that's doing business with us, we're going to lose 70% in that moment when Putin was bullion, Yana, COVID, what was your opinion about Putin in that moment?

Starting point is 00:12:57 Well, my opinion, Putin's been always been the same going before that moment. After all, he's a thug. What you're seeing today in Ukraine was what those who were paying attention to Ukraine 20 years ago saw. You saw the writing on the wall with Putin one hundred twenty years ago that you like did you are you saying that you kind of predicted what's happening today? I what I'm saying. Yes.

Starting point is 00:13:17 I mean, can I predict that the, you know, rubble that's happened? No. I would never have thought that Putin would have leveled the country, but was I aware, was was anybody aware that Putin's desire for Ukraine? Yes. Putin always felt. And again, we in the in the West, things are right out there and that we don't pay attention to because we don't want them to be true.

Starting point is 00:13:45 But Putin has always said he thought Ukraine should never have been given its independence by Khrushchev and Khrushchev. The story on Ukraine's independence was part of the Soviet Union, but it was on an integral part of greater Russia. Khrushchev, when he was the general secretary, in the 50s, was from Ukraine. He was Ukrainian. And so as a gift on their independence day, he gave them their independence. Never thinking that the Soviet Union was going to collapse, never thinking that it made. It was a distinction with our difference. And Putin was totally against that. I mean, he wasn't involved back then, but he thought that was one of the two biggest mistakes in the history of the Soviet Union. The other being Gorbachev's working with Reagan and Bush to break up the Soviet Union.

Starting point is 00:14:31 So he's always been an historical. Ukraine is part of Russia, not Ukraine is an independent country with Russian heritage. Have you ever met Putin? No. No. And so, so what Putin was doing with putting the squeeze on was because he finally realized that a code which was serious, even though mind you, changing the legal structure, changing the economic structure, changing the regulatory structure, it's a massive amount of work.

Starting point is 00:15:02 And Ukraine went through that for the first three years of Yanukovych's presidency With great detail working with the European Union They call it the the committee on a large which is the body that from the EC that deals with Potential new countries and I personally was working with stuff on Rupfila Who is the commissioner of the commission of the law large and we worked through thousands of issues, all towards the end of getting the trade agreement signed and then getting the political, it's called the Association Agreement signed. That was the key work during the Antichovicist time. Where things went badly for the Antichovic with the West was

Starting point is 00:15:44 about a year and a half in when he had his opponent for a prime minister to mishanko arrested And he had her arrested for corruption corruption which her president when she was prime minister Victor you shanko was president Victor you shanko accused to mishanko of the same corruption But it was heard part of his base so he couldn't go after it later in life he did. He was very public about how she committed crimes and dealing with Ukrainian interests on Russian gas coming to the country. But when Nyanakova had arrested the West went crazy because she was the darling of all bright the darling of Clinton

Starting point is 00:16:28 Even though she was a correct fine minister and it was if you were people that don't know she would be the modern a. O.C It would you put her like that? Who how would you say her personality how she was? I know I wouldn't call her a. O. C. I mean the the She was a typical Soviet politician. But she was good looking. She understood how to work the media. Tyler Polaro. And she, she sold herself to Merkel and Albright and Clinton as the hope of the West. The reality was she was the Putin candidate again in 2010. The Enicle which wasn't. Again, one of the major myths in the words, they didn't want Enicle which in the reason they wanted her is because the corruption that she committed that she was arrested for was

Starting point is 00:17:25 when she went to Russia to negotiate the agreement between Russia and Ukraine for the gas pipeline. What happens until the Nord Stream pipeline with Germany, all of the Russian gas to Europe came through a pipeline through Ukraine. It was very important to Ukraine's economic life blood. And, uh, this is her. Yeah, but it's her before she changed her hairstyle. Can I ask you a very, but let me, let me say one thing here, and then I'm gonna, I'm gonna go to you. You know, what's tough for me for, for the average person who's not on the inside to believe this is if Yanukovych was against Putin and Putin wasn't happy by the Yanukovych, then

Starting point is 00:18:08 why did he few months later when he was an exile come and protect them and bring him to Russia to provide safety to them? That's very... I agree that. I was opposed to Yanukovych. There was a... Some people call it a coup, some people call it a revolution that was geared towards Yanakovic that probably was not not indigously grown by itself.

Starting point is 00:18:34 We leave it at that for now. But I'm from Iran. Okay. So I remember when I'm a revolution baby October of 1978. So three months after that, the Shahz and Exile, right? And Chomeini'sones and France he comes from France to Iran and he was in exile for 15 years. I think he was in exile twice Chomones you want to eventually was hiding in France, but it's kind of like

Starting point is 00:18:57 Iraq to come and say hey Shah Come and stay here in Iraq and we'll give you protection. It's a very weird For you to say that he's not against Putin, but Putin provides that protection because Putin saw the destabilizing effect Again, you have to understand something else about Ukraine and which Putin is learning now Eastern Ukraine is the Ukraine's two countries There's Eastern Ukraine, which is a Russian and a Catholic base, and there's Western Ukraine, which is more European, Hungarian, Polish. And Yanukovych was very popular in Eastern Ukraine, even near the end of the time.

Starting point is 00:19:38 Why? Because he was protecting Russian culture, Russian heritage, Russian language, but not joining Russia. And what Putin didn't understand when he invaded Ukraine and expected everybody to be running into the streets in the east, to see him as the conquering hero, was that the Ukrainian people of Russian ethnicity do cherish their freedom, their history, their language, their religion. But this is a big part of the fight in Ukraine is the Orthodox versus Ukrainian or the Orthodox religion. It's very political.

Starting point is 00:20:16 But in the Eastern Ukrainians, a Russian Orthodox Christians. But they treasure all of that. And the Yanukovic was their protector. But what they treasure just as much, if not more, is their freedom. And Eastern Ukraine, I did over 150 Poles in Ukraine. I understand the whole country very well. I had in all of my Poles, I would be testing to understand the dynamics in the between the conflicts in the country and of course the Russian, the Eastern versus Western part of Ukraine conflicts. No poll were those were any of the Russian ethnic Ukrainians in Eastern Ukraine ever more

Starting point is 00:20:59 than 4% saying they wanted to be part of Russia and not part of Ukraine. They cherished their Ukrainian freedom because they knew the difference between freedom under Soviet slash Russia versus what they had in Ukraine. And so there was no desire to become part of that. And Putin is seeing that now in its ugliest manifestations with the people fighting, you know, you know, you've got a system militia that's defeating the Russian army right now. And it's just as strong in the eastern part as it was, you know, it is in the western part of the country. Yannakova, which was a hero to them, Putin, to the eastern, to the, well the well to yes, Princess definitely to the Eastern was his base,

Starting point is 00:21:45 but also not to the elites in the West, but to the elites in the East. And another ugly secret that people don't like to talk about is some of the biggest promoters. You can be again also, let me back on one second, the economics of Ukraine. The West East is where the wealth of Ukraine was because that's where the industry is.

Starting point is 00:22:07 That's where the gas is and the west part of Ukraine is the breadbasket, which is an important part, but it's not the engine of the Ukrainian economy. The oligarchs in the eastern part, which are most of the important oligarchs in the eastern part, which are most, we're most of the important oligarchs, my time there. They saw the importance of going, becoming part of Europe, not staying a part of Russia. And it's, again, if you think about it, it's logical. They were sort of the, the bastard child with, with the oligarchs of Russia. They didn't have the power, they didn't have the political support, they didn't have any of that. And so and and they were always at risk to the Russian model, and which was also the Ukrainian model of how you

Starting point is 00:22:57 a business and who owns a business. And and those times and in Russia still, it's you have the power, you have the business. So if you have a change in leadership, the new leadership, they don't try and buy up your interest. They come to you and they say, here's the shares, sign them over to me. And it's a corrupt system. And the Eastern Ukrainian oligarchs saw the protection of the West in their of their business interests if they're part of a real market economy and were part of a real democratic framework political system, which being part of Europe would have been for Ukraine.

Starting point is 00:23:37 So they were in the four and this was the base, the economic base of Yanukovych's support as well. So Yanukovych, one of the first things that I talked to him about before I agreed to help him, was his commitment to becoming part of Europe. To him, he saw the value of being an independent president of a free Ukraine that was going to be the biggest country in Europe. And lots of natural resources, lots of... Ukraine offers a lot to the world. Absolutely. And so so he's not but have a lot of controversy to go back to

Starting point is 00:24:08 lineage with uh... nazi would hit lyrs their history is not the most well that's the western part of your crain at the eastern part uh... but and but again from the anacobas and standpoint and that would do frankly he would say that at times why do you overlook the blemishes in the, my, my eastern, you know, western Ukraine, uh, opponents and, and over exaggerate the blemishes on the eastern Ukraine's? I mean, there's too much to go into. What do you think about how Zalinsky is handling everything? He's been brilliant. I mean, Zalinsky was an actor, who played the role of president on a popular television

Starting point is 00:24:46 program and people who joke to him and say, you ought to be run for president. He's all these other guys are doing a terrible job. And he did, and he won. And I never expected this out of him, but he's risen to the moment. He understands his symbolic importance to democracy, to Ukraine, and he's been brilliant. And you ever met him? Once, but not in an important way. I mean, and like Ronald Reagan, and really like Donald Trump, he understood how you use the media to promote, and what he's doing. You know, one of the criticisms I always had about the West is their sort of superficial support for Ukraine be in a part of Europe. There's

Starting point is 00:25:34 a lot of history as to why they didn't want Ukraine to be a part of Europe, but they could never say that. And you look at the support that the Western Europe was giving to Ukraine until it became unconscionable not to give it lead to lead. And you see exactly what I'm talking about. Excuse me. The ones Zalinsky has done is he recognizes the sort of duplicity of the leadership of Europe. And so he's speaking to these legislatures, the

Starting point is 00:26:07 brilliant part of that move is not that he's speaking to the politicians. He's speaking to the people in those countries that those legislatures represent. And he's forcing those legislatures to actually give him the lethal A that he needs because he's creating the political groundswell in their countries. That's his brilliance. And he's creating the political groundswell in their countries. That's his brilliance, and he's also calling on artists to create the groundswell that you're talking about. Because he understands that the European political community and the Washington political me community, by the way, is not...

Starting point is 00:26:40 There were a lot of reasons why they were comfortable with the sort of data that existed between Russia and Ukraine, with Ukraine being Western-oriented democracy, not under Russian control, but not outside of Russian hegemony. They accepted that. Merkel, who I think was a terrible leader for Western democracies. You know, she was a Patsy-Frick Putin. You think Merkel was a terrible leader and a Patsy-Frick Putin, you say that? Because I think that she basically empowered Putin

Starting point is 00:27:14 to do what Putin is doing today, with Nord Stream 2, which totally undercut Ukraine. I mean, the life economic lifeblood of Ukraine was that pipeline and Because it flows from Russia through Ukraine all European gas went through there and She understood the importance of it But she signed the North Stream 2 deal which was going to choke off Ukraine

Starting point is 00:27:41 Create a vassal state. That's what Putin was trying to do is one have the Europeans dependent on the pipeline that he controlled and two kill Ukraine at the same time by taking it away. I mean Putin has been playing these moves for a long time. The West, they're not stupid. They've understood it, but they were comfortable in the little this little that mentality reanna kovic upset all of that Because Anna Kovic said I want it the Eastern Ukraine leadership wants to be part of Europe the Western Ukraine leadership wants to be part of Europe So now we're truly united as a country wanted to be part of Europe One of the reasons I got involved with you know, Kovic after I was convinced he Would support Ukraine coming to into Europe, it was the my feeling that Ukraine was the

Starting point is 00:28:32 equivalent of Nixon going to China. Only Nixon could open up China because he came from the anti-communist right wing part of the Republican party. And so he brought Republicans who would have been the natural opposition into the fold. Same thing was true as far as I was concerned in Ukraine. You Eastern Ukraine needed a leader from Eastern Ukraine that could help them accept becoming part of Europe, minimizing the conflicts that could exist.

Starting point is 00:29:02 When you shanko in the orange revolution happened in 2004, I wasn't involved. I got involved after that. And I got involved, frankly, because this little bit of what I was talking about earlier, you shanko who was the Western candidate and who won was re-nationalizing companies of Eastern Ukrainian businessmen

Starting point is 00:29:21 and then selling them below the bargain prices to his oligarchs. So the transition was happening and an oligarch who had a steel company had hired Aiken Gump, a Democrat firm, and they asked me to help him as well. That's how I got involved in Ukraine. But what happened in 2004 is a result of this re-nationalization and then privatization gain that was going on is that the Eastern Ukrainians decided it was time that they really got actively involved in becoming part of Europe. Because to be in the current environment that Ukraine had,

Starting point is 00:30:06 it was not really getting the protections of free market principles of so the corruption issues. And so they got all in, Yanukovych convinced me that he would be supportive of it, and I got involved. So, and if you look at from that moment forward, what were Ukrainians today? How did Yanukovych find you through this oligarch? Through this oligarch. So, did you work with the oligarch in Russia first? Or did you use that? Well, this was a Ukrainian oligarch. Ukrainian. Because you also work with a oligarch in Russia. What happened was, I worked for oligarch in Pasco. Right. It was an oligarch. Because you also work with oligarch in Russia. What happened was I worked for oligarch de Rapasco. Right.

Starting point is 00:30:48 It was an oligarch. And how is he exactly? He's the aluminum king. He's number two largest aluminum company in the world. Russia. Easy from Russia. He's a Russian oligarch. He had plants all over the world.

Starting point is 00:31:02 Natural resources that were needed for aluminum and things like that. And he hired me to help him actually get involved in elections in this country. What year was that? What year was that? This was probably 2005. Yeah, it was two months. That's way before. So you, and he was in Russia at the time when you were working with him. He was in Russia at the time, but my work for him was not in Russia. My work for him was in the countries in Africa and in the, in the, in Ukraine, where he had plants and where he needed help, two types of help. Number one, protecting his interests by having, you know, me help build a lot of lobbying

Starting point is 00:31:42 strategy and public affairs strategy firm because a lot of these countries were either dictatorships or former parts of the Soviet Union in the stand countries like Kazakhstan, Turkestan, Ukraine. So I was helping to build a and running elections form in some of the democratic countries in Africa like Guinea. And in the course of that, he said, you want to get involved in Ukraine because they're talking about nationalizing one of my plants down there in this pro-Western government that's supposed to be against this kind of stuff. And so I went down and I looked and I started getting involved.

Starting point is 00:32:22 That's how I interacted with Akin Gub. And that's how I then was introduced to Runaat, Akmatov, who was the Ukrainian oligarch, who was having his countries nationalized as well. And it was because of that, that as I was helping him, Akmatov said to me, would you ever think of running, helping us with an election here in the United,

Starting point is 00:32:43 in Ukraine, I said, well, it's gonna depend. I mean, who might get a help? You've with what's it going to be all about? And he said, look, take a poll. See what I mean, you know our interest now, because I've gotten to know some of the political interests, figure out what we need to do. And so I did. And in the party of regents, which was the party of the Eastern Ukrainians, and, you know,

Starting point is 00:33:05 and that had been discredited into the 2004 elections, what I saw in that first poll was that the party wasn't really discredited as much as demoralized American, that was support for the party in Eastern Ukraine. It was a regional support. I mean, you just like you have red states and blue states here in the United States and Ukraine, you had Russian, ethnic states, or oblasts as they call them, and Western oriented oblasts, the western part of the country. And so it became a red blue kind of breakdown in the typical to what you see here in the

Starting point is 00:33:43 United States. They didn't talk to each other. They talked over each other and listened to each other. But what I found was that the Eastern part, as I said a few minutes ago, they did not want to be part of Russia. They wanted to protect their interest. The party of regions protected their interests

Starting point is 00:34:02 because it was from the Eastern part. Yannickovich was the governor of Donetsk before he ran for president of Donetsk being the, one of the biggest obelis in the, in the east. And they saw him as a loser. And there was some controversy whether he tried to steal the election. Some people say you shank or tried. I wasn't involved. I never got involved in that issue.

Starting point is 00:34:25 I made an appointment. Whatever a campaign I was going to be involved in, we were going to have an electric election integrity component and work with all of the international organizations to bring them in to watch the elections and ballot security. And every one of the elections I was a part of, there was a major component of it where I actually had a part of my staff Dealing directly with the European Union on election integrity and facilitating the international observers coming in to watch the elections in all of the potential places that Work corrupt. You know, it's crazy as I'm listening with Nepal This guy's that you crane expert. I mean, you know, don't judge a book by its cover You know, there's a lot of people especially in the left. They're like always is this corrupt. You know Russian You know, Paul on it like this guy's been dealing with Ukrainian politics for two decades

Starting point is 00:35:15 And he's breaking it all down. I'm trying to follow what's going on Ukrainian politics How many Americans literally know as much about Ukrainian politics as you? No Zero like you're an expert on this I'm the expert on the expert on Ukrainian politics, including with the US state department as well, by the way, that's what I'm saying here I feel like he could be utilized not scrutinized that he's been by the media, but it doesn't it's not convenient I mean there are to court Al Gore inconvenient truths and the inconvenient truth is that they would have to acknowledge that it isn't black and white right yeah yeah one of the biggest problems for Yanukovych and the reason I think he fled was something that I was coming down on a margarita who's cropped you know but

Starting point is 00:35:57 I mean Yanukovych was cropped but they were all cropped yeah I mean if you just say you can't be free Yanukov, you have to be for X. X was just this cropped. So Zelensky is a, no, no, Zelensky is a different model. So, I mean, there's a, Zelensky represents an emergence of Ukraine from the shadows of the Ukrainian, of, of, of, of Soviet influence. I mean, he's a new style politician. He doesn't come out of politics. He hasn't, he hasn't been corrupted on the way up. Now there are people who will say, mean, he's a new style politician. He doesn't come out of politics. He hasn't, he hasn't been corrupted on the way up. Now there are people who say, well, he's owned by one of the oligarchs, who is corrupt, but it's almost by necessity, right?

Starting point is 00:36:33 Yeah. He was doing his thing, whatever. But now when Putin invades, he's got no other option. When did you realize Yanukovych was corrupt at what? Well, I mean, I didn't know how corrupt it was over. And, but it was showing up in my polls. I mean, there was corruption that was going on. And, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and and, and, and and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and and, and, and, and, and and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and and, and, and, and, and, and and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and, and Burisma was managed by corrupt Yanukovych people who were partners of Hunter White. So let me, let me ask you while you're in it and you're going through this, and you're having, you know, you're saying 150 polls, I've been there, you know, two decades, all this stuff. What do you know on the inside of the involvement of Biden's what they were doing? Hunter and his father.

Starting point is 00:37:26 Well, did I know that he was nosing on a Ukrainian business? Yes. Did I know what he was doing? No. Did I care? No. Why? Because I was working with the Obama administration.

Starting point is 00:37:42 The Obama administration, the Obama embassy in Kiev needed my help. I mean, one of Obama's first major international victories was getting all of the nuclear fishing waste product out of Ukraine. There was a big conference on collecting all of the, from the very Soviet countries that had nuclear byproduct, there was that were weapon-grade, you know, nuclear product. Obama and the West was trying to put it all under control of the West and, he brought it was totally, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, and, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, uh, he brought it to us, and, and, uh, uh, uh, he brought it to us, and, and, uh, uh, he brought it to us, and, and, by Putin and I think it was Medvedev at the time in Russia.

Starting point is 00:38:49 And so I was working with the embassy on a regular basis. Whenever the embassy in Kiev, US Embassy in Kiev had a problem with foreign US business companies or for something that was going on politically that they disagreed with what was happening, they'd reach out to me. And I would work as an ombudsman if you will with them

Starting point is 00:39:09 and every one of the ambassadors. And mundane things is getting Jeff Pied's dog into the country because he couldn't get it into the country. It's a big deal. The him it was, to overwork in with them to make sure the international observers got to go to overs working with them to make sure the international observers got to go to every district to watch election results as they wanted to.

Starting point is 00:39:31 And so by the way, this you're saying this is under the Obama administration. The Obama was secretary of state at that time. He'd always good. Okay. Yeah. Who reset the Russian US relationship. Right. The button that she couldn't even press correctly

Starting point is 00:39:46 To reset the relationship I mean, you know, so when you hear Rachel Maddow people thought I was working with this Russian oligarch in 2005 six and seven because that's what I work with him Who's very close very close to to Putin now But wasn't then and we wasn't part of it then, it's no different than when Obama became president. And Obama set the reset with Russia, not Paul Manafort. And what he reset was the political relationship between the two countries. My oligarch that I was working with was at a different time, but now the stink of Putin today,

Starting point is 00:40:34 and the image of Putin today is being held up as what I was dealing with and for with their Pasco back in 2000. It's totally different. But there's no distinction between Putin and, well, and U.S. attitudes in Russia from 2004, you know, with Bush to 2009 and 10, resetting it with Obama and Clinton to 2013, when Putin went to war against Ukraine and the West. And even then Obama blinked and let Putin get away with it Which is why with Crimea and what he tried to do with these quote independent Eastern zones of influence in Ukraine and Dorodzkyla Hanz so

Starting point is 00:41:22 It's just all blurred together So it's just all blurred together and there's no distinction between you could have been four. Medvedev when he was president, the US was looking at him as potentially being the end of Putin. Now, and they, because they do, Medvedev is a bureaucrat and somebody who didn't come out of the KGB. And so his, this is one term of president that Putin actually put him in on.

Starting point is 00:41:47 They were hoping he would become a two term president and Putin would fade into history. And if that had happened, I think the world would be very different today. But they didn't do anything to help Medvedev. And at that time, I was trying to promote the Western form policy, because I saw the difference between Medvedev and Putin and how that could impact the world, but also

Starting point is 00:42:14 more importantly, from my vision at that time, Ukraine. Wasn't Medvedev the individual who Obama got caught with a hot mic, isn't that the conversation? Yeah. So what was the the so what are your thoughts on what happened there? Well, I mean, that's another part of the hypocrisy of the attacks against me. I mean here, you know, Obama gets caught on the hot mic saying to me to tell Vlad I can be a lot more flexible in dealing with him after my election because this was done and I think this. This was done, I think, in the fall of 2012. And, and Obama meant it. He wanted to be more flexible in broad relationships. Partially, I think because he recognized that Putin was not going to let Medvedev have a second term and he was going to have to deal

Starting point is 00:43:03 with, you know, he's saying to the current president, Medvedev, tell the prime minister, I'm going to be more flexible. What is that? I'm kind of signaled as that said. Well, Medvedev, you're still the lackey and Putin, you're still the power, even though Medvedev, you're the president. You know, and the Russians know how Putin in particular knows how to read these signals. And so, guess what happens in 2013

Starting point is 00:43:27 2013 you have the you have the revolt in any crane and 2014 Crimea gets invaded because Putin doesn't fear Obama They you know and then he puts food is put in fear Well Right now he probably fears the litsky. I think so. I mean, he respects him a lot more. He'll never say that. But, you know, he's just, you know, so litsky's with a, with a citizen militia has just defeated

Starting point is 00:43:57 the Russian. Okay, but that's, that's, that's misleading because it's not a citizen militia just by itself. They're backed and armed to the teeth by the United States government. No, we sent them to the US. We sent them $15 billion in military aid. We are now switching from Soviet era weapons to NATO weapons, we're also providing them intelligence. So it's not just a citizen militia. Well, they are completely backed in a proxy war by the United States.

Starting point is 00:44:19 Well, no, I mean, you've blending it all together. They, what they did the first month, that where they blunted the, the, the Russian invasion in Kiev, was done with the remnants of the lethal aid that Trump gave them. Obama wasn't given them lethal aid in the first year. There's, again, they're still backed by the state, whether it's Trump or, of course they are, or Biden. They're still backed by the United States. Well, barely.

Starting point is 00:44:45 Now Biden has gotten much more active, he's the two sector state and the administrative defense have just gone to Ukraine because he's got to. Why though? Because this one is the right thing to do. Yes, but I wonder how this ends up, because even back in 2016, the Obama doctor, the Obama was interviewed by David Goldberg of the Atlantic and said that the United States

Starting point is 00:45:09 has no interest in Ukraine because Russia can always exert dominance over there. There's no interest to us. Okay, so again, it's, it may be the right thing to do, but why is it the right thing for us to do? We're continually providing aid, we're continually providing intelligence. And day after day, we get more and more involved in this proxy war with the second strongest nuclear power in the world. Okay, you've said a bunch of things that you need to break down here, because number one, you said correctly what Obama's policy was, which was it's not

Starting point is 00:45:39 our backyard. Okay, I happen to think 44 million people who want to be part of the West deserve to be Given the tools they need to become a part of the West. I also happen to believe that Putin showed his teeth in 2014 when he invaded Crimea and we didn't do a thing we barely Registered objection no sanctions of serious nature were put. There were sanctions, but they were not significant. And what happened is a result of that. Putin then moved into Eastern Ukraine in 2014. That got stopped pretty much because of the Ukrainians, not because of the West,

Starting point is 00:46:16 and pressure that the Europeans were starting to feel now. And it was an election year coming up in the United States. Then, so now Putin sees all of that. now and it was an election year coming up in the United States. Then, so now Putin sees all of that. Trump becomes president and Obama refused to give any leave the late, any leave the late, which people here don't follow, but the people over there do. And they understood the significance of that, put no difference of it, so are the Ukrainians. And so how did the Ukrainians get their weapons in 2016 through mercenaries, through, you know, the arms, you know, the underground arms operation.

Starting point is 00:46:54 And that's how they were able to get some, but not enough. Then Trump gets elected president. What does Trump do for almost first things in first year in office? He gives lethal aid. Now, Putin is seeing a change in the leadership of the country. What does Trump do for almost first things in first year in office? He gives lethal aid now Putin is seeing a change in the leadership of the country You know this pro-Putin president new president Donald Trump is given to lethal aid and he said don't mess with with Ukraine Putin pays attention to that

Starting point is 00:47:19 Biden gets elected president Biden brings in the same foreign policy team that was dealing with this area under Obama, new titles, new chairs, but it's the same team. Putin understands what that means. First thing Biden does is he makes United States energy dependent again by shutting down new production. Second thing he does is he removes the sanctions

Starting point is 00:47:42 that Trump put on Nord Stream 2, which were serious sanctions. And what does that put and see there? Okay, I got the I got the Obama form policy team in place now. I got Biden helping me, you know, and build my my my energy position in the world. And because the US is going to be becoming a net expo importer, the extra flow of gas is coming from Russia, the third parties, which means he's making billions of dollars more to funnel his war machine in Moscow. So he sees all of that. And then he says, you know, to the West, don't bring anybody into NATO. What were his conditions for peace, not having them invade Ukraine? He wanted the commitment that Ukraine would be not be a part of NATO.

Starting point is 00:48:32 Ukraine said they were not prepared to be a part of it. They were never going to be a part of that. So that wasn't an issue. But then he said, and I want all NATO country borders with military, Western military, NATO troops to go back to 1997. You know what 1997 was? That's when the Soviet Union basically fell apart. And so what he was saying is he wants no NATO troops in any of Eastern and Central Europe

Starting point is 00:48:56 and also in the Baltics. He wanted to pull back on the Lafayah in Estonia. No, that wasn't a peace gesture. That was a war gesture. Well, and I think you're correct. Let's not forget that Trump was in peace because he threatened to withhold federal aid from Ukraine.

Starting point is 00:49:11 You're correct about that. And nobody's... Well, we can go into that and separate issue, but we're gonna confuse the conversation. I think we should stick on this and then we can talk about that. But he did send federal lethal aid to Ukraine. And again again nobody's

Starting point is 00:49:25 saying what what Vladimir Putin is doing is correct right if forty four million people want to be free they have the right to be free but again i ask where does this end up why is that our responsibility i didn't say how does this end i didn't say that was our you what you took objection to is me saying that uh... that ukraine it blunted in the first month the the Russian invasion by using a citizen militia. That's what I said. That's what I said. And what you did, I didn't get a chance to, but now I'll give you a chance to be irrelevant on your comment, to say that what the West should have been doing from that point

Starting point is 00:49:57 was facilitating what Ukraine needed in order to defend themselves because we are committed to free freedom and democracy. And you're talking about 44 million people or do you know I'm not saying we should have put troops in there. I am saying we should have allowed the air equipment to go in there. Now we are. Why are we not allowing it to go in there? Because it's now apparent that Ukraine can use them and win. But back then we didn't want to get drawn in. Why? Because Putin was threatening us, like he's now threatening us with nuclear weapons. Putin is a bully. Bullies push until they find a wall. Putin's got a problem. He can't win Ukraine. And he's not going to be able to win Ukraine because of the Ukrainian people. of the Ukrainian people if they're given the tools they need to defend themselves. The polls understand this. Why are the polls on the front line here?

Starting point is 00:50:48 Because they know if Ukraine falls to and becomes part of Russia, they're the border and they know what that means. And hey, Pat, you're doing a lot of listening, right? You're probably processing everything and Paul, thanks Tyler, getting in on it. How are you processing all this? There's must, I mean, you've done a whole episode on Ukraine. You've watched Ukraine's fire, everything. But there's a difference between watching an episode of being on the inside.

Starting point is 00:51:16 And no matter how many papers I read, you don't know until you're dealing directly with Yanukovych and oligarchs and you're doing the, you your your therefore few years. I think the question would be the following. So American military news comes out yesterday, two days ago, Russia warrants, World War III, very risk is very significant. So Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov warned on Monday that the risk of a third world war cannot be underestimated and said the US and NATO are adding to the risk by supplying weapons to Ukraine. Love role of said Russia agreed on the in the admissibility of nuclear war and said avoiding such conflict is our principled position. However, he warned that now the risks are very significant.

Starting point is 00:52:01 He particularly criticized the US for supplying man portable anti-aircraft missile launchers and anti-tank javelin missiles, which he said could be used for terrorist attacks. So is this just a threat or is this a bluff or do you think things can get pretty ugly there? You know what happens when you capitulate to a bully? They keep moving. Is it a threat? Yeah, is it a serious threat? I don't know. I know that they're losing and they know that. And so they're getting desperate.

Starting point is 00:52:33 And so they're making these crazy, acuters threats. But frankly, the moment we capitulate, is the moment the world becomes more dangerous, not less dangerous, because the bully understands where the red line doesn't mean a red line anymore. And when they start getting away with a nuclear threat, then what happens in Estonia? When they rush an ethnic population in Estonia that Putin is stirring up right now, he

Starting point is 00:53:02 what happens when he gets them to do like we did in eastern Ukraine and say they, they're not having their interest protected and Russia's got to go in there now and protect them. Well, no, they're NATO country. So if, if, if Moscow goes into, into Estonia, you know, are we going to give in? And if we've given in on the nuclear threat on Ukraine, we'll give in on the nuclear threat in Estonia and all of a sudden the Balkans go back. All of a sudden Sweden and Finland are talking about maybe becoming a part of NATO. Why? Because they feel threatened now. They've for years they've always said neutrality. We don't need to be a part of NATO all of a sudden they're changing Germany I mean I mean this is one of the big surprises to me yeah the the chance of Germany is a social Democrat which is the party that's affiliated with Putin's party you

Starting point is 00:53:55 know where you have these affiliates internationally and he's rearming Germany. They mean amazing. I mean, it's historic. Why? Because now Germany's starting, this guy recognizes his country is worried. I mean, he's got his relationships with Putin. But the country is worried that Germany's borders though are good potential to be addressed. I should be worried that the world be worried if Germany starts arming itself. I mean, they don't exactly have the best reputation. No, they don't. But the point of getting that is you got all these things

Starting point is 00:54:28 swirling around. Nothing is black and white. Putin is causing all of the swirling around. And so when he starts threatening us with doomsday and we give in, it's not going to get better. It's going to get worse. Let me ask you, we talked about him being a bully, how different was his relationship with Trump versus Biden. I was preoccupied during

Starting point is 00:54:51 those days as though, you know, my understanding of is what you saw in the papers as well. I never thought Trump was pro Putin. I think Trump's foreign policy and it's true, it was true in Russia, it was true everywhere, it was true in North Korea, was personal diplomacy. He believed, I mean, the Donald Trump I know, believes that when he can look you in the face, and he can talk you, you'll understand his resolve, and if you understand his resolve, that ability to understand it will allow for things to happen. You know, in theory, Moscow and Putin, there were no Russian invasions happened anywhere during Trump's presidency. Why? Because I believe Putin understood Trump wouldn't tolerate it. And so what they talked about, I have no idea, but I do know that just like North Korea,

Starting point is 00:55:52 when rattled the Sabres before Trump was president, they went quiet after, after he had to Trump met with Kim Jong-un. Trump's conversations with Putin, Putin won quiet. And even China. I mean, I have been thinking if Trump had been reelected, I think they would have finished the international tariff negotiations, and then you would have seen a new kind of approach on foreign policy

Starting point is 00:56:16 with Xi Jinping by Trump, because he would have fixed what he thought was the first problem, and then he'd be dealing with the political relationship, all on a personal basis. And so I don't know what Trump and Putin talked about. I just know the results of his presidency, and the results were very positive for freedom-loving countries. So before we transition out from the story of Ukraine and the story of Russia, Putin, the

Starting point is 00:56:43 story with you, in the world of lobbyast, okay, and that's the business you've been in since 1980, you know, when you got into the business, you know, when they talk about you going to jail, what did you really go get sentenced 47 months for? Some are saying Russia, some are saying the $10 million loan from the oligarch, some are saying the $60 million from Ukraine, what was the real reason at the end that you got 47 months? There was no 10 million dollar loan from oligarchs. There was no loads of oligarchs. There was a bank loan that they accused me of, US bank. What I was villainized for was being pro-poutant, you know, a trader to my country. Yeah, what I was convicted of were legal issues,

Starting point is 00:57:30 which I talk about in the book, that I don't even been cleared up on. I don't even been cleared up on it. In the fairie issues, the tax issues, on the F-buyer, which is the offshore counts issues, and I'm not going to get into them today,

Starting point is 00:57:44 but in the book, I is the offshore counts issues. And I'm not gonna get into them today, but in the book, I get into them in detail. And you need to understand the context, and that was exactly what WISE was to confuse the context, to make me a villain in the media, and then get me convicted on just overcharging and just dropping hundreds of thousands of documents, millions of pages pages and putting me in solitary

Starting point is 00:58:08 Putting me in solitary so I couldn't really prepare myself. Why is my being the right hand guy for Mueller? Right? Why is my case? He ran the, he ran it. I think he ran the whole special one role that leticia, leticia Jackson play. Leticia James. Let's touch a James play. No. She's the attorney general in New York.

Starting point is 00:58:27 But she was trying to go after Trump, you know, God knows how many different things it was trying to find. They couldn't find anything except for, you know, the CEO, you know, who apparently Trump gave away. Why is it like Ferrari or something like that? They couldn't find anything else. So I guess the question for you would be to follow from 1980 till you go Again the 47 months how often Ford Reagan all these guys you work with how often were you a target the way you were a target the moment

Starting point is 00:58:56 He started helping out Trump never Now so you've never been a target like that. I don't know. So why why this level of hatred towards Targeting Trump versus every everybody else your support was also repubbling on what's different between Trump and everyone else The world has changed. I mean number one social media Number two social media was Trump's Help Trump Facilite Trump's, and it's dominated social terms presidency.

Starting point is 00:59:29 We used to have, in going back to four days, there was one new cycle, and you got, you used between eight in the morning until about three in the afternoon to get out on the three network news programs that night. And that was the way you built your strategy for the day. By the time, you know, second Reagan's second term in Jim Baker, master this, we had two cycles. We had the morning cycle in the afternoon cycle so that we dominated what was in the news in the evening and what

Starting point is 00:59:56 you saw on the papers in the morning. Today, you have 24 hour cycle. And you've also had journalism, mainstream journalism change. It used to be that, you know, the fact checkers were the most important part of any, any, any articles you'd read in the non-editorial pages. Fact checkers don't exist anymore. It's first to file, not first to get the facts. And that's driven by the social media to some respect. And the social media has, you know, is dominated the mainstream media's because the mainstream media's are these new reporters grown into national celebrities. The articles they get, they get, they get to be writing and also the coverage they get on the TV talk shows and the clicks. How many clicks? So that if their articles get clicks, the more clicks they get,

Starting point is 01:00:54 the more tension that brings to them, the more tension that brings to them, it's helped their economics. And what gets clicks? News or or I want to buy sensationalism. I want to I want to say, okay, it's social media, but Nixon got target at hardcore, you know, when they were after him, you know, a lot, you know, we can give names of people. Of course, post media coming out first debate being John F. Kennedy and Nixon on TV where it was no longer radio on radio, Nixon's winning on TV is not. But the targeting has happened for a while, maybe not at the levels that we have today, right?

Starting point is 01:01:30 With intensity, intensity. So, but why do that's what I want to know. Forget the social media side. Why, why specifically towards Trump? Well, again, well, I think the main reason for Trump and I get it, this in the book is because he threatened the system, not Democrats, the system. He was going to drain the swamp. The swamp wasn't the Democrats. The swamp was Washington. The swamp was New York. The swamp was the elites versus the people.

Starting point is 01:02:03 They to quote Hillary Clinton, the basket of deplorables. That's they were coming, not since Andrew Jackson, where the people coming to the streets of Washington, the way they were under Trump. Really, I mean, you look at all of the changes, the FDR, you know, even Abraham Lincoln, you didn't have an attack on the system the way you did when Trump or Andrew Jackson, depending on whether you want to do it, became president. And so and they weren't ready for it. In Trump's case, nobody was ready

Starting point is 01:02:41 for Trump to be president except Trump's supporters. And they were the quiet still, to quote Nixon silent majority. I mean, they were hoping I felt Trump was going to win the whole time in 2016. I wrote a memo which they tried to, why shouldn't they try to make into a, something it wasn't in on Thursday before the election in 2016 that I sent to the president to Jared and to right's previous who was running the RNC at the time, where I said that Trump is going to win on Tuesday. And I wrote the memo on Thursday specifically because I felt that there was still time

Starting point is 01:03:18 the week before for Clinton to change. If Clinton had run a smart last 10 days of the campaign, she could have won. I'm not saying she would have, but she could have. By Thursday, it was too late. She couldn't do in my mind what had to be done in the states where I thought Trump would win. So I wrote a memo that said that it's really important

Starting point is 01:03:40 this weekend that we get out there and make people understand we're going to win. I said the media is not going to believe it in the memo, but we have to put the marker down because when we do hit on Tuesday, I said, no one's going to understand how this happened and they're going to try and say we stole the election. And we didn't. Some of them, some of them what I asked for, they suggested to happen happened, but I'm not saying it was because of my memo. But my point was that the system wasn't expecting Reg Trump to win. And so the combination of he's going to drain the swamp, nobody expected him to be standing on Wednesday after the election.

Starting point is 01:04:25 The people crying, schools, teachers unions closing schools because... No, it's epic. Yeah, I mean, when did we ever have that happen? When did we ever have that happen? But that became the defining atmosphere for Trump's presence. I guess what I'm asking is the following. By the way, some people may even say, you know, you are part of the swamp. As a lobbyist, you know, I think lobbyists,

Starting point is 01:04:48 would you say lobbyists have done a lot of damage? I think lobbyists, well, it depends on what they did. I mean, lobbying is government affairs. What does, I mean, you walk to an office of a congressman, you think they're the experts on all the topics they're dealing with in the committees? No, a good government affairs firm is providing information for people to make decisions. Now, there's corruption within the system.

Starting point is 01:05:10 What good does a lobbyist do? Like if I were to say a, you know, what good does a comp do? Okay, I can say what good a comp does. What good does a military soldier do? What good does a, whoever do? What good, what good does a lot of? They provide information factual

Starting point is 01:05:25 information on whatever the issues are that they're representing in the case of foreign government representing foreign governments they facilitate understanding because people they don't they don't people don't talk the same to each other they don't understand the same to each other and and a good lobbyist, which has become a pejorative term, but a good lobbyist is somebody who brings information, finds out what the problems are, goes back and gets responses to the problems and comes back. And that's the mundane work that gets done in the legislative process and the regulatory process all the time. What you read about are the excesses, Hunter Biden going into the state department and

Starting point is 01:06:10 saying that we need to keep, we need to back off on prosecutors in Ukraine coming down on Burisma. That's what Vlabi and his viewed, but that's not lobby. That's political, political influence? Would you say lobbies are like the ultimate spinners, though? Like the ultimate spinners, they'll spin any story into, they'll use some factual things and then they'll spin it into whatever story or narrative they want to tell. But it is a form, they're like the ultimate, ultimate spinners.

Starting point is 01:06:40 Well, that's one of the things they do. Yes, absolutely. But again, don't deceive yourself. The system in Washington is not meant for Congressman to know everything and their staffs know everything about all the issues that they and the committees they sit on. They need information from outside to make informed decisions and good lobbyists provide that information. They might it's, it's, it's, there's some of it is spending. The congressman, it have to in the end make judgments. Isn't it all money driven, meaning like a lobbyist is going to tell them that

Starting point is 01:07:16 information based on how much they're getting paid by that company that represent that they represent. But the, but the member of Congress understands that the lobbyists have shown up on behalf of AT&T. And so that comes with a certain frame of understanding. And the information they're getting from AT&T, they get, and they have to contextualize that versus what they're getting from a company that's opposing AT&T, you know, buying time Warner or whatever the case might be. What would happen if lobbyists were just completely eliminated? Then you would have a lot of legislation that was uninformed.

Starting point is 01:07:49 That would watch this though check this out. So about half of retiring senators and a third of retiring House members retire as lobbyists. Well, let's you know, we've got this image in our head of lobbyist. You know who's a lobbyist? Who the teachers union? Okay, teachers are just lobbyists. I agree. So you can take them out No, it's not my thing teachers you know They're talking about taking a lobbying company out, but the teachers union is lobbyist uh, a RP is a lobbyist. They're also there's an element of them. That's also corrupt But my point is there's a role they serve and when you start saying take lobbyists out of the equation, you're taking everybody out

Starting point is 01:08:28 of the way. Who would win elections if there was no lobbyists? Like let's you say it's it's it's criminal to hire lobbyists or lobbyists firm. Who would that favor the most if all of that was gone and out? I don't even know how you could do that to start with. But if you're saying take, take lobbyist out, you're really, I think what you're saying is take the money out of contribution. Sure. If there's no money, there's no lobby in them. But again, the teachers union doesn't get to contribute. The FLC, I don't even get to contribute. I mean,

Starting point is 01:09:01 start and you think they're going to give that up. No way. I'm not saying they're gonna give it up. By the way, I actually don't think it's gonna happen. Not in my lifetime, I'm 43. It ain't gonna happen in my lifetime. But all I'm asking is, you know, if we did in everywhere, who does it hurt, who does it benefit? Look, I think done correctly, it hurts good legislation. I mean, if you take out the information flow

Starting point is 01:09:28 that lobbying companies bring to the system, how does a member of Congress get their information? Where are they gonna get it? They're not gonna intuitively know the technicalities of big tech in the exemptions that they have from publishing. They're not going to leave out of that. A friend of mine was a lobbyist and a very high paid lobbyist. He made very good money, very, very good money.

Starting point is 01:09:58 And he left and got into a complete different industry. I said, so why did you get into a lobbyist? You can make a lot of money. I mean, a lot of money. I made a lot of money. That's OK. This whole thing about politics is dirty and all this stuff. He says, listen, some of the stuff I did as a lobbyist, it eventually got to a point where I'm like, holy shit.

Starting point is 01:10:16 If I continue like this, this thing's eventually going to catch up to me with what we're doing with our team. How ugly is the world of lobby? And meaning the power plays. Is it, you know how, okay, we asked this question regularly. We, you know, hey, if you want to build a championship in football, what matters the most? The GM, the owner, the quarterback, the running back, the defense, blah, blah, blah, blah, all this stuff you go through, offensive

Starting point is 01:10:39 coordinator, recruit, who do you put up there, right? If we want somebody to win, okay, if we want somebody to do it okay? If we want somebody to into a candidate to win, how important of a role does a lobbyist play to help that person win? How important of a role does a lobbyist play to get an Amazon who moves a part of their headquarters closer to, you know, Virginia or DC to pass some laws? How important of a role do lobbyists place to pass some of these laws for them. Well, those are two different things. Getting elected versus government. Both of them.

Starting point is 01:11:07 Yeah. Getting elected, you know, money is important, but money comes from a lot of sources. Not just lobbyists. So I would not make lobbying as the distinction. There are probably people and Republicans probably feel like they're out manned by the Democrats and getting lobbyists money. If you look at lobbyists money, most of it goes to Democrats. A lot of it does. But I don't think that matters to getting elected. I think what matters to getting elected is

Starting point is 01:11:35 the issue agenda and then as an incumbent, what you've done. The end of the day, the American people usually figure things out. I'm a big believer in our system. They usually figure things out. They can be fooled for an election cycle, but they generally figure things out. It's so lobbying to me is more impactful in governance, not in elections. Money's going to come from somewhere regardless. You take lobbying money out. It's still going to come from somewhere regardless. You take lobbying money out, it's still going to come from somewhere. And so getting elected is a different paradigm from my standpoint. As far as

Starting point is 01:12:10 governing is concerned, lobbying plays a constructive role if you frame it things correctly. It's still going to be up to the member to make a decision on the information that he gets. And it's not like it's happening in a vacuum, a lobbying, you get lobbyists on both sides of issues, more often times than multiple sides of issues. And so yes, that puts a responsibility on the member to understand the facts, but that's part of his job is to understand the facts. You got to make sure he gets the facts. And if he's getting both sides of the facts, he's got enough to make judgments.

Starting point is 01:12:50 I would, you know, make the point that special interests are not particularly lobbyist that control members of Congress, but industries. And how do you get, I mean, and that's part of, if you come from a coal mining area, coal mining industry is going to have an impact on the members of Congress from that area. Is that wrong? Probably not, because that's the area, the, the from and they need to understand those issues. Um, it's where, where I have my problem with Washington and where I think Trump tapped

Starting point is 01:13:22 into something in 2016 was where members of Congress will be for something when they're in power and then when they lose power, they're against what they were for on an issue. And that hypocrisy is what gets given exempted. Obama or Trump? I mean, neither in that sense. I'm talking more congressional. I mean, I'll give you an example.

Starting point is 01:13:50 It's a political one, but it's nonetheless. The filibuster and the Senate. You've seen all the clips, the Schumer and the Democrats being against the filibuster being removed when they had, when they were in the minority in the Senate, and now they're for the filibuster being removed when they had the when they were in the minority in the Senate and now they're for the filibuster being Getting rid of it why because it enhances their power. So it's the equation is defined by what it does for power not what it does for democracy McConnell's done the same thing same things both sides and and and Trump campaigned against both of them

Starting point is 01:14:25 Both sides and and and Trump campaigned against both of them. Mm-hmm. They were the swamp creature. McConnell can't stand Trump out there. Well, that's probably mutual. Oh, you're not. It's probably. It is mutual. But the point is, why doesn't Trump like McConnell? Because McConnell to Trump is the same thing.

Starting point is 01:14:39 As humor is the Trump as far as a swamp creature. Is a swamp creature. Why doesn't McConnell like Trump? Because McConnell is a swamp creature. Why does it McConnell like Trump? Because the call is a swamp creature and Trump wants to get rid of the swamp there. Yeah, and so and that well They ever see eye to eye and upon a link Trump. No, I was there's no hope for reconciliation now No, there's always hope for reconciliation because there'll be mutuality of interest They will they ever like each other. No, but will they ever work together? Yeah, I think they would. Hey Pat, it would seem. Tell me if I'm wrong here. We're talking about lobbyists back to that. Paul's almost defending lobbyists. I would say that you would, I mean, as a lobbyist, hello, I mean, political consultant as well, you would think that there's a role that there's a role and that they are a net positive to governance. Whereas Pat, correct me if I'm wrong, at the end of

Starting point is 01:15:29 the day, you think lobbyists are a net negative to America. Am I wrong on that? Okay. So here's how I see it. Okay. You know the whole conversation between sales and marketing. Yep. What sales, what's marketing? Right? Marketing spreads sales was one dimensional marketing is like a story goes out like Coca Cola, share a Coke with Jose with Adam. Oh my god, I don't even drink coke. Well, hey, I got this great campaign came out Australia Coke took off. They become what they become, right? I think lobbyists are the ultimate CMOs. They'll do laps around CMOs at major corporations. Like if a major corporation wants to hire a real good CMO, go freaking put on ad in Sam looking for former lobbyist who helps somebody

Starting point is 01:16:14 win. I'll give you a lot of congressman. That would have I would tell you like he would make one hell of a CMO out of major core. And I'm being very frank with you. I mean, very soon because the strategy they take with research and data and gathering them and tell them the story and saying it in a way where you're like man this thing makes sense. It's a very powerful job but it's the ultimate spins on though. It's the ultimate spins. In my opinion I may be wrong. And by the way let's just say one that you get into politics. If the other guys use a lobbyist guess what we got to get for you.

Starting point is 01:16:45 We got to get some solid lobbyists on you because if you're going to use it, I have to use it. Doing this on what I'm saying, I'm not going to do it. Hey, you're going to use all, we're going to become these noble people, we're not going to use it. No, you have to. So he makes the point about, so what do you want to do? Teachers union, should we get rid of them? I mean, if both sides are going to use it, you have to use it, okay?

Starting point is 01:17:03 That's the part where once you get into that game, that shit is dirty and you wanna, you gonna play that game against me? Watch how better of a job I'm gonna maneuver against you. And you made this agree with me, but that's my assessment on the world of lobby. Look, I mean, I understand the point and, and by the way, Donald Trump would agree with a lot of what you just said. But but the point is, what are you going to replace it with? I mean, you can't expect Congress, especially in today's day and age, to be experts on all the things they have to be experts on. And you can't, they, they, there's not enough staff for them, the money for the staff they would need to have an expert on this, an expert on this, an expert on this, etc.

Starting point is 01:17:46 So you have to have a role. How you frame the role to protect the concerns that you have, that's a different issue. But to say that, throw the baby in the bath water out, that's not realistic. And frankly, I think it's harmful to the system. I disagree with a lot of what the teachers stand for as far as what they think they can do with our kids in school. But I see a role for them and they're massively still. Oh, they are massively.

Starting point is 01:18:14 They're massively because they have the power to be a massive. Yeah, so that, but again, it goes back because we've empowered them. I think in 1877, I don't know what the year was when they were trying to eliminate lobbies and create laws and all this stuff. This has been going on for a while where they knew this was eventually because some of these guys were going to become more powerful than actual presidents, congressmen and senators. Some lobbies are more powerful

Starting point is 01:18:35 than, you know, Jim Baker, you've read his book. I'm sure you've read it. If you haven't read his book, I couldn't put the book down by the way. Some of the stuff he was talking about in there on the stories of what happened. Jim Baker is more powerful than most of these guys that became president. Jim, he could have become a president, but he chose to play a different role, you know. Yeah, I think, again, I think lobbyists in a big way make the political world. You know, I just thought of it for as lobbyists, because you at one point said, well, they represent industries.

Starting point is 01:19:08 It has a beast, by the way. You said industries, lobbyists represent industry. We met initially at an insurance conference, Nalbum, 10 years ago. Yeah. That's probably the biggest brokerage industry meeting. There's another one called AALU. You probably are familiar with that. They've changed their names since then, but it's the insurance

Starting point is 01:19:29 Advocacy group in DC every year the meeting is in DC We're in the insurance business financial services business the whole point of that meeting is to get all the insurance people to DC To do our meeting and then what do they all do Go to the hill to meet with our congressman to basically promote the importance of insurance and You know financial wellness in the family. So there is there is an upside, you know even to us but but but the reason why they need that Because on the other side, Elizabeth Warren's got the best of the best was lobbying against hurting People in the financial industry so you have to have the counter attack. That's my point

Starting point is 01:20:07 earlier. If you're going to use it, I have to hire him. That's what he's saying is that you can't toss a baby with a bath water. I don't disagree with you. And yes, there are excesses. Yeah. Again, part of my biggest problem with, and why I think, why I believe that Trump was going to win in 2016 was because you Washington becomes segmented, segregated, segregated, and they focus on what's in their interest, and not in the people whose interest they are representing, meaning the American people. And it bothers me, And I got out of American politics until, for about eight years when I was over in Ukraine, because I was fed up

Starting point is 01:20:51 with being part of a system where when people got elected and came to Washington, they didn't worry about their promises as much as they worried about building a power base inside Washington. And that was true in public and in the hypocrisy that I said a minute ago, using the filibuster example, but that is true throughout on issues and on, it's power based. And that bothered me. And then I think I could change a system. No, I couldn't change this. I said, okay, come on, Paul, you could have done it.

Starting point is 01:21:23 Well, I did it. And actually, because I then changed my mind in 2016 when I saw somebody who could do it. Huh. And I got back in the game. And you regret it? No, not at all. No. Do you think when you wrote that article Thursday of 2016, right before Tuesday saying this guy's going to win it, do you feel that way about him in 2024? That Trump is going gonna win it. Do you feel that way about him in 2024 that Trump is gonna win it? Because I don't think the Santa is gonna run. I don't think the Santa's wants to be on the same stage with Trump because it's gonna get ugly Oh, I don't think the Santa's runs if Trump runs I agree. I think if Trump runs if freezes the field

Starting point is 01:21:57 I mean that was somebody I mean whether it's Bill Weldingen or Hogan or K6 somebody will run it won't matter. Trump will dominate other Republican prime minister. Other Republican prime minister. What are the chances he runs? 100%. I think Biden is making it easier every day. Well, Biden won't be running again.

Starting point is 01:22:18 It's 24. We all know that. But you've got to look at what you got. Now we have to project what's 2024 going to look like. Well, we have to look at it through the prism of two things, the Biden administration and the 2022 elections. Biden administration has failed on all of the key issues that Trump was a succeeding on. And to the point where I couldn't believe this is I mean, I think the polls are outlier, poll, 19% of the people who voted for him want

Starting point is 01:22:49 him to run again in 2024. Now think about that for a minute. Biden got 80 million votes. 19% of Biden. Right. He's won him to 16 million out of the 80s. That's my point. Do the math.

Starting point is 01:23:03 It's embarrassing. He's in that number. I think it was Harris's poll. I think it was Mark Penn's Paul. Why is that number shocking though? 80 in one and a half years. He's what's like that? Million people that voted for they weren't voting for him Paul you know that but they were voting against Trump You know this well some of them were but my point is nobody's like hell Yeah, but Joe's my guy. They said Donald Trump's not my guy. And I'll take anyone else. Well, we can get into that in a minute,

Starting point is 01:23:30 but the point is still to me that's shocking and it perfected up. 60 million people voted for it within a year have said, I don't want them to run again. That's an incredible number. But now get underneath the numbers. What does it mean? Young people, why do you think they're talking about

Starting point is 01:23:50 student debt again? Because young people, I think, it's like 60% of his vote in 2020. He's down on the 30s, 33% of young people said they would vote for him. If they show up, so you've got an issue on turnout and then you've got to show up and who turns out is back on a third is gonna vote for them. If they show up, so you've got an issue on turn out, and then you've got to show up of who turns out, it's back in a third, it's going to vote for me.

Starting point is 01:24:08 You look at Hispanics. This was a movement that was starting in 2016. It was already starting to move on to cultural issues and on the economy. Those are the things that are important to Latino community. Trump accelerated that a little bit, and Biden in one year's president is accelerating even more for Republicans, to the point that Republicans could carry a majority of the Hispanic vote in, is it saying 2024? No, I mean, it's a layup to, so that's why it's, that's why it looks like a layup for 2022.

Starting point is 01:24:44 And what does that mean? Well, that means that these developing segments of voting population are moving away from their traditional place. And once it starts to move, it doesn't just come back. And what's going to happen as a result of that in 2023, 23, what will happen to my judgment is the Republicans are going to win both houses and Congress. More importantly is what happens in the house.

Starting point is 01:25:12 The plurality in the house of the Democratic caucus is going to be the left. It's going to be the AOC types. Many may not be the leadership, but the plurality. The Elizabeth Warrens on the Senate side are going to be empowered as well, so that the left is going to have more of a stranglehold on Washington than they do today in 23. What does that mean for Republicans in 24 and to your question about Trump? The agenda is going to be way out of here when the American people are here.

Starting point is 01:25:45 And the governance is making it worse. I mean, how does the woke left not realize that because they don't care about it. What they care about is getting power. They understand the left understands a very basic thing. First you take power, then you create change. They have to take power first of Being the big fish in a small pond is how they take power. Then they'll worry about it because the end of the day, what is American politics? It's two people you generally running for president. You get one of the two people

Starting point is 01:26:17 nominated. You've got a chance to take over the White House. Joe Biden is the best example of that. And so from the left standpoint, they're playing the long game. And they see the opportunity to take control of the Democratic Party in Washington in 23. And then worry about 24 next. Elizabeth Warren, she's already running for president. And she'll change her strokes here and there but first she's got a consolidate she doesn't stand a chance well Elizabeth Warren

Starting point is 01:26:49 you know she's not marketing again the again nominations are a different game the new nominations yeah but if she gets nominated she's got a chance I'm let's say she hasn't that ship all sailed Elizabeth Warren the Bernies like we've been there done that 2016-20 there out but no we haven't got it totally disagree with you I totally disagree with you 2016 was the I mean 2020 was the wrong time Bernie Sanders when we put the strategy together for for Trump in 2016 part of the vote that he got, and we targeted, it was Sanders vote in the primaries because they weren't leftist. They were drain the swamp type of people.

Starting point is 01:27:35 And what's going to happen is the rhetoric of 2024 is going to be revolutionary from the left standpoint. And again, if they can consolidate and get in the primaries, because in the primaries, you get through the primaries, the left, the democratic primaries are going to be primaries of the left. Not the moderate Democrats, not the Joe Manchains, not the Joe Biden's. I mean, Biden emerged for very specific reasons. I always feared Joe Biden.

Starting point is 01:28:09 I mean, here's the one, in fact, I did a couple things. It might be the only person in America fears Joe Biden. Well, it feared him in 2020. Fear him in 2020. Because I thought he could win. Why? Because American presidential politics, when you have an incumbent running for re-election,

Starting point is 01:28:25 so it's not an open seat. It's a matter of contrast. You said it a minute ago, people were voting against Trump. Why were they voting against Trump? His personality. Uncle Joe. Uncle Joe, hide them in the basement. Create this image of this image of this, you know, soft, gentle person, that's the right image. Throw COVID on top of that. Throw expansion of voting on top of that. Throw everything else. He gets a chance. Any, any pulled it off. Should he have won? No, but he did for that reason. So from the left standpoint, they think they're smarter than that. And yet, Joe, won. So we get control of the Democratic Party.

Starting point is 01:29:10 We'll figure out how to win the general election against whoever. If it's Trump, we're going to go and harm Trump. And they'll make his personality. They'll try to make that the issue. And sneak by with Soffinine Elizabeth Warren or softening who you know a Buttigieg and then figure it out later after they went. You think a wild car like rock is celebrity like if there's ever been a time to come in and win like this is a good time to do it. One of these guys that's got a couple hundred

Starting point is 01:29:40 million followers on Instagram Twitter they come and use that car. I think Elon Musk in the future is a candidate for president. He's not born here, though. Uh huh. Born and stopped. That's true. You're right. That's, that is the restriction.

Starting point is 01:29:52 You're right. But, but that he's going to be a major player. He, well, he is now, but I made Twitter. Um, but in our political system, you're saying an outsider with a major massive following a ton of money. Like a my Cuban. Will he run in run in 2024? Like possible.

Starting point is 01:30:07 He'd like to be president. He's a Trump. He saw Trump do it. He's a Democrat. Uh, you know, he's got a social image. Uh, he's building. Uh, could he win the nomination? I don't think so.

Starting point is 01:30:17 I think the problem on the democratic side is it's going to be a leftist candidate for president. And wow. And if we've come that, well, we're going to be a leftist candidate for president. Wow. And if we've come that, what we're going to have a leftist candidate, I think that's what's going to emerge from the Democratic Party, especially if what happens in 22 is going to hurt them. Oh, you're going to get trounce that that's the direction. If and look at what they're doing, they're doubling down on moving left.

Starting point is 01:30:40 I'm putting pressure on Biden right now on student debt. If he does student debt, I mean, it's really stupid from a political standpoint, but from the left standpoint, they like what it stands for. But if he does the student debt issue, what's going to happen? He's not going to get, he's not going to pump up turnoff in an off-year cycle among young people. I mean, he may go from 37 to 45% and voting for Democrats, but you know what the number one issue is

Starting point is 01:31:09 for people in 18 to 29 right now? Inflation, the economy, and jobs. So do you think that forgiving the debt for a segment of the 18 to 29 because what happens all the people aren't going to college what happens to the people who are starting college next year? What about my debt? These are the kinds of issues that affect who's going to turn out and how they're going to turn out.

Starting point is 01:31:36 What about the guys who pay for their debt? Yeah, like me, I pay it off my debt. Okay, there you go. I mean, the point is the left doesn't care. That's a big that's a big vote If you're able to get you know all these folks college debt to be forgiven you know what loyalty will get from them because that that keeps a lot of people But they're not even a majority of the segment of the 18 and 20 not at all. They're not and no and what what's gonna happen?

Starting point is 01:32:01 What does it do to inflation? Which is the number one issue for that voter block? Well, actually, for every voter block, but for that voter block, you know, it's going to make it worse. And so all of a sudden, though, you're rewarding people, a small segment who got college debt

Starting point is 01:32:19 and you're punishing everyone in that time in the country with inflation, which is the number one issue. But the left only cares about where they're going to be in January of 2023. Are you in Trump in communication right now? You guys talk about it. I'm not going to get into that kind of conversation. Only reason I ask the question is because if he does go 2023, 2024, anyone's, who's he going to put on his campaign? Who's he going to bring in, who's out there that he can bring in to Oklahoma? I don't think you'll have any

Starting point is 01:32:54 trouble hiring people. I mean, I saw theal is making a decision to, you know, theal is a Peter Theal, that's a pretty big name to have there, but that's a different role. That's more of a treat. Yeah, yeah, no, but I don't think trouble having any troubles putting together a campaign if he sites run. And it'll be a campaign that's more pro Trump. I mean, in the sense that, you know, one of Trump's biggest problems when he first became president, when his source elected, is he didn't have a bench. He didn't have people to put into the government. Yeah, he had, he Trump didn't know anybody in Washington when he ran for president.

Starting point is 01:33:37 I mean, I mean, I tell the story of the book. I mean, when I got involved, normally when you get involved in a campaign, you're somewhere in the middle of the process, and you have a specific role, you have to come in, you have to clean out some stuff, move people outside, bring your own people in. I had none of that problem because there was nobody to move out. There was no there there. Trump was the campaign. He was the candidate, he was the pollster, he was the communication director, he was the speech writer, he was the advanced guy. I mean, you know, you mean, and there were a couple of people who were the golfers, not golfers, the whole picks, assistants to do things.

Starting point is 01:34:18 Hope was very important for Trump because I think so. Hope, hope, he was a very organized person. for Trump because they hope, hope, he was a very organized person. She understood Trump. And so she could get done what Trump asked to do efficiently and quickly, which is why he loved her. But I'm talking about, but, but Trump came up with a strategy of, hope, do this. I just put this to eat that whatever. He was the strategist of the campaign and the, and the media guy as well.

Starting point is 01:34:43 What was your role? Well, when I came in, I first came in to help because of that, that kind of campaign structure, the nomination process is a multiple process, a multi-faceted process. You have to win the primaries, but you have to win the delegates primaries, but you have to win the delegates and they're not connected. They're there's a dotted line connection, but for example, crews understood all the rules of the Republican party and the nominating process. And so the feeling was Trump strategy was I'm one of 16 people. I can get nominated by just building my pluralities after each election.

Starting point is 01:35:24 I can get nominated by just building my pluralities after each election. Cruiser strategy was there are 16 people against Trump. And so the opportunity to do a leg delegates that are not automatically elected, creates an opportunity to have a convention floor of non-Trump people. Meaning, let's say, in every state was different, but let's say, in Virginia, Alex, well, yeah, Alex, they're delegates at a convention, but they have a primary and there's some, some, the allocations are bike CD and buy at large. But the conventions elect the delegates. So let's say I've won, I don't think Virginia has 51 delegates, I've won 37 delegates based on the law, but I don't control the convention. I could have 10 delegates on the floor. 10 delegates on

Starting point is 01:36:21 the floor, if there's a majority of people who are not for Trump on the floor, even though Trump's got 40%, 45% of the convention, they can vote, they have to vote for Trump based on the skin, the states, the first ballot, but they can vote against Trump on rules, on, on free and up delegates and undercutting state laws on convention officers on the platform. And then on the second ballot, if they keep it from happening on the first ballot, the ones who were voting for Trump, in many cases are freed to do whatever they want.

Starting point is 01:36:53 And if they're not Trump people, but they were just Trump bodies, or not Trump bodies, the nominations at risk, which was the cruise strategy. That was cruise of strategy. He had people who understood convention politics very well and party rules very well. So Trump sees himself all of a sudden winning primaries and then subsequent state conventions electing cruise delegates who have to vote for Trump for the first ballot, but only for Trump on the ballot question. And he's saying, this is fixed. It's, it's, it's, it's, it's, I'm being, I'm being robbed.

Starting point is 01:37:32 The party is cheating me. Well, the party wasn't cheating him. He just didn't have a structure that was paying attention to the rules so that way he was running the campaign, he came into a state, he wins the state, he then moves. There's no, that almost cost them that, well, that's why he brought me in. That's why he brought me in because when he moved, there was nobody left in the state. Well, guess what? Cruise people were going in after the primaries and they were electing the bodies to be at the convention. And so Trump finally had a meeting with Pribez to complain that the party has scruined me.

Starting point is 01:38:10 And Pribez said to him, no, Donald, you just don't understand the rules. You just don't understand the rules, I don't remember that. And so Trump turned to Lewandowski who was sitting with him there and said, did you know this, Cory? Of course, no. Because Cory never done anything like this. He didn't understand the rules. And so Trump's realizing I'm winning, but I'm not winning. And that's my expertise among other things. And that's why I was brought in. What happened to Roger still? What happened? He seems like he's like turning more and more against,

Starting point is 01:38:39 this is your former business partner. What's going on with him and Trump? Oh, they just have a love. I mean, they're like big brother, little brother. I mean, they're going back to the 1980s. I mean, Rogers Trump became president because of Roger, though, not in the sense that Roger elected Trump, but Roger was the one who set in Trump's mind. You can be president. And when Trump started to finally look at Washington, because again, the only time he never, when I brought him to Washington in the spring of 2016, he didn't know it, basically he didn't know anybody unless they'd come to New York to ask him for money. And he knew just as many on the Democrats side as other Republicans, actually said, very

Starting point is 01:39:18 popular. Right, right. And so, so nobody knew Trump, but Roger knew Trump. And Roger got Trump to start paying attention to politics in like 1983 and 84. And then, and I go into this in detail as well, then Ross Perot ran for president in, in 92. And Trump looked at the parole thing and said, well, it's an interesting phenomenon. And then of course, Ross Perot loses, but Trump says, I'm smarter than these guys. I mean, I wouldn't think all these stupid things. He could have been president. And there was a

Starting point is 01:39:54 chance that at the time of point that parole was leading, or close to leading in the in the three-party race. 1921 percent, you know, he was however right, but Bush was at 36 and Clinton was about 35, 36 and there was a lot of undecided. It was a three, it was a little chisperol was Clinton's best campaign manager. Well, he wasn't the end, he wasn't the end, but Trump's point was Ross Perol could have been elected. Yeah, but he wasn't smart enough and he wasn't ready enough. And he wasn't tall enough. He wasn't tall That's another theory of Rogers to get the guy with the big head and the height wins

Starting point is 01:40:31 but but But Roger was sort of the adrenaline to that with Trump It's big brother little brother. You're comparing Roger Stone as the big brother to Trump in the little brother No, I think it's changed But at the time and at the time Roger was the expert and Trump was the was trying to learn Trump never looked at himself as a little brother But the point is yeah, they would fight like that. I mean, they loved each other. They hated each other and Stone was your full-on business partner Oh, yeah, yeah for the in the in the eighties your full on business partner. Oh, yeah, yeah. For the in the in the 80s, when we saw the firm in 92, I left the firm after my lock up and Roger went off in a different direction.

Starting point is 01:41:12 Did you get a Nixon tattoo? Like him? No, I did. Although Nixon used to, Roger, my office was Nixon's office when he came to Washington because I had the big office of the Roger convinced Nixon. Paul, do you have any tattoos? I don't. If you had to get a tattoo of a president, if you had to, who would it be? Georgia, Washington. Boom. Right there in your back.

Starting point is 01:41:33 File in the country. There you go. Okay. Not Trump. I would never get a tattoo. But if I had to have a symbol of something, I'd have the file in my country. I'd have enough. And then maybe I would have the filer of our country. I'm not. And then maybe Abraham Lincoln after that. But Trump and Roger have their falling out.

Starting point is 01:41:53 Trump never always been there somewhere in Trump's world. And their fallouts are more just because they're both media people, media stories, but not really behind the scenes realities. Tyler, do you have that story about voting? Cureson will get this final thoughts before we wrap up. The voting story that they want to get 100% of people to vote if you don't, it's a $20 fine. Did you hear about that or no?

Starting point is 01:42:18 That they're trying to legislate where 100% of people who are able to vote have to vote or else there's going to be a $20 fine. Have you heard any of this? I have, but who's there? Do you have this? Tyler, is this a Minneapolis? Let me tell you, if the Republican offered that, they'd be called racist because who's going to suffer from that? The blacks and

Starting point is 01:42:45 minority communities. There's a $20 poll tax penalty. So it's a crazy idea. Can you find it or no? Okay, Lee look forward. I'm going to go to the Kevin McCarthy story. Tucker Carlson said, the clearest Kevin McCarthy, a puppet of the Democratic Party who shouldn't be speaker, sounds like an MSNBC contributor. Carl's appointed to an expert excerpt in a forthcoming book. This will not pass by New York Times reporters, Alexander Burns and Jonathan Martin, four days after the January 6th insurrection. Capital-wide, they quote McCarthy as musing allowed whether Twitter would ban in

Starting point is 01:43:25 In theory accounts that have tweeted favorably About the incident he was participating in the meeting of the House of GOP leadership at the time Congress McKev and McCarthy of California told his close friends list cheney that he hoped the social media companies would sense Or more conservative Republicans and Congress he stated, Donald Trump the sitting president had already been silenced by those companies, but McCarthy wanted to tech oligarchs to do more and force disobedient lawmakers off the internet. What are your thoughts on Kevin McCarthy?

Starting point is 01:43:57 I mean, there's a lot of emotion goes into that time frame and what people were saying, I don't know what McCarthy said. I inferred the tape as well, but I don't know the context. Do I think Trump and McCarthy have settled that whatever the differences are? Yeah, I do. I mean, the story is out today, but this leaked out a while ago.

Starting point is 01:44:17 And I've watched what McCarthy has said since that time, I've watched what Trump has not said since that time, and it appears to me that they've made their peace on it. I asked him a good question. Sure. So, Paul Manifur is in the house. I mean, I didn't just realize that. But what I'm learning about you is,

Starting point is 01:44:36 there's a lot more to you, prior to then when everyone really full on new your name in 2016, okay? So I'm looking at your, essentially, your Wikipedia page right here. My question to you is two part question is number one, how important is your reputation to you? My reputation is important. I mean, I'm writing the book to sort of at least have an historical record. I mean, I realized in the moment in 2017 and 18, there was a tsunami against me. There was no way me trying to put out anything

Starting point is 01:45:06 was possible plus once I got indicted they put a gag order on me right so that I couldn't say a thing even though all the stories continue to leak and uh... and and characterize me so your reputation is important to you is what i'm establishing so it says here in the book it says it's no exaggeration that everything in most Americans think they know about Paul Manafort is false. So I'm looking at again your Wikipedia here. Essentially nothing is black and white. A lot of gray. So you know essentially there's words at the beginning, power broker, political advocate, political consultant, political expert, right? And then you kind of keep reading down and And then it says criminal tax fraudster,

Starting point is 01:45:45 moneylunder, or scandal. So you have all these things, you know, for and against you. So my essential question is, who actually is Paul Manafort? Paul Manafort is an American who has spent his life trying to improve the political system and bring democracy in countries around the world. Paul Manafort has always been somebody who works with the United States government's interest overseas. That includes whether the Republicans are Democrats in Washington, because overseas, I grew up with the, you know, politics stops at the American border. And I spent my life doing that. The Paul Manafort of 2017-18 is not Paul Manafort. It's a lie. It was part of a social media orchestration to define me so that I could,

Starting point is 01:46:39 and I get into this in the book, so that I would feel the pressure and give in to the system and give them up Donald Trump, which I wouldn't do, one because there was nothing to give up, but two because I wouldn't get a lie. And because I wouldn't lie, and because I wouldn't concede to what was, I considered to be a cabal against me, I went to jail and I suffered and the parts of that Wikipedia that you're reading were written by people who were, some of them were paid to stand outside the courtroom holding science trader, go back to Russia, pro-Putin, things that I spent my whole life in politics, fighting, was now being used to define me when I couldn't speak back. In the book, I get to speak back, it's coming out in August, I'm looking forward to it. I'll be willing to come back here and talk to you

Starting point is 01:47:32 with the more details on it when that comes when it does come out because I'm not afraid of talking about my life. I'm not afraid. My life is something that I'm proud of. And my book talks about why that is. My father became a Republican, I'm a matter of principle. The only Republican in his family. He was elected as the working man's mayor. It was a blue collar town. Three times. New Britain was a blue collar town.

Starting point is 01:47:59 You know, Stanley Works had their first, that's where their headquarters still is. Fafter ball bearings, all these, is an ethnic melting pot, Irish, Italian, Ukrainians, Armenians. And I grew up where you lived by, you played sports, you went to school, you lived by your brains, and you chose your careers by your interests. And that's the American dream. And I lived it. My father, my family company is a good example of that,

Starting point is 01:48:31 which I chose not to get involved in the end. But my grandfather in 1919, a 10-year-old came over to Italy, sent over by himself, to be picked up in New York. And he created, I mean, before 1990, but in 1919, he created with one pickaxe on his shovel, a demolition company that with one employee, they would take down buildings and the salvage was what they made their money on.

Starting point is 01:49:00 We're in the fifth generation of family business now. It's one of the largest nuclear plant, I guess, it's not demolishing, but to deconstruct it. Worldwide. And I think the biggest family owned business in Connecticut now, they lived the American dream too. Each generation of my family. One of the reasons I felt Donald Trump could win in 2016 is my cousins are not political. They're businessmen. Many of them still haven't gone to college. I mean,

Starting point is 01:49:39 the fifth generation is, but the fourth generation, but they were the fabric of our country. And they were all for Donald Trump. And they were calling me saying, what do you know about Donald Trump? They never called me in my political career, asked me about a candidate around the president. It was a signal to me, what I already felt, but it was confirmation that Trump was on to something that when you got out of washington uh... was existed in the country ronald riggan understood the united states very well he understood it because when he was the spokesman for g e and they and their weekly television program uh... he would travel to all of g e plants around the country which were not in

Starting point is 01:50:20 the main the cap getting say paid a million to do that eventually fired him because they said you're talking too much about america but the point is he was not going to the capital, the capital. He was getting paid a million to do that. Eventually they fired him because they said you're talking too much about America. But the point is he was not going to the capital because the plants were in the secondary cities and suburbs, but he got to understand the country. And the reason he was such a, and I, some of my treasured moors when I traveled with him, the reason he was so confident

Starting point is 01:50:40 what he was talking about was because what he had learned about the American people. Powerful. Donald Trump was the same people. Powerful. Donald Trump was the same way. Donald Trump, through the apprentice, but the same kind of connections made those connections with the American people.

Starting point is 01:50:54 And I saw it firsthand when I would travel with Trump, just like I saw it firsthand with Reagan. Well, that's who I am. I'm that person. And I came to Washington to help and to make a career. I'm representing that that that and to try and protect it. That's not in the Wikipedia because the Wikipedia is a political document that's written by the Twitter types who spent all the time trying to define. I'll admit I wasn't a fan of Paul Manafort in 2016 2017 straight up. I'm I'm now officially a fan. Well, thank you very much. I wouldn't have expected you to be but I'm glad you are

Starting point is 01:51:28 I'm all are you a movie guy? I am favorite movie of all time. I'm assuming it's number two. Is it Godfather to or no? You know, you know, my favorite movie about that. Godfather's up in the top five, but there's a movie that I really like a lot. It's a silly movie. It's called Michael. And Michael is, in the movie, John Travolta is an angel who comes in the credible movie. And it's a movie about hope and about dreams. Crazy.

Starting point is 01:51:59 And that's my favorite. That is my favorite. Never. Yes, you're gonna say Michael. I mean, most people don't even know the movie Michael. They probably know, but to me, and it would be powerful. That is my favorite movie Never. Yes, you're going to say Michael. I mean, most people don't even know the movie Michael. They probably know, but to me, that is my favorite movie. Well, why did you think Godfather too? No, first of all, first of all, you have, if you have any interest of politics, yeah, you have to, you have to, you have to because it's all power plays. That's all it is.

Starting point is 01:52:28 And to be able to survive the power plays of what you're doing in there, that's not easy. Especially for four decades. That's a pretty hard thing to do. But I'm going to compliment you. I would not expect you to know Michael. It's a great movie. It's a great time. But do you think the number of change laws for guy like Elon wants to be able to run like a law to say they're not going to change that's not going to happen. Yeah.

Starting point is 01:52:51 Last but not least, it opens up a PVD. Yeah. I'm a king maker. I want to help the guy get their speed run. I'll give you a name. Give me one word that comes to your mind. Steve Bannon. Uh.

Starting point is 01:53:01 Uh. Uh. Uh. Uh. Uh. Any lock? Okay. Cory Londowski, small man, whole picks, good person. Roger Stone, good friend, Kellyanne Conway, good friend, Mike Pence, a very good vice president, DeSantis, the potential future. Muller, a man who's passed, well, one word, not a good person, that's about one word, but Muller was used, and by the book I talk about my experience

Starting point is 01:53:42 with him. I was not impressed with him. Hillary Clinton. Fake Biden. Beyond this time, the FBI. I don't want to define all of the FBI, but people abused their power. Avonati.

Starting point is 01:54:03 Sean Cohen, Michael Cohen. Overset, Podesta, which one? The one you worked with. Good guy. Okay. John Durham. Hope. Last but not least, Donald Trump. Manor made a difference. Fantastic. Awesome. It's been a blast having you on. Seriously, this was great. Thank you so much for coming out. Looking forward to having you back on. When the book comes out, Tyler put the link below for the link of the book. I'll give you the final thoughts. Any final thoughts you want to share with the audience before we wrap up. Well, I mean, I appreciate this opportunity today in this expanded format allowed me the opportunity to get into the context, which I couldn't.

Starting point is 01:54:49 And I would just like the American people to pay attention to what I say. Now what other people say about me. Fair enough. When's the book coming out? On the 16th. August 6th. But it's on its pre-sales now. Yeah, we're going to put the link below in chat box and the description, all of it for people to get it. Folks, we are not doing a podcast on next Tuesday, I believe. Do we have Tuesday?

Starting point is 01:55:08 Monday, we have William Roger Reeves, the pilot for Escobar. Very interesting. Trevor Runner. William Roger Reeves on Monday. Fantastic. Folks, have a great weekend. We'll see you next week.

Starting point is 01:55:18 Take care. Bye, bye, bye, bye, bye. you

PBD Podcast - Political Consultant Paul Manafort | PBD Podcast | EP 151

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.