Pivot - Elon Merges Companies, WHCA Cuts Comedian, and Guest Co-Host Jen Psaki

Episode Date: April 1, 2025

Kara is joined by Jen Psaki, the host of MSNBC's "Inside with Jen Psaki," to talk all things Signalgate, Trump taking on Big Law, and what's going on with the latest pardons. Then, Elon says the "destiny of humanity" rests on the outcome of the Wisconsin judicial election, and his AI company xAI acquires X. Plus, Jen weighs in on The White House Correspondents' Association cancelling comedian Amber Ruffin's appearance at the annual dinner, and possible changes coming to the White House briefing. Follow Jen at @jenpsaki.msnbc.com Follow us on Instagram and Threads at @pivotpodcastofficial. Follow us on Bluesky at @pivotpod.bsky.social Follow us on TikTok at @pivotpodcast. Send us your questions by calling us at 855-51-PIVOT, or at nymag.com/pivot. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Support for Pavement comes from BetterHelp. Let's talk numbers. Traditional in-person therapy can cost anywhere from $100 to $250 per session, which adds up fast. But with BetterHelp online therapy, you can save an average of up to 50% per session. You just pay a flat fee for weekly sessions, saving you big on cost and on time.

With over 30,000 therapists, BetterHelp is the world's largest online therapy platform, having served over 5 million people globally. Your well-being is worth it, and now it's within reach. Visit betterhelp.com slash pivot to get 10% off your first month. That's betterhelp, H-E-L-P, dot com slash pivot. Now streaming. What do you know about the happy face killer?

He's my father. It's so good to see you, Missy. Experience the thrilling new series. He said he killed another woman. Inspired by a true life story. If I don't deal with him, he will never leave us alone. You don't see how the world's saying to you. Anna Lee Ashford and Dennis Quaid star.

I am not responsible for what my dad did. It's going how you hoped. Happy Face, new series now streaming exclusively on Paramount+. OK, Martin, let's try one. Remember, big. You got it. The Ford It's a Big Deal event is on.

How's that? A little bigger. The Ford It's a Big Deal event. Nice. Now the offer? Lease a 2025 Escape Active all-wheel drive from 198 bi-weekly at 1.99% APR for 36 months with $27.55 down. Wow, that's like $99 a week.

Yeah, it's a big deal. The Ford It's a Big Deal event. Visit your Toronto area Ford store or Ford.ca today. He also wore a cheese head at one point. He didn't look bad in the cheese head, I'll be honest with you. Most people don't look good in cheese heads, so I guess that's a pro. Hi, everyone.

This is Pivot from New York Magazine, the Vox Media Podcast Network. I'm Cara Swisher. Scott is off today, and in his place, I got someone much more superior. I brought in Jen Psaki, the host of MSNBC's Inside with Jen Psaki, who also has a new podcast, The Blueprint, which is excellent. I recommend everyone to listen to it. We're doing a little crossover event because I was on her show this weekend. She promised to bring dirty jokes in Scott's absence on the show. Welcome, Jen.

I mean, Kara, first of all, as a listener, as I told you yesterday, I was like, I have to bring inappropriate jokes and inappropriate things to be said. But I don't know. I don't know that that's my vibe. I'm just trying to be my authentic self. Do you have any? Do you have a dirty joke that you promised on the air last night? I really don't, but maybe the conversation will bring me around to it. Okay. Maybe it will bring me around to it.

Feel free to. I'll feel free to say inappropriate things. I feel free. Feel free to in your podcast. Okay. All right. We've got a lot to get to today, but how is it going there? Now, explain what you're doing. You're doing 103 shows for MSNBC, is that correct? Approximately.

What's the pitch? Well, right now, I'm doing a show on Sundays. I'm doing a show on Mondays. They're a little different because Sundays, which you were on yesterday, it's a different thing. People are sitting down with their coffee. They want big picture. That's what we try to do.

And Mondays is just what the hell just happened today. So it's a little bit different. I have a podcast called The Blueprint. Explain what The Blueprint, why it's called The Blueprint. You and I talked about this name before. Yeah. I mean, The Blueprint was my form of therapy. I don't know if you find podcasting to be therapeutic,

but for me, it was after the election. And I, like many people, I was like, what the hell just happened? I wasn't shocked, but I just felt like so many things were missed, including by me and so many things I was like what the hell just happened I wasn't shocked but I just felt like so many things were missed including by me and so many things I got wrong and I So for me my therapy was making a list of people who I felt would be Candid say what they actually thought not pretend like they know all the answers because no one does I made kind of a list. I make I like read everything on note cards I'm like an old lady, but I made like a back of the envelope

list of people. Some of them, I think you know all of them, right? It's like people who would just say what's on their minds. You know, Jamel Hill, Rahm Emanuel, Don Lemon, none of these people are holding back. So we did that. We were only going to do six episodes. We ended up doing nine and we're going to reboot it in the fall.

Oh, great. So why the blueprint? Explain for the kids who don't know what a blueprint is. I know. I think you told me. We talked about this and you're like, it's a very old-timey phrase. Yeah. Yeah. We're going to do the horse and carriage. Guys, there are so many people I consult with, the great Kara Swisher about every career move and thing I do in my life.

We're going to do the mimeograph. That's what I said. Remember the mimeograph. What if we call it the record player? Would people relate to it? The blueprint is- Actually, they're back. They're back, Jen.

I know that. My daughter has a record player. The blueprint is not back. But go ahead. Could you explain? We're bringing it back. We're bringing it back. The blueprint is how do Democrats win again?

So reflecting on what just happened, what people got wrong, but also looking ahead to what to change moving forward. And there's a lot of criticism people have on the, for episodes we've done so far, which I think is healthy. People don't all disagree with each other either, and that's kind of the point. So that's kind of the point. So that's the purpose. When you're thinking about this, your transition from politics,

it's been a while you and I met right before you started, after you left the White House. What's it been like for you shifting over? I mean, the initial stages were a combo of, I literally had never seen a teleprompter before. I didn't know what it looked like. It's not the most important thing, but you want to be functional enough on it that it's smooth.

The biggest part of it is if it's your own words and your own voice, which sounds obvious, but it isn't always. Learning how to use a teleprompter, read a teleprompter, and really learning how to write for TV, which is different from writing for a politician, writing a book or writing an op-ed. So that was its own kind of technical transition. I also think when you transition careers, sometimes you think you have to become a version

of what you see, right? Like I have to look at anchors and be an anchor. And really you just have to be yourself. And it took me a while to feel comfortable, not too long, but a little bit comfortable in what that meant. And in some ways, and the other thing I was very mindful of that I, when I started was I'd obviously been Joe Biden's press secretary

until a couple of months before I started, and until about eight months before my show started. And I didn't, I think you and I talked about this, I had, I didn't, I was thought a lot about not wanting to be perceived as his spokesperson but also not being inauthentically all of a sudden I'm down the middle because I'm not, you know. I mean I've worked in politics for 20 years I'm not down the middle. I have points of view. And so that was its own kind of journey for me. Now, when the debate debacle happened and I said what I saw, as everybody saw, that maybe broke the fever of that. That wasn't my intention. But now it's a little different because we have a new,

I mean our new show is going to be at nine o'clock on Tuesdays through Fridays is launching in May. One of the things I've been thinking a lot about is that I shied away from talking as much about my own experience and my experience in government and politics. I do sometimes, but now it feels like there is this real hunger. I know this anecdotally, I know this from people who message me on social media or email.

I know this from people I run into the airport. How the hell does this work? How is this supposed to work? What's broken, what's not? I think I didn't, Lord knows, work for the current president. There's many, many Democrats. That would be funny. That would be a great show.

Oh my God. Many, many Democrats who may run for office president one day, who the hell knows? I root for all of them, but I don't have any dog in the fight. You know what I mean? So now I feel like I can dive back into that a lot more. Give your expertise. And give my expertise. And I think I shied away from that initially because I was so

worried about being perceived as this continuing spokesperson. Right. So we're going to give you a little workout today on that. So you have a lot to do today. So including Tesla protests worldwide, Elon buying his own company, weird flim-flam own company, and weird kind of flim-flammy kind of thing, and Trump's latest partnering spree. And we're also going to talk a little bit about the White House Correspondents Association,

which you have had a lot of experience with. I have some thoughts on all the things. Good. Oh, great. Okay. So let's first talk with the latest with Signalgate. I call it Whiskey Leaks. I know.

You love that. I love that word. I like that Whiskey Leaks. It's good. Come on. I'm sorry,'m sorry Pete had that, but you deserve it. This weekend there were reports that Trump was asking around for opinions on whether he should fire National Security Advisor Walz. But when asked by NBC the president said he doesn't quote fire people because of fake news and witch hunts. Defense Secretary Pete Hicks says is really helping the we're not messy

cause by reportedly bringing his wife to two meetings with foreign military counterparts where sensitive information was discussed. So talk about this. Like you've been in there where there's been a gate, blank gate, whatever it happens to be, every administration has them, something occurs. What happens inside versus outside? And this is a unique president who just doesn't want to give in to the media. I think that is a bigger deal than people realize. But neither did Biden, right?

Biden probably doesn't either, right? Well, no president does. First of all, every president, I work for two, they're all pissed off when the press writes things about them that are negative, even if they're entirely fair. Now, Trump is obviously uniquely against the freedom of press, I would say. people may argue that, but I think that's a fair statement.

Now, normally in a case like this, what would happen is you have a scandal, a controversy, whatever it may be, you get together. In this case, if it were, let's just say normal times for a moment. I would have gotten together with Jake Sullivan and the National Security Team and Anita Dunn and Ron Clayton.

And we all would have talked about like what actually happened here. You want to have a full understanding of the full damage, right? So it's not drip, drip, drip. This is the biggest communications 101 mistake is not having a whole understanding of all of the things that could come out. And in this case, it would have been what were the other signal chains, which is probably knowable internally, but Mike Waltz also had that automatic delete after 30 days administration, 60, 70 something days old, right? So, and they had access to classified information during the transition. So it could have even gone beyond that. And you would have decided kind of what are we going to say about it? Is it something the press secretary says? Is it something the press secretary says?

Is it something Jake Sullivan comes and talks at the briefing about and then I answer questions? And then before you do any of that, you go get it approved by the president. That's a normal process, right? There's no doubt that's not what happened here. But that's what you would normalize. It looks like everyone was freelancing. Because he had that disastrous, Waltz was disastrous. Even on Fox News he was disastrous.

If Laura Ingraham doesn't believe your line of bullshit, you're kind of fucked. Well, and Kara, I mean, if you start your answer with something about like some people say I'm a conspiracy theorist or there's a, then you sound like a conspiracy theorist. I mean, it's like, you know, what are we, so yes, they're all freelancing. And Pete Hegseth was freewheeling somewhere. Well, Pete Hegseth went out. I mean, there's the crazy video from last week

after Jeffrey Goldberg had put out the full, you don't have to call them war plans. Their specific logistical military attack details, right? After that had already been out on the Atlantic, Pete Hegseth went to the cameras. You know, he talks very loudly and aggressively when he's trying to deny something, which he has a lot of experience doing.

But he went out and denied it. I mean, it's just, but I also feel like this whole thing of if they just admit that there was a mistake and then we'd move on, I don't think Democrats would. And I don't think they should have. I mean, this is just kind of like a a fuck up, right? A fuck up. So what happens now? What happens now when it's still here? It still hasn't left. It's a little bit like a sore that won't heal.

Well, I mean, I think there's a question, right? Does Mike Waltz survive? He's the easiest one to fire because it's not a confirmed position. And any president can name anyone they want to that position, just like any other political appointee in the White House. People can hate the choice, but he's the easiest one to fire. Pete Hegseth is probably the one who's more justified to be fired.

I mean, you could argue whatever, because he's the one who put the information on there, but then he's gonna nominate a new defense secretary. I think all the reporting, which I think is true for any president, is you step away from a cabinet member and that makes you look weak too. That seems to be part of the discussion, I would bet. Plus getting someone to confirm for that job.

So brazen it out is a better tactic here. Well, look, if he fires Mike Waltz, then he just names another national security advisor. Right. So they don't mind shoving him out. But I don't think they will. I don't think they will, do you? Yeah. I don't think they will.

I don't think he'll survive it. Yeah, exactly. So more on Trump's feuds with lawsuits. Wilmer, Hale, and Jenner, and Block have sued the Trump administration over executive orders targeting them for employing attorneys or representing groups he doesn't like. Since being in office, Trump has signed five executive orders targeting law firms with punishments. One firm, Paul Weiss, got out of Trump's crosshairs by agreeing to perform $40 million worth of

pro bono work for Trump-friendly causes. Skadden, another major law firm, has agreed to provide $100 million of free legal work. Federal judges have temporarily blocked Trump's efforts to punish Wilmer, Herr, and Jenner on block, and others like Perkins-Cooey are pushing back. How do you think about this? This is something maybe you wished you could have done in the Biden administration, but you're always... And a lot of these firms are doing it for financial reasons because clients will leave them if they don't have security clearances

or if the Trump administration is hostile to them. So they would see an exit of clients presumably. Well, which is why they're doing it, right? Right. That's correct. I don't think we ever would have wished we could have done it. Maybe some people did. I just feel like it's got such a bad, it's kind of counter to what most presidents argue they're

for, right, which is kind of rule of law. And you can be pissed off about what courts do, but it doesn't mean you ignore it. And it doesn't mean you pressure law firms not to represent clients. I mean, it's, I think it's, I mean, there's lots of things to be worried about right now, but this is one I think that's a legit one to be worried about. I mean, you have these- Because tell me why from your perspective. Well because I think you have these law firms who are making a business decision, not a crime, but also one where it's a version in my view of obedience in advance. It is deciding that in order to survive, which they have to do as a business and as a law firm, you are going to agree to things that you wouldn't normally agree to,

and you give Trump power over you. I think for any president, that's dangerous. We have Democrat or Republican, but there's not a Democrat who's tried to do that. But does it concern you? Even if they lose because the judges are pushing back on these things, it will have done business damage to these law firms. So it doesn't matter.

Then I think later administrations, including Democratic ones, will be looking at a lot of these moves and thinking, this worked. They may not have the permission structure Trump has, but once it's crossed, you're like, could I do that? Even if you say I'd never do that, you're like, huh, could I do that? Even if you say I'd never do that, you kind of are like, I could maybe have a little more influence over irritating

lawyers or irritating press people. So maybe I'll sue a little bit more. I think it opens a floodgate of behaviors. And I think if Democrats think they'd never do it, I think they're not telling the truth. I don't. I think some Democrats would do it. I just think though it's kind of, what I mean is if you're kind of arguing part of your argument is I believe in kind of the rule of law and I believe in kind of the legal system, then making these sort of so frontal deals with law firms feels counter to that. I don't know. I guess there's lots of things

Trump does and that Trump administration does that maybe do open floodgates. But not in this case. One of the things that's interesting is which firms are agreeing and which firms are not and why. That is interesting. To me, that's really like why has these others saying no fucking way, and the others are going along with it. That to me is a really interesting. To me, that's really like, why has these others saying no fucking way and the others are going along with it? And that to me is a really interesting. And then what it does to their businesses, because I don't mean to be rude, but I don't

find lawyers to be the most, you know, backbony of people. Like journalists are a different thing. When they start suing journalists, they may stick together, although we'll get to that later. They aren't in the case of the White House correspondents. They're not joining as a group. But I do think that they, I'd really like to understand why others, you know, even though they're trying to stop these punishments and federal judges are blocking these efforts,

why certain groups did it and certain groups didn't, because presumably they all have the same business problem going forward. Do you think they're making a business calculation of their own that they can get? But it's like liberal causes. How does that make them the same amount of money as businesses? I mean, you see this in kind of the consulting world, right? Which is like, it's really hard, not well as well poor Democrats, but what's true is it's very hard to get hired right now as Democrat, right? In person who's left the Biden administration, no matter how good and whatever your skill set is, because every company is like we need closer ties to Trump, right?

Not to you, yeah. That's every calculation. Now, these things are cyclical. Well, let's hope they're cyclical. I will hope they're cyclical. But yeah, I guess it's a calculation of that sort. But what businesses — I don't know, what do you think? What businesses are going to be like, well, they're not falling prey to this, so I'm going to go with them.

I don't know. If I were in a law firm, it's four years. I better do what he wants for the next — and then later I'll get him. Or at least the next year and a half or two, right? Because then who knows, right? Because then payback can be a bitch. Well, yeah, the House could be controlled by Democrats. It could be a little bit more like, you know, balanced. We're going to investigate why you gave in here. Yeah, yeah, exactly. Right?

So it's coming and going. I think it does create a really interesting situation for Democrats to whether they're going to be as bullying going forward. And you don't think they will. I think they will. I think, you know. Well, maybe I'm naive about the law firm thing. Yes, you are naive. I may be. I do think they're going to be more bullying about other things. The law firm thing, you're right, like their businesses, they have to make calculations and

maybe, I don't know. Well, where they're attacking is law firms, judges, media. It sort of makes a lot of sense and it's very strict. It's a very strict effort to like stymie law firms, judges, media, it sort of makes a lot of sense. And it's very strict. It's a very strict effort to stymie law firms from defending press people, for example, things like that. Correct. Or taking on clients that would remotely offend the Trump administration. That's correct. So is that what you want to agree to? And that does, I mean, again, doesn't it feel counter to why people say they went to law

school? Yes, it does. But they also like money quite a bit, Jen. I don't know if you know that. I understand that. We'll go on a quick break when we come back. Elon hits the campaign trail in Wisconsin and also acquires his own company. Support for PIVOT comes from the podcast Tech Unheard. We live in complex times, is evolving faster than ever before, and the people driving that evolution can seem distant.

Tech Unheard is a new podcast that puts you right in the room with the people shaping the future of technology. It's hosted by Rene Haas, the CEO of Arm, one of those companies on the leading edge of tech innovation. For the show, they've partnered with national public media to bring you a series of in-depth conversations with tech industry luminaries.

Tech Unheard explores each leader's path and analyzes the most pressing trends in their space, all while sharing a few entertaining anecdotes of success and failure along the way. In the first episode, you can hear René talk with his old boss Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA. They dive into Jensen's journey, the future of AI, and how NVIDIA's unique culture of relentless innovation continues to push the boundaries of technology. Tech Unheard lets you listen in on unscripted one-on-one conversations between some of tech's biggest leaders. These conversations have never been more important than they are today. Tune into Tech Unheard from ARM

and NPM wherever you get your podcasts. from ARM and NPM wherever you get your podcasts. Support for Pivot comes from ZocDoc. When was the last time you needed to go to a doctor but you pushed it off? Let's spin the wheel of excuses to see where you land. I'm too busy. It'll heal on its own. I don't need help. I don't know which doctor to go to. Look, booking a doctor's appointment can feel daunting.

But thanks to ZocDoc, there's no reason to delay. They make it so easy to find and book a doctor who's right for you. ZocDoc is a free app and website where you can search and compare high quality in-network doctors and instantly book an appointment. Appointments made through the app can happen fast, typically within just 72 hours of booking. You can even book same-day appointments to take some of that stress out. Once you find the right doctor, you can see their actual appointment openings and choose a time slot that works for you. Plus, you can filter for doctors who take your insurance, are located nearby, might be a good fit for any medical need you may have, and are highly rated by verified patients. You can stop putting off those doctor's appointments and go to zocdoc.com slash pivot to find an instantly book a top rated doctor today.

That's z-o-c-d-o-c dot com slash pivot. Zocdoc.com slash pivot. Last week we at Today Explained brought you an episode titled The Joe Rogan of the Left. The Joe Rogan of the left was in quotations. It was mostly about a guy named Hassan Piker, who some say is the Joe Rogan of the left. But enough about Joe. We made an episode about Hassan because the Democrats are really courting this dude. So Hassan Piker is really the only major prominent leftist on Twitch, at least the only one who

talks about politics all day. What's going on, everybody? I hope everyone's having a fantastic evening, afternoon, pre-noon, no matter where you are. They want his cosign, they want his endorsement because he's young and he reaches millions of young people streaming on YouTube, TikTok, and especially Twitch. But last week he was streaming us.

Yeah, I was listening on stream and you guys were like, hey, you should come on the show if you're listening. I was like, oops, caught. You're a listener. Yeah, oh yeah, I am. Thank you for listening. Head over to the Today Explained feed to hear Hassan Piker explain himself.

Jen, we're back. Elon says, the destiny of humanity rests on the Wisconsin Supreme Court election, which is happening Tuesday. Elon appeared at a town hall in Green Bay, Wisconsin on Sunday where he gave out million dollar checks to two Wisconsin voters. He also wore a cheese hat at one point. He didn't look bad in the cheese hat, I'll be honest with you. Most people don't look good in cheese hats. So I guess that's a pro.

But I think it was okay. I think it worked for him. And blamed George Soros when he was heckled, which is kind of ironic since he was paying people to be there. The Wisconsin Attorney General did try to stop the giveaway, but his suit was rejected by the state's Supreme Court just before Elon's event began. Elon and his affiliated groups have now spent over $20 million to help the conservative candidate in this judicial race. We're recording a day before the election. I'd love you to sort of assess his political, if you're in a political suit, like how do you think his communications are? How do you think his impact is? By the way, there are also two special House elections in Florida this week to fill

Matt Gaetz and Mike Walz's seats. The race for Walz's seat is tighter than Republicans expected, although both Republicans are expected to win there. Talk to me a little bit about what the Elon effect is happening. Again, there were Tesla takedown protests all over the country, some very creative, and it's ongoing and it's really affected Tesla stock as much as President Trump and others are trying hard to stop it. I mean, I think his power is his money. And his money is not paying for, I mean, as much as he was in Wisconsin on Sunday, it's not paying for, hi, I'm Elon Musk,

go out and vote in the Wisconsin State Supreme Court race. It's paying for all sorts of things, including convincing, you know, getting people to register or to vote to participate in this, whatever we're calling this, a raffle. I don't even know how to call it, the thing where he gives out money, a raffle. So that's, his money is his power. I mean, and his platforms are his power. His platforms are his power. And so I don't think any Democrats should underestimate that. At the same time, he's more unpopular than Trump, right?

If there were House races now, I don't think any House candidates would put him in an ad, but they would happily take his money and they'd happily get his favor so that they would get favored status on Twitter or X or whatever. Or not be attacked by Trump. I mean, you must. Or not be attacked.

Right. There's lots of ways to look at that. And the Wisconsin state supreme, we'll see what the turnout is. And you talk to Democrats, Ben Wickler, who's the party chair and others, and they say the turnout is going to be high. That may be the case, but it's still a state Supreme Court race. It's not a governor's race,

it's not a presidential race, and the money he's spending there matters. That's where I think his power is. Money, just money. His destiny of humanity, I think he's done this about, I've heard him do it 27 times in the time I've known him. It's like, if Tesla doesn't survive, humanity is doomed, he told me once. And I was like, okay, all right, sure, Chad.

And one of the things that's, he's very dramatic about this, but isn't it positive for him to be so, like, imagine a Democratic president and say Reid Hoffman decides he wants to be next to the president at all times, you know, and there was a little bit of pushback in the Obama administration when Eric Schmidt was there too much, right? Yeah. He was buddies with Jim Messina. I think they were on like speed dial. Yes, exactly.

So is that a, how do you deal with that? Do you think it's a good thing or has it gone too far here? Everybody says they're going to have a breakup. They are. You and I disagreed. I don't think they're going to break up. Why would they? Their money is good. He's a heat shield. Those are my arguments.

Yeah. I mean, the heat shield, I think, is the most, like, clearest. As long as he continues to be heat shield. I think where we disagreed, and I feel like you have some sort of insider trading knowledge because you just, like, know him better than I do, is, like, will he be there in a year? Himself because of his businesses. Well, no, will Elon Musk still be like in the Trump orbit in a year? You think yes, right? Yes.

I think no, although I only bet $5. Okay, all right. So I wasn't like, throwing. So why no? Tell me, I'll tell you my yes in a second, but why no from your perspective? I think if Musk feels like a political problem to Trump, I know he's a heat shield,

but you can go from a heat shield to becoming a political problem, including if Democrats get their act together and figure out a more effective way of talking about Doge Cuts and cuts to social security and things like that, then he's not going to be as convenient as a buddy. So then he won't be as around as much in the orbit. Right. And how do you limit excise someone like that? Just so people are aware, Tesla's

shares are down another 4% today. It's down 13% for the month, although year over year, he's up 50%. It took a big leap during when Trump won. Well, do you think Musk would exit himself or you think it's Trump exiting him? I think he exits himself, it's business interests, but he seems to be doing all kinds of manner of hoping AI, using the bubble and things like that. So I don't see Trump cutting ties with him.

I just don't, I just think it's too problematic. He's brought him in too close What what happens? What how do you deal with an angry Elon Musk because he's unstable, right? He could do anything with enormous amounts of money I think you keep him in the tent no matter you have other rich friends who take his place in the tech world Or other world, but I'm talking about an unhinged Elon Musk attacking you. That could be the story, right? It's a great story. Well, maybe, but Trump,

I don't know how much he cares. Like he's had plenty of people attacking him all the time. How do you rid him? I don't mean to sound dark here. I'm saying he can go whatever. You just put someone else in charge of Doge. You like say, this guy like is out of whack or whatever. You say, I don't know, who knows?

He offs people all the time in terms of his orbit. So there's all sorts of ways to off Elon Musk in his orbit. I think that the interesting thing to me is if, to your point, is if Trump and Musk at some point have a falling out, I think there was a theory, which I don't think you ever agreed with, that it might be a short honeymoon. It's already a long honeymoon. Then there's an interesting thing for the future of the Republican Party. I mean, if you're JD Vance, you don't want to be in the crosshairs of Trump, but you also don't want to be in the crosshairs of Elon Musk. That's correct.

JD Vance is like 40 something. Maybe he's around for a long time. Maybe he wears that as welcome with Republicans too. I have no idea. But if you're a lot of these future Republicans, you care about Musk and you care about Steve Bannon, who doesn't like Musk. So that's a different. That's an interesting calculation

if Trump and Musk have a falling out. Which way do you go with each of them? Yeah, it's interesting. So last question, one of the things we talked about was the idea of these protests because thousands of people over 250 protested him over the weekend with rallies held at these Tesla showrooms around the world. The protests were part of so-called Tesla take down movement,

an effort to push back against him, encourage people to stop buying them. Protestors, branches, signs that said things like, fight the billionaire, broiligarchy and send Musk to Mars now. What do you make of these protests? Is it, is there, they seem, I don't think there is, Musk is blaming victimization.

These are real protests, people really don't like, my son writes me about it now. He's like, what an asshole. And he liked him, right? And so how do you look at these from a Democratic perspective? Is it a good thing for the Democratic party to see these happening? Or to me, they just don't like them. Like Reid Hoffman says, they just don't like you, bro. That's why they're there. They don't like them. I think it's furthering the heat shield that you've talked about, and I totally agree with, because it is taking the energy and anger

that you are seeing from a lot of Democrats out there and directing it at Tesla. Now, I think it's very warranted. Elon Musk has done some very bad things, but I kind of wish these people were protesting about Trump and Social Security or Trump and something else, Medicaid cuts. Because I don't know, ultimately, are people going to go to the polls in November and in November, a year and a half from now about

Tesla? I mean, I'd be surprised. A lot of things can happen. But I think that's the only thing that's a little wish they were this is what they're mad about and not anything else. I wish they directed all of their pain, anger, and passion, which is a good thing. What can Democrats do to cycle that in? Well, I mean, this is presumably somewhere organic. I haven't seen, but you tell me that these Tesla protests, are they being organized by any Democratic grassroots groups? Some are.

Some are. Some are't. Some aren't. Just like every other protest. That's everything. But I think there are things that are happening that are sort of organic but have been, you know, indivisible and others have been additive to it, like these town hall meetings, right? Showing up at town hall meetings, town hall meetings being held in Republican districts, more of that. I think, though, there's not Republican districts, more of that. I think, though, there's not enough Democrats who are doing that.

There are plenty who are doing, there are some who are doing it, I should say. But there needs to be more of that, and people, for people to feel like they have a place to go and to direct their energies. I don't know, I still think there's some work on kind of the coordination and kind of what the messaging is and what people should be doing who are writing letters and things. A lot of it is still about Tesla and maybe it will be for a while about Tesla. That's a really good point. Yeah, it shouldn't be about Tesla because then he's not the president. He's not the president.

That's why it doesn't get affected of Trump. Although Trump's affiliation with Elon is so strong, it does have residual effects. And one of the things, speaking of money, Elon Musk's X has been acquired by Elon Musk's XAI. Elon announced the deal on X saying the two companies' futures are intertwined. They've already been intertwined, by the way. They're using X data and this technology for Grok, which is their product. This officially combines the data models, compute and distribution and talent. It officially does, but it's already been combined by the way, everybody. The all-stock deal valued XAI at $80 billion and X at $33 billion. I don't think that takes into account

the debt, but I'm not sure. There's a big debt thing on there. The price is down from $44 billion Elon paid in 2022, but it's higher than a recent $12 billion valuation. I think this is all made up because I think the company has never been a particularly good business. And all it does is it hides it now. It hides it completely within this AI boomlet. And even XAI probably shouldn't be worth $80 billion. It doesn't make anything. It doesn't make any money. It makes a lot of noise. And he's not alone in this, all the other AI companies are high, but he's just putting money from one pocket into the other. And it just looks good because what he's doing is attaching.

I wouldn't be surprised if he brings Tesla in on this too and merges it into Tesla and then completes the picture to bring Tesla shares up, giving it an AI value essentially. That's why he's doing it, you think? It gives it this fake phony boost? Until it's not, right? Someone's going to get ahead in AI, and so why not just fold them together and then you don't understand the actual businesses themselves.

Yeah. Yeah. I mean, the interesting thing about reading the stories about this made me think about the early days after the purchase when, one, I think it was, did it happen in the spring of like two years ago? When did this happen? Am I remembering this correctly? This is relevant only because at the Correspondents' Dinner, which I still attend many years later. We're going to talk about that next.

Yes. But I sat next to Linda Iaccarino, who was still at NBC at the time. And I was like, she's nice. She's fun and interesting. I remember now you're going to be like, you're naive. But like, and I was like, oh, she's very engaging. And then like a week later, she went to Twitter or X or whatever they were still called at that time.

And I was like, wow, I misread of that whole situation. That was a real reflection moment. But you remember the early days when it was like, thank you for being a source of where I could share my thoughts and I know you're going to disappear. There was this fear of your followers going away. I've had decreased followers, of course,

as anybody who is not a right-winger has done for the most part of the last couple of years. But you know, at the time I had like 1.4 million followers and I'm like, well, man, I want to see what this happens, but this is like I've built up a following now. And now it's just like, no, no, no, I'm saying this is how I felt a couple of years ago. Now it's just like a dumpster fire of hellish horrible.

Are you on there still? Jen, are you still on there? You need to get on. I haven't deleted my account, but I really don't engage. Neither have I because I don't want Linda Yacarino to do something funny with it. That's really pretty much. That's fair. I don't engage on it,

but I still have an account. You still have an account. That's probably the best way to do it. Lots of insane fake accounts, I'll have to do something about at some point, but I, you know, whatever. Do you? Just let it be. I worry I don't really care.

Yeah. She got mad at me because I called her that nice ad lady from Queens, but because I don't think she has any technological experience and is just there for window dressing for Elon. Now she presumably will disappear into whatever this is. I'd be shocked. Maybe he'll make her CEO, but she'll be CEO, a Sino CEO. Well, that's what she wanted, right, at the time?

Wasn't that the name? No, I think she really thought she was in there with him shoulder to shoulder. I think that it's like not true, but whatever. Who knows? I don't really care what happens to her career. Honestly, I could care less. But one of the things- Hard same.

I met her once. Yeah, exactly. Well, you missed it. You missed it. She's quite conservative. You missed that You missed it. She's quite conservative. You missed that part. Clearly. She's quite.

Clearly. She always was. If you spent enough time with her, you're like, what? And you'd be like, I'm going to go now. I remember that when she was at NBC. She said something sort of right-winging. I'm like, you know what? My mother annoys me enough.

I don't need you on top of it. That's how I felt. I need to limit the number of right-wing people that I engage with on a regular basis. Well, I was like, I don't even know you, and my mother I have to still talk to. So, one of the things about this purchase is it's just a way to get the benefit of an AI valuation and pretend that Twitter is an actual business when it is at best a middling advertising business that she's never gonna transform because it missed the boat many, many, many moons ago

to Facebook and Meta. So whatever, good luck with this, Elon, we'll see. Here's what it does, I'll make one more point. It doesn't improve the product. Like nothing in this is about the products of either of these things and what they're gonna sell to consumers, how they're gonna make money.

It's all about the financial transaction. And to me, that's a big red flag. But did he ever care about the product? No. He does. That's not true. Oh, okay. No, I think Tesla, the original Tesla.

No, no, no, no, no, no. About X. Now he doesn't. Twitter, Twitter, Twitter, X. Yes. You think he cares about the product? I think he did initially and then doesn't care now. He's using it as a cudgel is what he's doing it.

All right, Jen, let's go on a quick break. When we come back, Trump is on a pardon spray. Jen, we're back. President Trump commuted the criminal fraud sentence of Aussie media founder, Carlos Watson, just hours before Watson was due in prison. The company falsely claimed to have deals with Google and Oprah Winfrey

and would have owned fines over $90 million. Watson is convicted of conspiracy to commit securities and wire fraud, which he did, and identity theft, which he did, and was sentenced to 10 years. Trump also pardoned Trevor Milton, the founder of electric truckmaker, and Nicola, who was convicted of misleading investors. Same pattern. Milton was represented by Brad Bondi, brother of AG Pam Bondi in his securities fraud trial. Do you think Trump will be the latest investor in the Fyre Festival too, the way this is going? Do presidents usually do this in the middle of a term? No, no. I mean, wait, also, I mean- It's like at the end, right?

Right. And also, I mean, these two thematic fraudsters, it feels also to me, it's like the Eric Adams thing in the sense that it's a little mobby, right? Because it's like Carlos Watson who I've met a couple times. I don't know well or anything, but like- Did you like him too? I'm kidding. He was around Democratic circles, but go ahead. He was around Democratic circles, this is my point. You're like, and Eric Adams, I think he still considers himself a Democrat, who knows? But they now feel an obligation to Trump.

Some version of it, of course they do. That's what reminds me of a mobby's thing. The other thing about this Milton pardon, Trump said, one of my biggest pet peeves is when people talk about themselves in the third person, which Trump is not the only one who does this, but he does it a lot, where he said, the thing he did wrong was he supported a gentleman named Trump, right? That was Trump talking about pardon.

It's like, I don't know the guy well, but he supported me. It's like, I don't know the guy well, but he supported me. It's like he gets pulled into these broadsters who he wants to validate, because I think it validates him. That's what it feels like it's about. But yeah, you don't really do it in the middle. If you were working for Biden,

and he suddenly started doing this, what would you run into the Oval Office and say? What, the actual fuck or what? What would you be crazy? Oval Office and say? What in the actual fuck or what? What would you say? Yes. I mean, you know, it's like, yes, because in a normal case, though, here's the thing Trump knows. There's so much shit flying out there that like, we're talking about this, you're talking about this. Is everybody going to talk about this? No. Because there's so many other things going on. So it can be kind of buried in the burying of all, you know, which is why he does things

like say he's going to run for a third term. Right. It's like he wants to. We're not even talking. I'm saying he's doing it because he wants to change subject. He wants to talk about it. So yes. What's he changing the subject from?

I think he, well, a couple things. Signal K, which I don't, I'm not saying this is going to be a political problem for him forever, but hey, there have been a few polls and people hate it, including Republicans, and he knows it makes him look weak in the national security world. Elections, special elections tomorrow. Who knows what will happen? Maybe they'll win all three. But even if Josh Weil loses by five points, that's not, it's not great for Trump, right?

That's a little bit of sign of political weakness. It was Michael Waltz's seat. Maybe some of the tax, you know, who knows? I think there's just like, he'd like to talk about, there's still, again, I know I keep talking about this, but like, a bunch of his advisors, including his commerce secretary, keeps talking about social security in ways that are hugely problematic for anyone who reads a poll ever. So yeah, it's changing the subject from a lot of other things. Yeah, that's true.

That is true. That's exactly what he's doing. He's doing a good job at it though. So last thing, the White House Correspondents Association has canceled comedian Amber Ruffin's scheduled appearance at its annual dinner. WHCA President Eugene Daniels said in a statement that the organization decided not to have the comedian to ensure the focus is not on the politics of division. The cancellation came a day after the White House Chief of Staff Taylor Butowich slammed

Ruffin on X. He shared a clip from a recent appearance on the Daily Beast podcast where she referred to Trump administration as kind of a bunch of murderers. She's a comic. Garfin also revealed the guidance she got from the Correspondence Association in that podcast interview. Let's listen. They were like,

you need to be, you know, equal and make sure that the... that you give it to both sides and blah, blah, blah. I was like, there's no way I'm gonna be freaking doing that, dude. Under no circumstances. So as somebody who attended the dinner, you've been at some of the more controversial ones, both as a member of the White House Press History team and a member of the media. It's not clear if Trump is planning on attending the dinner he has in the past and Press Secretary

Carol Levitt has already said she's not going. The White House correspondents seem to be giving, they're also deciding where everybody sits, right? They were going to have the president now decide where they sit and they could push the main media out of the front seats. They've already also knocked AP out. There's all kinds of things. When you look at this, you didn't do much with the White House Correspondents. They just ran their own show, right? Correct. Also, like, you don't have to agree to what they say, you know, and they don't respond to what you want

either. I mean, the whole point is that. I think this is such a sign of kind of weak obedience from, and I will say, I mean, I know Eugene pretty well. He seems to me a little bit, I haven't talked to him about this. In the statement, he said, unanimous decision. I would not be surprised if he was quite pressured to do this by the White House Correspondent Association is made up of representatives from kind of every network, every wire service, by outlets who feel under greater pressure than I think he would personally. But it's not his personal choice. I think it is a scholarship dinner, yes, that is true.

But what you're doing here, there's a comedian at almost all of these dinners. Right. The comedian typically, even when there's a president with less fodder than Trump, spends most of their time making fun of the sitting president, because that's the whole point. There's plenty of easy fodder about Democrats right now. I mean, Chuck Schumer, hello. There's a few jokes about you and a couple of other people, right? But what this is doing is this is agreeing to the terms he wants at a dinner that is supposed to be about preserving the value of the freedom and independence of the press. It is you are-

And speech. And speech. And you are obeying in advance about something so stupid. Yeah, that's the thing is so stupid. I've never been happy about that dinner, I have to tell you. I've always felt it was too jocular. I thought it was too like hanging out with your sources. And I wasn't a political reporter, but I was like, this is a little awkward.

When you were dealing though, with the White House correspondents, they decided where to sit, right? Where everybody sits in the- In the briefing room. In the briefing room. And now the Trump administration is taking control of that. They took control of who could be there,

and they knocked AP out for not saying Gulf of America and saying Gulf of Mexico. Again, it's a matter of free speech, as Julia Pace has said, who runs AP. Did you ever imagine that you could push these people around like this? Because it certainly looks like it was possible for you to do that. What was your relationship with them? Well, you could.

They would do sternly worded letters and you would ignore them. I think it's a bit of an outdated system in some ways. In many ways, the idea of it is a good idea. It just needs to be modernized, which is like a bunch of reporters who cover the White House speaking as a group about issues and not as individual organizations. That's a good thing. But it's what they choose to fight about.

And when I was there, sometimes they would write these sternly worded letters about like, we need a formal press conference in the East Wing. And you're like, really? That's what you're going to write your sternly worded letter about? And you ignored it. I mean, you're going to do one or you're not. I don't, you know, it's like-

I'm seeing your face going, oh, God, this letter. But here's, but the other thing is that you also work with the White House Correspondents Association on a variety of things that can be useful, like the president's going to a war zone. You can't announce that in advance. We need a small pool of reporters on the plane to travel with the president.

And you work with them on that. You work with them on planning foreign trips, to making sure and fighting for access and things like that. There are a lot of constructive reasons for having an organization that you can work with as a representation. But I think some of this stuff is like a misguided. So one of the ideas is they band together and they just leave the room, and then it's left to the Newsmax don't know, Newsmax people, whatever.

Is that a bad thing? Just say, you know what, because by staying there, you give it credibility, this nonsense. Or do you have to just live by the rules they've decided now, live in their oxygen universe? Is there any possibility? They won't do this because corporate media won't do it. But is there any choice here but to dance to his tune?

Well, I think it would be a mistake for them to leave the room. Because I think they leave the room. Hard to explain to the public that all of these organizations who are giving them any information from inside the White House are all biased toward Trump, right? So they are, this is not their responsibility. Oh, maybe it is part of their responsibility, but they're playing a public service role by still being there, I think,

and by even present in the room. Even if they're not asked questions, even if they can't, they don't have any access? Well, they ask questions in the briefing, right? The briefing and the outdated nature of that is another topic. The briefing and the outdated nature of that is another topic. The nature of the pool is like, there's no precedent for this.

There's no, just like many things Trump does, it's almost like the playbook, the system is not prepared to respond to it. This is a moment for I think them and as an association or as media outlets to decide how are we going to respond to it. So this is a moment for I think them as an association or as media outlets to decide how are we going to respond. Maybe Trump's not the last version of this, right? I think you should plan for him not being the last version of this. And what does that look like? Well, you just said very quickly, like, it's another topic. You shouldn't have briefings.

I think they're stupid. No, no, no, no, no, no. You shouldn't have briefings. But absolutely, for a number of reasons. I mean, one of them is it's, I mean, freedom of press, having the freedom of press there, that sends a message to the world. You can't go into other countries and be like, freedom of press, talk to real reporters, and then not do it yourself.

It also pushes the system internally to get answers. It's very efficient, all of those things. What I mean is there are ways that the, you know, in the briefing room, it's a little different now, but in the briefing room still, it's dominated by a handful of outlets. And a handful of outlets are not what the majority of the public consumes. And so there are some outdated aspects of it. Yeah, yeah. I was sort of like, when she was like, let's let in others.

I'm like, yeah, let's let it, I want to go. Oh, yeah, yeah. So those things, the thing, the problem is those things are good things. Like Sean Spicer did a lot of crazy things. I can only think of Melissa McCarthy. But he did have a screen where he had regional reporters at times. I think that's a good thing. There are things that need to be modernized about that.

But what they've done now is they've essentially let in half the state-run media to kind of be the dominant sources of information in the pool. And that's a problem. Well, why wouldn't they do that? I mean, to me, being angry about it is sort of like, oh, can you, someone was like, can you believe they did it? I'm like, yeah, I can believe it.

Once again, I can believe that they would put state-run media in there. Why wouldn't they? That's good for them. They'll do whatever is good for them. I don't know if we have any choice in there. I honestly believe or go. Yes. Historically, Democratic and Republican presidents have not done that. There's all sorts of things to criticize about every administration in terms of

the ones including the ones I worked in about how they dealt with the press. I'm not suggesting that. But there were briefings done. There was, most of the time, accurate information. There wasn't intentional misleading most of the time. There are exceptions, right? This is a whole different thing and the system and the press corps is not prepared for it.

Well, Trump is innovative, if anything, somewhat innovative in a very terrible way. I guess you could call it that. I call it that. Yeah. Anyway, let me ask you one more question because you were there. How would you have changed if you were still there, if you were not working for Trump but a Democratic? What would you have taken from what they've done here and said,

okay, good idea, this not so much. How would you modernize it? Give me two things. Sure. I would have done actually, truthfully, if Hillary Clinton had won, I was the communications director for Obama, we would have recommended they change the briefing. And when I came in, and I'll come back to that in a second, when I came in and I was Biden's press secretary four years later, because we were following four years of them yelling at reporters and demonizing the media and not doing regular briefings, we felt like we had to return to some sort of normalcy to send the message, right?

But if it had been Hillary Clinton, I would have said, do two or three briefings a week include some sort of rotation of regional reporters or other outlets, either in the room or on a screen. You can easily answer questions to people who are on a screen. The other days, maybe do them off camera, because people can still get information. But there is something very performative.

I realize I'm currently I'm a host of a TV show. But there's something very performative. I realize I'm currently, I'm a host of a TV show, but like there's something very performative about the briefing room and television. You and Steve. You and Juicy. Yeah, we got it. I mean, but you know, yes, you have to, you can do that, give people the clips they want and whatever, but like two days do a gag, what's called, we call it a gaggle. You do them on planes at the state departments.

In your office. But you're in your, well, it's hard because there's too many people usually, but like, yes, back in the day, you should do gaggles in your office. People still ask tough questions. You still have to answer them. It's not as performative, but it's not as constructive to ask the question 17 times because somebody's already asked the question. Those are a couple of the things I would do.

Yeah, I agree with you with the screens. You could have people from across the country. Sure. Yes. Anyway, one more quick break and we'll be back for wins and fails. Okay, Jen, let's hear some wins and fails. I'll go first. My fail of the week are these continuing attacks on these students at colleges. They should be able to say what they want anytime they want and even criticize the United States and things. I don't even agree with some of them. And I really find it a fail that people are not more upset about this, that students just because of things they say. Same thing with Elon Musk's attacks on people who don't like Teslas. If you don't like a Tesla, you should be able to say you don't like a Tesla.

If you don't like Elon Musk, you should be able to say you don't like Elon Musk. He shouldn't have to spin a conspiracy theory about it because he's sad. One of the things that I've always noticed about this group of people, as I've said on your show and many other shows, every accusation is a confession with these people. Everything they accuse people of, they're doing themselves. I find it really, these are students that are here,

we're supposed to be an open society. If they want to dislike us, come here and dislike us, that's fine too. In fact, it makes us stronger, makes us love our country more. I think a win is, I'm going to give it to Lisa Murkowski, actually both Republican senators, Dan Sullivan and the other, and how they're really doing different

tactics to push back on Trump. I would say I prefer Lisa Murkowski's efforts more. She's in a safer position now that she's shown she's got the grit to stick in there and she has the political capital to do that. But I do think there should be more, you see Senator Lankford doing the same thing and calling for a look into signal gates. It would be really nice to see more of these Republican senators find their set and of course it's a woman who's doing it first. And I do think that's something to look up to and we

should praise those efforts when they're done by the Republican Party. Because I do think it's, as much as we talk about the lack of spine for the Republicans, I think it's super, super hard to be in that situation if you want to have a role in government. And I'm going to add in a last one from International. Marie Le Pen, barred from the presidential run after embezzlement ruling, is really something. It shows there are, there are, now there are other leaders now who have taken her place, so it's not going to really slow them down. But I do think that just shows that other countries know how to handle problems of their, of their, of their elected officials and are much more fair about it.

Of course, there's going to be a whole conspiracy theory around her, but nonetheless, I thought that was something surprising for me. I didn't even know that was coming. So your turn. I didn't either on Marine Le Pen. Okay, wins. I'm going to say, as much as I've said repeatedly that there are not enough Democrats out there and more need to be out there, I am delighted by the re-emergence of Tim Walz,

who I think was locked in a closet somewhere during the 2024 or most of the election after he became the running mate. He kind of, I love his imperfect, rough-around-the-edges answers to things. He had this amazing moment where he, a couple days ago, where he talked about the benefits of the Department of Education and what it actually does for people. He was asked a question about a Title I by a student at a Title I school. I think this is one of those bureaucratic things most people don't know how to talk about. And I think a lot of parents would actually care if they knew. I loved that. I love the reemergence of him. I'm going to give a tie.

The other person that I have, I knew who he was, but I didn't really pay attention to what he had to say, but I feel like has become this emerging great speaker and voice in the Democratic Party is Greg Kazar. Oh, I love this. Explain. He is the chairman of the Progressive Caucus, but he is a person who speaks in

plain English about how things impact people. I've had him on the show a couple of times. He's been at a couple of these rallies. It's always exciting when you see people you didn't really know before and you're like, that person makes sense. That's exciting to me. I'm going to say my loss, I'm just going to stay in the political space, know before and you're like, that person makes sense. So that's exciting to me. I'm going to say my loss,

I'm just going to stay in the political space, in the blueprint theme since everybody knows what the blueprint is, I'm going to tell you. I have been consistently disappointed with Chuck Schumer, which I have openly talked about. Me too. I think we can move on from the debacle of the funding agreement

for a moment, but here's what is disappointing. It doesn't seem clear that any lessons have been learned because the Democrats have been on recess. There is a debate coming up about extending high-end tax cuts, which will happen in all likelihood, but this is a winning issue. It could be something you could equip people to go out to

districts and hold town halls and meetings and be aligned. I'm obsessed with Social Security and how this is something that some Democrats have effectively talked about. But the fact is you have the Commerce Secretary saying his mother-in-law, was it his mother-in-law? Whatever. He's such a clown. Wouldn't care. No, he said, did you see this? Yes, I did. Wouldn't care if her Social Security check got a week late. Because her son's a billionaire, you imbecile. What?

Right! Also, that should be in ads everywhere. I know about it, but why isn't it everywhere? So I'm not putting all the blame on him, but he's a Democratic leader. We can move on from the funding debate. Let's learn some lessons. Yeah, I would agree. I would get to Delta.

I think you should. Just so you know, for people who don't know, Representative Kazar is from Austin, obviously. He also includes Elon Musk's largest factory. And he is terrific. He's really terrific. And he's been attacking Musk, among others. And before Musk became Musk, he had a little tangle with him.

He did. And he's also saying, let's stop with the purity tests and stop being so. He's got the right message and it's really interesting. It's an interesting place because he's from Texas, although Austin is not really Texas, is it? In any case, those are good ones. See, that wasn't hard. See, you did it. No.

You have still not told a dirty joke, but let me have a comic come on and talk a little bit. We want to hear from you. Send us your questions about business tech or whatever's on your mind go to nymag.com Pivot to submit a question for the show or call 855 51 pivot elsewhere in the Karen Scott universe I talked to comedian Michelle Boteau on on with Kara Swisher this week. Let's listen to a clip I'm not working from a place of fear. Fuck that no if no no edit yourself from a place of fear, fuck that. No, if no, no.

Edit yourself, no, no. As so many people edit themselves and they do what they think they should be doing, and then they beat themselves up when it doesn't go through, when it doesn't get a second season or get greenlit, da, da, da, da, da. And it's just like, no.

I need to sleep at night. And if I'm not doing what I know I need to do, what my intuition tells me I need to do, then I'm not going to sleep. So no, working from a place of fear is, if you're an artist, like get over that shit real quick. Anyway, she was great. I think comics are doing some of the most interesting work

right now, don't you? Like I have a comic on every eight weeks at least, because I think there is some of the smartest people talking about politics right now and have had a fearlessness Yes, we do too we like to have comics on as well because I think they can talk about things happening in a way that breaks through and is It's real. As she said, it's a little bit more fearless because you want to be funny, right? Right. I'm gonna try to get Amber Ruffin to come on and do her set. Good.

Yeah. Yeah. So no jokes from you then. No jokes from you. All right. I'll do one. Why do melons have weddings? Why? They cantaloupe. All right. One more. Here's a dirtier one. Okay. That wasn't even a dirty joke, Kara. I knew it was like a, you know. All right. Let me do a penis one then. Why did the sperm cross the road?

Why? Because I put on the wrong sock this morning. Okay! Oh, but I don't even know what that means. My son said it should be. I don't... I'm here for it. Someone's going to write to you and give their analysis.

I love it. Right, exactly. I need an older son to give me dirty jokes. I know. It's true. Okay, that's the show. Thank you so much, Jen. Jen is the host of MSNBC's Inside with Jen Psaki, Sundays at 12 p.m. ET and Mondays at 8 p.m. ET.

Come this spring, she'll be making the move to MSNBC's Primetime as the host of the 9 p.m. ET hour, Tuesdays through Fridays. So Jen Psaki everywhere. She's going to be surrounding you. You're everywhere, Kara. Well, I'm not on Five Nights a Week on Prim Time. Anyway, thanks. I knew you'd be good at this and you are indeed. Thanks for listening to Pivot. Be sure to like and subscribe to our YouTube channel. We'll be back on Friday. I will read us out, but thank you, Jen, so much. Thank you. Great to be with you. Today's show was produced by Lara Naiman, Zoe Marcus, and Taylor Griffin. Ernie Enderdot engineered this episode.

Julian Villard edited the video. Nishat Kurwa is Vox Media's executive producer of audio. Make sure you subscribe to wherever you listen to podcasts. Thanks for listening to Pivot from New York Magazine and Vox Media. You can subscribe to the magazine at nymag.com slash pod. We'll be back later this week for another guest host. I'm not saying who it is. And another breakdown of all things tech and business.

But Jen, again, thank you so much. Thank you. Next guest host better bring dirty jokes. You give them a heads up.