Pod Save America - “A wicked clutch election.” (LIVE from Boston!)

Episode Date: May 26, 2018

Trump calls off the North Korea summit after Mike Pence was called a dummy, and the NFL restricts the right to free speech after threats from the president. Governor Deval Patrick and Ambassador Samantha Power join Jon, Jon, Tommy, and Erin on stage at the Wang Theater in Boston.

🎵 Hey, Boston. Very cool. Very cool. Wow. Wow. Hello, Boston. It is good to be home. Welcome to Pod Save America.

I'm Jon Favreau. I'm Jon Lovett. I'm Jon Favreau. I'm Jon Lovett. I'm Erin Ryan. I'm Tommy Vitor. Hey, nice shirt, Lovett. It's really cool. You mean the Mets? It's cool to wear a Mets shirt. Unbelievable.

Hey, hey, hey. John thought he would do a funny sports thing. Maybe the enemy of your enemy is your friend. You know? Think about it. We have some great friends of the pod from the state of Massachusetts joining us tonight. Your former governor, Deval Patrick, is here. And your former ambassador to the United Nations, Samantha Power, is here. All right.

Should we do some news? Sure. Okay. I mean, you got all your cousins here. Should probably do some news. I think like half of our wedding is here, actually. So that's... So, guys, I regret to inform you that it's back to the drawing board for the Nobel Prize Committee. Some Norwegians are angrily scratching up.

They were so close. Roll the red carpet back up. Donald Trump has canceled his June 12th summit with North Korea's Kim Jong-un after a North Korean official called Vice President Mike Pence a political dummy because he told Fox News that the model for the denuclearization of North Korea was Libya, where dictator Muammar Gaddafi gave up his nuclear weapons and was later deposed and killed by rebel forces. So I think that was a clever play. Tommy, was this a big win for Trump or the biggest win?

Oh, it's tough. This is very frustrating. Right, I mean, when Trump sent his letter, he said the comments about Pence were the last straw, which is funny because Donald Trump says worse things about his own staff, his own cabinet on a regular basis. A reminder, John mentioned that Pence mentioned the Libya model again about North Korea,

just not to put too fine a point on it, but the Libya model ended with Gaddafi getting sodomized by a bayonet and then killed in the streets. So are we surprised that that offended Kim Jong-un in North Korea and they didn't want to go that direction? No. This...

You know, I'm not happy that these talks blew up. Nobody should be happy. We all want a realistic diplomatic set of discussions to try to manage a crisis that still exists today now that these talks are over and that stupid letter was sent. But they rushed

into it. There was no process. There was no forethought. It was all about chasing a headline. And of course, like a shitty process leads to a shitty outcome. That is just a rule in life. Do you think that Pence made a mistake there? Because John Bolton also referenced the Libya model a couple weeks ago, and that pissed them off. And then Pence goes ahead and does it again.

Is that a strategy? Is that them just being morons? I think what happened is that this opportunity to have a meeting was brought to Trump. And instead of taking the NSC down the Situation Room, talking through it, figuring out exactly what they mean, what it would entail, what steps we would need to take to get North Korea to take meaningful actions, like what steps we would need to take to get North Korea to take meaningful actions, he sent the South Korean National Security Advisor out to the driveway at 7 or 8 at night in the dark and had him do a press conference to accept the invitation. And there was no forethought or planning that went in that would enable this to be a success.

So Trump, when he saw Kim Jong-un getting squishy and maybe not being ready to give up all the things he needed to give up, decided to dump him before he could get dumped. Aaron, here's a sample of the right-wing reaction. Fox host, almost VA secretary, Pete Hexeth said, best letter ever. Good for Trump. Stay tough. Set the terms. No reason to lung at a bad deal. I guess he meant lunge. Didn't really say lung.

Yeah, he said lung. It was a cool tweet. And it wasn't just Trump media. Here's Axios. This move is pure Trump. A reminder that he milked his adversary and gave them nothing in return. Never talk about milking people.

Don't milk people. Don't milk people. Was this a clever ploy all along? What did you think of this? You know, whenever I see right-wing media response to Donald Trump's clear losses as wins, I think of the Drake lyric. I think, nice for what? Nice for what? Why are you debasing

yourself to this extent? Donald Trump is not going to be president forever. He's not going to live forever. And at some point, you know, the lights are going to come on in the bar. The lights are going to come on in the bar and these people are going to see that they've been completely humiliating. They've been face-frenching this awful person. Another thing that I... I don't face-frenching. Are there other frenching? I think what other...

I think usually the face is implied. No, what I think that this exposes, though, is the fact that Donald Trump can be basically led around by the nose if people flatter him and give him, like, his, if they confirm his biases that he's the greatest person in the world. And I think these people are kind of hanging out and hanging around hoping that at some point they can get a job in a White House

and then have their legacy be disgraced and never get another job again. It's kind of befuddling to me. Also, I think that the invoking of the Libya model is really funny because it's sort of like if you went out with a guy who had like a terrible personal history, like maybe he had burned down his ex-wife's house or something. And you were like, oh, I don't know. I'm a little worried about letting you come into my house. You might burn it down. And he's like, yeah, but I loved my ex-wife. It's like, yeah, but you fucking burned down her house. So I just think that this is very confusing to me, and I don't understand how the male ego works, and I don't understand why these people are constantly...

I don't understand what this is all leading to and what they hope will come of it. I don't. So John, in the letter, Trump refers to Kim as his excellency. He had said a wonderful dialogue was building. As we all know, he made a coin with their faces on it, which is now a collector's item. What else did Kim get from this deal here? And what does it tell us about Trump's negotiating style? He is the deal maker,

out of the deal. I'd say, first of all, I proposed this earlier, but I believe that the coin should be cut in half. Kim should wear one half and Donald Trump should wear the other half.

Didn't we almost have it all? Over years and years, it's passed down from generation to generation. Over time, the story of the two halves is lost. And then one day, many generations from now, two star-crossed lovers see each other from across a space train and catch each other's eye. She smiles. It was meant to be.

Now, yeah, the letter is dumb, the whole thing's dumb, right? But what I was thinking about today is it just feels as though we're trying we're laying over a donald trump reality tv story over what is a 30-year structural problem or like at least two decades long structural problem of there's this country they looked at the world and they said we better get nukes or somebody's going to bomb us until we're dead uh and then they've slowly moved towards doing that and they've never been proven wrong i don't think things were, like, the media went too crazy about how much better things were because Donald Trump had opened this avenue for talks and all the caveats that came with it were kind of cast aside. I don't think things were as good

as they were. I don't think the things were as good as people claimed when Donald Trump was going to have this meeting. Things haven't gotten that much worse because this meeting has been withdrawn. I think what we're learning is Donald Trump has said for better part of his time in public life that all he has to do to be president is bring the gifts of negotiation to the table that he's learned over a lifetime. The apprentice on the world stage. Right. It's the apprentice on the world stage. The lessons he learned over a lifetime of inheriting a lot of money and only losing it all sometimes. But it, and so he's threatened this. He talked about this for years. Here's what I'm going to do. I'm going to walk into the room. I'm going to say, let's do a deal. Then I'm going to get up and walk out of the room. It's like, okay, now he's trying it. Nuclear annihilation or not is, is, is, is on the table, but he's trying it.

And what, and we're learning is that it just doesn't work. It doesn't do anything. It's just stupid. You know, it's stupid. This is the shit that drives me, I'm gonna clap for that. This is the shit that drives me crazy with the press, because understandably, they write day after day after day of awful stories about Donald Trump, because day after day, we learned that he paid off a mistress and lied about it. We learned that like literally every single person who ever worked for him may or may not be indicted in the next few months. And then he's had a tough go at it. They they he gets talks with the North Koreans and he floats that he maybe should win the Nobel Peace

Prize. And these pundits are like you know maybe he does deserve the Nobel Peace Prize. And these pundits are like, you know, maybe he does deserve the Nobel Peace Prize. Like, they grade him on such a fucking curve. Yeah. Republicans say he deserves... He and Obama, day after day. Republicans say he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. Democrats disagree. When we come back,

we'll take a look at the Nobel debate over Donald Trump. Does he deserve it? Yes or no? We'll ask you to submit your ideas. You know, Lovett... into the fiery cauldron of a one-straight nation. You mentioned he's not a good negotiator.

And you know what is really frustrating to me is that he is good at one extremely specific thing. Like, he's good at structuring payments for his mistresses. He's good at... That is a genuine compliment. Like, good for his mistresses. He's good at it. That is a genuine compliment. Like, good for you, Donald. You're able to somehow structure payments to women who you had affairs with shortly after your wife had a baby.

He dotted the I's, he crossed the T's. Yeah, 2005 to 2007 was a very horny time for Donald Trump. But he's able to somehow obscure who gave the... Like, it's been years, and we didn't learn about that until just now. So he's good at something. Why can't he be good at literally any other thing? Yeah, I don't think he puts a lot of effort into it.

Tommy, so the North Koreans responded tonight, and they said, basically, we're happy to meet any time. We're sorry this happened. So they're basically trying to take the high ground here, which they should never be able to take because it's a country run by an awful dictator who puts people in labor camps.

But now on the world stage, they're saying, well, we were doing everything you told us to do. We were ready to go to this meeting. And now Donald Trump, because we called his vice president a political dummy, is calling it off. Right. Which they stole from us. That's also plagiarism. Nobody's talking about it. He put out... Trump released this letter rejecting the talks without telling the South Koreans. I mean, this is a big deal for us because they're developing a missile technology

that might be able to strike San Francisco or New York. It's a legitimate threat for us. If you live in South Korea, it's been a threat for a long time. If you live in Japan, it's been a threat for a long time. And Trump's, they try to sell the crazy man Nixon theory as somehow being beneficial in negotiations. If you live adjacent to North Korea, it's just

fucking terrifying. And so, yes, like, President Moon of South Korea really pushed hard to get to talks because he was scared shitless. And now, there's a chance he's more scared of what we're going to do than what Kim's going to do. And, by the way, how many U.S. soldiers are sitting there on the

border between North and South Korea? So that's pretty scary for them too. I also think though, I think part of the reason the press was open to the idea that Trump's craziness could bear fruit is you do look at this situation and you say, well, there was a need for something new because Democrats, Republicans, you try the hard-nosed negotiations, you give a little, you get a little, they lie, they keep developing, things keep getting worse and worse, their program gets worse and worse and worse, and so you say, oh, well, maybe this is someone, you know, changing things,

trying something different. The problem is you don't just, if the careful measured approach by both parties for many years wasn't working it may mean that there is a better approach but that one's also going to be pretty hard to find and get right it's also going to take thought and discipline and effort even if it does look different and even if at first the experts aren't totally sure about it like that's not what it's not gonna be going with your gut yeah that's not what right that's going with trump's gut is nonsense but as usual the press picked the wrong thing that was good and different about Donald Trump's approach. They thought maybe it's his tough guy tweets. Maybe we needed some strength in this country.

Maybe we needed someone to tweet at a madman that he was called Little Rocket Man. As opposed to the fact that Trump said, I'm willing to talk directly with a leader of a foreign country and I'm willing to engage in diplomacy. And make concessions. Which is something that we liked from Obama. And make concessions. Going back to the whole madman theory, the only reason that the madman theory worked is because the madman had an end game in mind. I think Donald Trump is constantly stuck in the step one, step two, step three, question mark, step four, profit. He's constantly in the step three question mark phase of that. And so if you're, you know,

madman theory, he's just kind of doing a lazy version of it because he doesn't really, he hasn't three question mark phase of that. And so if you're, you know, Mad Men Theory, he's just kind of doing a lazy version of it because he doesn't really, he hasn't really pictured beyond him winning, or before winning a Nobel Prize, what that would actually look like. This advisor's like, okay, thank you so much for doing the Mad Men thing for two weeks,

but we think you should go back to being, he's like, what are you talking about? What Mad Men thing? What madman thing? What madman thing? Oh, yeah, no, I was doing it, yes. Just doing my tweets. Just doing my tweets. Okay, so I want to talk about something else.

On Wednesday, a major U.S. corporation announced that it would restrict its employees' right to free speech in response to repeated threats from the President of the United States. The owners of the National Football League decided to adopt a new policy that will punish players with fines if they kneel on the field in protest of police brutality and racial injustice during the National Anthem. Donald Trump responded to the news during an interview with Fox & Friends this morning,

saying, You have to stand proudly for the National Anthem, or you shouldn't be playing, you shouldn't be there, maybe you shouldn't be in the country. This follows last fall at a rally in Alabama. He said, wouldn't you love to see one of these NFL owners when somebody disrespects our flag to say, get that son of a bitch off the field right now, he's fired, he's fired. And apparently they listened to that. Erin, the NFL says this is a compromise because players who want to kneel can now stay in the locker room during the anthem, though the NFL Players Association said in a statement

that they were not consulted about the new policy at all. Is that a compromise? Do you feel warm and fuzzy about this compromise? So first of all, that Fox & Friends interview that aired this morning was taped yesterday. And also during that Fox & Friends interview, Donald Trump was like, the North Korea summit's probably happening. So by now, he might have totally changed his mind about that. Secondly, you know, apart from...

First of all, if I played in the NFL and they were like, you can just kind of hang out in the locker room for longer, I'd be like, sweet. I'm going to hang out in the locker room for as long as possible. But third, this might be an unpopular opinion, but I think football's bad. I think football's a bad sport. I think football is a bad sport. It has a long history of excusing and enabling domestic abusers. It hurts the players.

CTE is a huge problem that the NFL has worked to obscure. People all the way from high school level through college and pro football have major brain damage from playing this sport. I think that in the future we will look back on NFL fandom in the

same way that when we watch Mad Men episodes, we see Betty Draper smoking when she's pregnant and think, holy fuck, they did that back then. They did that back then. I think that football should be on its way out. I think that this is an expression of how outdated and ridiculous a sport it is. And I say good riddance. Okay, okay.

Tommy? I mean, the idea that sports are something not political is just ridiculous. I mean, like Jackie Robinson breaking the color barrier was political. David Ortiz coming out after the Boston bombing and saying, this is our fucking city was a political statement. This is just a political statement that some people don't like. And it's very frustrating because the media and the way we talk about it has allowed the underpinning of what Colin Kaepernick

and these players were actually protesting to be completely lost and completely twisted. They were protesting the fact that many, many African-American men were getting shot by cops. You know, Stephon Clark in Sacramento, Mike Brown, Eric Garner, Freddie Gray, Sterling, all these people were killed by police. That was the protest. And for voicing concern about something that I think should concern all of us, he was blackballed from the NFL. He's going to win a case against the NFL probably to show that everyone thought

he could start on an NFL team but they kept him off because he was seen as too politically charged. And it's just wrong. Yeah, and look applause applause We have a long history of protest in this country

around civil rights and when people are driven to protest and to do and to kneel like some of these players are in the game, they don't do it because they like the attention that comes with it. Colin Kaepernick and all these players that are kneeling, that's tough for them. It's tough to be around their fellow teammates.

It's just, it's not easy. It comes with a lot of criticism. And the reason that people protest is because they've tried a lot of other avenues to try to enact change, and those avenues were closed off to them. And so if're a celebrity if you're someone of notoriety and you decide that i'm going to use this and by the way like the fact that everyone's offended by it it is kneeling for five minutes quietly and then they go back to playing the game and nothing else

happens like the idea that that is something that is so outrageous that we can't as a society that we're not strong enough to tolerate that even if we disagree with it. And that the NFL thinks that they're... Applaud that. That the NFL has so little regard for its fans or for the people watching that they need to kind of keep this out of their faces. I mean, what the NFL has done is turn something that could have been something that was just a part of the game that some people debated, some people liked,

some people didn't like, just a part of what was going on. It turned it into this massive controversy that has made the idea of the protest so much more salient for people, such a bigger part of the experience of the game. You see people talking about it constantly, all because they just didn't allow this

to just be part of what people saw during a football game. Right. I think the NFL really shot itself in the dick with this. Because here's what's going to happen. The rule now is that you can be out on the field and you can stand for the national anthem. There are plenty of ways to protest while you're standing. And now it's going to become a thing that people try to work around. And one of the things that is also really frustrating for me,

and John, you mentioned this, is that the idea of the allegedly pro-freedom party, the Republican Party suddenly coming out against speech in many ways, or trying to police speech in arenas that they want people to agree with. So, you know, we have the NFL. They also try to police the speech of doctors when it comes to abortion care, or when they try to tell, try to force doctors to tell people medically inaccurate information before abortion in many states. And so they're fine with policing speech and they love freedom as long as freedom means

you're free to express exactly what they want you to express. Last thing about the NFL. Yeah. Donald Trump has started calling totally made up allegations that the FBI spied on his campaign Spygate. And that is our thing.

We invented fucking Spygate. his campaign, Spygate. And that is our thing. We invented fucking Spygate. We pioneered Spygate. If he's too stupid to know that Spygate is a thing, that is troubling on a whole other level. Well, we should just end this with, at least one NFL executive, Jets chairman Chris Johnson, said he will pay the fines of players who want to protest.

So, if the fucking Jets can do that, looking at you, Bob Craft, step up. Yeah. All right. And now? Now for a game we call OK Stop. All right. Here's how it works. We roll a clip.

We can stop it whenever we want by saying, okay, stop. If you have a television and a deep desire to feel the pain, you've heard of a channel called Fox News. And on that channel, there is a show called The Five. It is for the five IQ points you lose every time you watch it. It's like Fox and Friends without that charm and charisma. Earlier this week, the NFL imposed a new fine on players who kneel, and The Five was all over it.

Let's roll the clip. The NFL adopting new rules today to deal with this controversial issue. Teams can now be fined if players decide to take a knee and don't show respect for the flag. So this is a story we covered all week. Okay, stop.

Protest and free speech is the ultimate way to show respect for the country that you live in. I think expressing yourself freely... That's it. Now the NFL is gearing up for next year, and Pete, they're trying to get ahead of this. How do you think they came down?

Political expression is no different to me than the celebration excess that you see there. Both that you should be penalized for unsportsmanlike conduct. And so celebration excess is unsportsmanlike. Introducing politics into penalized for unsportsmanlike conduct. And so celebration excess is unsportsmanlike. Introducing politics into a game is unsportsmanlike. Whenever someone says there shouldn't be politics in this space, what that means is this space is for my politics, where I am totally comfortable and not challenged.

Because you know what? It's very political to have fighter jets with red, white, and blue smoke following flying over the stadium. That's very political. The national anthem is a political statement. It's one I agree with. I'm glad they do it. But it is politics.

When someone says they want to get politics out of football, I want to get politics out of comedy, get politics off my television, what they're saying is, I like the status quo. The status quo is so good to me that if you are challenging it in a place where I don't want to be challenged, you're introducing politics.

It's a defense of the politics of the status quo. It's a sport, so it's unsportsmanlike. Like, imagine if our viewers turned on the five, and instead of doing political conversation, we were throwing the ball around for an hour. Okay, stop. That would be a massive improvement. Do it. Do it. Do it. I would love to see Greg Gutfeld try to throw. Honestly, half their viewers would not notice. For a lot of people, the five is what you put on

when you're switching out the oxygen tank. The five is on. Too real. Gotta swap these bad boys out. Get some fresh air in these lungs. So I'm good and pumped for Hannity. They be. That's no different than turning on NFL and having somebody introduce politics into something that is supposed to be enjoyable.

This is a very vague rule. It's written very vaguely. And it's written to punish players for using their First Amendment right. And let's be very clear. The flag is nothing without our constitution and the first amendment to that constitution, the freedom of speech. If you work for a private company, you know it is about the flag. I mean, so it is about the flag. I thought it was about police brutality, but I guess it is about the flag. No, it's about the first amendment. Kimberly and I can't come here and wear t-shirts that have like a bad word written on them. Okay, stop. Please wear t-shirts that have a bad word

written on them. Please wear a t-shirt with a bad word written on it. It'd be great. I bet a bad word to the people on the five is crap. Company policy. But it would be my first amendment right to walk around in the street with it.

I agree. I like that they're tiptoeing around something, which is, huh, I've ceded a lot of my freedom of expression to this company I work for. It's almost like Fox doesn't let me say what's on my mind. And I think it's good. Huh. What? How is it?

Taking a knee before this whole controversy was a sign of reverence. Jesus took a knee in the Garden of Gethsemane. Jesus! Don't bring Jesus! Don't pretend like they were tailgating. I'm sorry, we should have made this clear. There is a rule on the Five. A black person is not allowed to finish a sentence. That's just a rule that they have. It's been long-standing.

It's a corporate policy. This is the part where I think the dialogue's really moving forward. Yeah, it's really advancing. Are you really going to do that? It should have been out in front of a police station. Yes. If that's the case, why kneel in front of a flag? He is so disrespectful to this entire conversation that he can barely remain in his seat.

He's halfway on the fucking floor. Greg Gutfield is the most pompous asshole on the entire network. Hey, hey, hey, you're saying something. You're talking about the next White House Chief of Staff, right? Sorry, you're right. When the coach is talking to the players, does everybody take a knee so you can hear me and hear me talking to you? It is a sign of reverence. I actually respect that way you're going with this,

because it's so clever. Okay, stop. I just want to point out that Kimberly Guilfoyle has said very little during this entire segment, and I think it's because she's remembered to be dating Don Jr. Yeah. I think she's just sitting there being like, what is my life?

What have my choices been? You don't think she's like, I'm so lucky right now. So lucky. No. We're going to have to end it there. Well, that was wonderful. That show sucks.

That was wonderful. I think they solved it. Okay. We're going to have our Under the Radar segment where everyone goes around and mentions the most important story that we did not cover. Tommy, let's start with you. Thank you, John. A couple months ago in Italy, there were two populist parties that won an election. And recently they were able to get

closer to establishing a government that would be the most anti-establishment fascist far-right party since Mussolini. And they ran on attacking immigrants and attacking the European Union and sort of blowing up the status quo. And this is sort of a trend that is troubling in Europe because the economies are fragile, the EU is fragile. It follows on like Poland and Hungary and some other places that have really gone in an authoritarian direction.

And so, you know, obviously there's a troubling history of fascism in Italy. And some of the like worst people in Europe, like Marine Le Pen in France, Nigel Farage in the UK, Steve Bannon in whatever dumpster he is currently living in. We're cheerleading this because they view this as, like, the beginning of the end of the EU.

And it's a real problem because normally the United States would be trying to hold things together and, you know, talking to the parties and trying to, like, keep together these international systems that have kept peace since World War II. But Trump is kind of into the burn it all down vibe, and he probably won't. And so we're pushing away allies like the French and the Germans when we ditch the Iran deal, and we are sitting idly by while Europe takes these frightening turns to the right. And it's a real

problem and it's something that is a long term challenge that's just not being worked on. So that's uplifting. Watch out for that. Check on that pod every once in a while. Bedtime stories with Tommy. We went over

like, alright, under the radar, who's got what story? Tommy emails, he's like, I'm going to talk about the rise of fascism in Europe. Europe's at a slow boil. I like what I like, John. Erin, what do you got? So the Senate has passed legislation advancing reforms in the way that they handle sexual harassment cases among members of, among lawmakers. What it used to be was that if you were somebody who was sexually harassed or discriminated against,

you had to wait for 30 days for a cooling off period. So you could just sit and be like, was I really harassed? Are you really still mad? Is it, was it that bad? It wasn't that bad. It was fine.

And then you had to do three months of mediation and you had, and then after that, if the person who you allege harassed you was found guilty, then the U S treasury would pay for the settlement basically. Um, now the Senate has passed a law where lawmakers will have to pay out of their own pockets. If, if, if so, so they'll have to pay out of their own pockets if it was sexual harassment. So if you're discriminated against for another reason, or you're discriminated against and it wasn't harassing, you just didn't get promoted because of who you were instead of you got your ass slapped because of who you were, then the U.S. Treasury still pays for it.

They also changed the mediation and the cooling off period and stuff. So there are still people. So the Senate version of this bill is an echo of something that passed in the House in February. And the House version of the bill is a lot stronger. It has the U.S. treasury completely out of the picture when it comes to covering harassment. Yeah, the Senate bill is people are kind of pissed about it. So what's going to happen now is it's going to get sent back to the House. They're going to have to reconcile the differences between the two bills and hopefully sign the most obvious piece of legislation. Donald Trump will have a signing ceremony with plenty of women. Yeah, he'll have to.

I was going to say, he'll sign it with one of those pens that's like a female torso and like the plunger for the pen is where the head should be. That's how Donald Trump was signed. So, you know, but just a reminder, Texas former Texas lawmaker, Blake Farenthold, who resigned in disgrace. Special

guy. He still has not paid back the $84,000 that the taxpayers footed for his harassment settlement. So reminder. Now he's a lobbyist. Yeah. Well, he's getting sued. That's great. Yeah. Hey, Blake, pay up. Yeah. Pay up, Blake. John? Yeah. So the Supreme Court recently ruled against workers seeking to sue in a class action their employers because they have an arbitration clause in their contract. I think that this is a growing problem. More than half of non-unionized workers have an arbitration clause in their contracts. Also, as consumers, every person in this room who's engaging in some way with the economy

has signed many arbitration, forced arbitration clauses, whether it's with a cable company or a telephone company or a company providing you a service. We have all basically ceded a huge amount of our rights and our power to these private arbitration systems, as opposed to the courts where you traditionally could get redress. And that's especially problematic for harassment cases where, because they're secret and because you can't do it as a group, there's no way to know that you're not the first person and not the last person who was harassed

at work, or not the first person, not the last person to be discriminated against and what have you. As consumers, as individuals, it seems as though we simply do not have the power and we shouldn't pretend we have the power to stop this. We can make demands and all the rest, but every single person in here, myself included, has clicked yes on countless end-user license agreements. And a lot of people in here, I'm sure, have negotiated with their employers over salary and over benefits, but you'd rather get the benefit than have a fight over removing a clause

about arbitration from your contract. I think there's a lot of people who just say, oh, it'll probably work out. I mean, people are just being people. It's because our laws and our regulations have so empowered employers at the expense of employees across the economy and corporations at the expense of consumers across the economy and corporations at the expense of consumers

across the economy, we don't have a lot of authority. And I think getting those arbitration clauses out of these contracts, making it harder for them to use them, having Congress step in, is something that Democrats should be talking about more and more.

Yes, yes. So one thing that's gone under the radar is the fact that teachers have been on strike for better pay and better benefits. And it's been in states like West Virginia and Oklahoma and Arizona and North Carolina, so pretty red states. In some places, teachers are paid so little right now that they've had to move back in with their parents, they've had to apply for food stamps. In some school districts, the pay is so low

that the school district has been forced to recruit for teachers overseas because they're the only people who will accept pay that low. And the reason I know that is because one of my old teachers sent me that story, and a bunch of them are here tonight, and they're the only reason I'm up here. So, but the good news, the good news is, Democrats in Congress just proposed repealing

the Trump tax cut for the top 1%, and using the $100 billion for teacher raises and investments in schools all across the country, which is great. So, you know, for all the talk that Democrats are only anti-Trump and don't have any new ideas, this is a really strong idea that Senate and House Democrats are for, and hopefully every Democratic candidate running in 2018 will be behind as well.

So that's good. When we come back, we'll have our interview with Deval Patrick. He is a civil rights lawyer, author, and served as the governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts from 2007 to 2015, Milton's own Deval Patrick. Applause Awesome. We switched. We switched. Thank you. I'm far away, you know. I see.

So you ran on a positive, hopeful, optimistic message back in 2006. Those were the days. Those were the days. Those were the days. But look, I mean, in 2006, it was also a time where there was a lot of anger at George Bush. There was a lot of anger about the Iraq War, about Katrina. What kind of advice do you have today for politically engaged people

who are so angry by what Donald Trump is doing that they can barely see straight sometimes? How do you tell people to not let the anger consume them? Someone shouted, run for office. Well, everyone can't do that. But more people should. Sure, sure. So with the qualifier that I have only run for one office two times,

first of all, I think as a citizen, I want to vote for something, not just against something. And so I think, you know, it's not like I wasn't angry with George Bush and with much of the Republican agenda back then, nationally and here. It's not like I'm not angry today. But I think we have to offer a positive alternative as Democrats. I think we have to offer a positive vision. And it has to be not a vision that is about just a perfected critique of what's wrong with the other side but where we want to take people and not just where we want to take

Democrats but where we want to take Americans and that we all have a stake in that I also think I also think you have to and again I say this as a, you have to run willing to lose. And by that, I mean stand for something.

You know, this notion of trying to outsmart the electorate, you know, figure out what you think they want to hear, you know, figure out what you think they want to hear rather than figuring out what you actually believe and expressing that, at the same time being respectful of a different point of view because no party and no individual has a corner on all the best ideas. I think voters read a fraud every time, every time. And they know when they're being gamed. And most of us have kind of gotten used to grading people on who's playing the game better

so that when somebody comes along who feels more genuine, like Barack Obama, it just so sticks out. It's so unusual. How do you think Donald Trump fits into that? Because clearly he seems like a fraud, seems like he conned people. But at the same time, I think a lot of people saw him. There was some genuineness to his bullshit, right? to his bullshit, right? What do you... Well, there was one... Don't throw anything.

I think there was one truth that candidate Trump spoke. And that was that establishment or conventional politics wasn't working well enough for a whole lot of people. By the way, Bernie spoke a similar... I mean, Senator Sanders spoke a similar truth.

And I think that what followed from candidate Trump's truth was a lot of lies. But I think that what, you know, if all we do is run down him and his campaign and stop, then it implied that all we had to do was get rid of him and we could keep on doing what we had been doing. But even President Obama, leaving office, made that point, that conventional politics needed to change, needed to adjust, in order to reach all these people who felt like they hadn't been seen or heard. And I think, you know, he wasn't, he wasn't, I didn't believe him, candidate Trump,

but the point had a kernel of truth. I think it still does. Do you think Democrats have adjusted based on that? Because when you say that there's a kernel of truth that the establishment was failing in some way i mean you're talking about the establishment democratic party you're talking about the apparatus of the democratic party and the policies it was advocating and the candidates it was putting forward have we changed are we speaking to those problems now or will we look back at this moment when we all feel energized we all feel enthusiastic that we still didn't get it we still weren't bold enough we still weren't attacking the problems with the kind of policies that would actually make a difference for people. John, I can tell you what I'm worried about,

and I'm reluctant to talk about Democrats as a... A blob. As a blob. I think that, you know, we... We think of ourselves here in Massachusetts as, or we are thought of, as a reliably blue state. In fact, we are, yeah, I mean, yeah, go ahead. In fact, there are more unenrolled independents in Massachusetts

than there are registered Democrats and registered Republicans combined. and registered Republicans combined. We have had, you know, we've had 16 years of Republican governors before me. We have a Republican governor now. Well, no, wait a minute, wait a minute, hold on, hold on. Where I'm going with this is that I think we, in this state, we are more discerning. I think, frankly, folks are more discerning than we sometimes give them credit. And I am concerned that we aren't listening closely enough.

We aren't patient enough with people who, I I guess where I'm going is I think the dynamic here I felt as a candidate and frankly as a governor is not so much Democrat Republican as insider outsider and I think that dynamic is at large nationally. So this notion that folks feel like they can't break in they can't get I, I mean, you know, there are a whole bunch of new candidates who are feeling this way, that it's hard to break in. There are lots of volunteers who come to campaigns or come to politics who feel like it's hard to break in. They want to participate. finding their ways in through other means, like Pod Save America, frankly, and all these other marvelous movements where folks are feeling their way to being more engaged, and I think that's incredibly exciting and important,

and I think in our politics, in our establishment politics, we have to figure out how to do that better, too. Thank you. our politics and our establishment politics we have to figure out how to do that better too a few weeks ago you told an audience that the woke need to make room for the still waking i thought that was a great line what what did you mean by that and do you think do you think we're doing that today so first of all it's not's not my line. I wish it were. Okay. But I heard that line in a speech at the first Obama Foundation Summit last fall. But it's an incredible,

I thought a particularly important idea because, you know, there are a lot of woke. But there are people who are at different stages on their journey, people who aren't as far along, who are still, as the speaker said, still waking. And I think the moment suggests we could actually build a coalition of the woke and the waking that could make some profoundly important change and recapture, I think, or reinvent the character of the country we want. And the character of the country is what's at stake right now. The character

of the country is what's at stake right now. And while I think that character should be generous and giving and broad and inclusive, I think there are people at different stages of that. And so I think we have to leave room for people who are at different stages of that and bring them along. And, you know, I'm at different stages of that, and I want to be brought along. I want people to show me and teach me what I don't yet know. What's an example of that?

The reason I say this is because I agree with the sentiment, but who are we talking about reaching who we disagree with or who has views we would say are wrong? What are we trying to get at? I'm not saying they're wrong, for example. But, you know, for example, I went, I spent three days or so before the election down in Alabama with Doug Jones. And it was so much fun. And I was in places I had spent time in before, in Selma and in Birmingham mainly. Actually, going back to my days with litigating against Jeff Sessions,

way back when. Yeah. Yes, indeed. And so one of my assignments on the Sunday I was there was to get around to some of the black churches. And I like church. You know, I'm a man of faith. I know something about the politics in that part of the world and in some of those communities.

And they often come right down to race and religion. It's too much to call it a subtext because it's right on the surface. And for some folks being a democrat in some of those communities is viewed as not being consistent with being a Christian. Because folks talk about Democrats being pro-abortion, which, by the way, is not the same thing as being pro-choice. It's not the same thing.

And so, you know, you're in these pulpits, and they give you a little time, and I would talk about my own faith, and I would talk about a story, a particularly favorite story of mine from the end of the fourth gospel, where you don't want me to get into all this, but anyway, we're... Is it about Passover? But anyway, but it has to do with a lesson where Christ is talking about feeding his sheep. And it really is a story

about the importance of, if you are a Christian, of paying attention to your neighbor. That that is the charge of Christianity. That is the charge of faith. And so my point was, in my case, my personal case, I'm a Democrat because I'm a Christian. I think we have to be willing to have that conversation. And that doesn't mean that if you are not a person of faith or you're not a person of my faith, that there isn't a place for you in the Democratic Party. But it seems to me that we as Democrats have to be a little less

squishy about the language of faith, because that is our language as Democrats. That's all I'm saying. When you won your first gubernatorial election, you were just the second African-American governor we've elected since Reconstruction in this country. Democrats in Georgia nominated Stacey Abrams this past week. Democrats in Georgia nominated Stacey Abrams this past week. Who, you know, if she wins the general election,

she'll be the first female African-American governor in the United States in history. Obviously, Georgia is tougher than Massachusetts for any Democrat, but what advice do you have for Stacey Abrams? Well, she's amazing. She's been doing terrific work. I've been following the race, and I can't be too involved because of the SEC rules and the work I do now,

but I'm incredibly proud of her and impressed. And one of the things that has impressed me is that, you know, she's talking to Democrats everywhere. You know, she hasn't limited herself to the limiting advice that the experts give. She's going to Democrats in the places where Democrats are way outnumbered, you know, in rural communities, but where Democrats have not participated and so she's asking people who have checked out to check back in and that's enormously important frankly whether she wins or not whether she wins or not and as she's doing that she I think is finding that she's talking to others,

Democrats, non-Democrats, who have also checked out, and inviting them to check back in. Again, enormously important, and I think that's her path to victory. As you think about possibly 2020...

I see our time is up. Thank you all for coming. You don't have to announce anything here. But what is your thought process around that potential decision? What are you thinking about as you look towards the future? I can't believe you asked that. I can't believe you asked that.

I can't believe you asked that either. You're looking at politics, you're thinking about it, you've been in it, you know, you have a strong view about, you know, where this country should go.

Well, I know you both do because I listened to the pod. You've heard, right? Yeah. Now look, seriously, I'm focused on, I'm very focused on 2018. And I'm going to be, you know, consistent with my day job.

I'm going to try to be active in 2018. I've been asked by a number of candidates to come and help. And I'm going to try to carve out some time to do that. It was fun to be involved with Doug Jones's campaign. I'm going to try to be involved in other campaigns where, again, where I've been invited and where I can be helpful. And I think, you know, I think it's all hands on deck right now. And there are lots and lots of different ways to serve. So that's my focus in the near term. I think looking ahead to 2020, there are going to be a lot of great people in that field. And I'm

watching that too to see who comes in and how to be helpful. Okay. Well, we will cut that off by saying we are going to play a game now. Yes. And you've graciously volunteered to. Deval Patrick has agreed to stick around for a game. Tommy's going to come back out. Also, she's a former United States ambassador to the United Nations and is now the Ann Lynn Professor of the Practice of Global Leadership

and Public Policy at Harvard's Kennedy School. But most importantly, she's a Sox fan. Please welcome Samantha Power. Yeah. Sam, thank you for participating So excited to do this Listen, assholes Anticipating. So excited to do this. Listen, mass holes. Oh, get ready.

You dump some Dunkin' to the harbor. Harbor? You bastard. All right. I'm going to try it again. You dump some Dunkin' Donuts into the harbor 200 years ago, and you've been coasting on it ever since. I wrote that for him. He didn't want to. And who can forget the time you saw a shirtless beefcake

do a magazine photo spread and were so impressed that you chose him to replace Ted Kennedy? I welcome your hatred. You see, America needs your help, mass holes. And this can make up for pretending you aren't a little bit, just a little bit, uncomfortable with Tom Brady's whole vibe. I'm not saying you don't love him. But you don't have to love the vibe.

All right? We're all troubled a little bit, admit it, by the whole vibe. Here's the thing. You know what? I had a backup joke in case you booed. I was wrong. I told them you would, but you laughed.

They want the backup joke. Listen, every time Tom Brady goes to the Met Gala, he does. He hurts your reputation more than Bill Buckner ever did. There it is. That ball went through his legs like Ted Kennedy's Senate seat. Just brutal. The 2018 midterm elections are around the corner.

And New Hampshire's 1st District, New Hampshire's 2nd District, Maine's 2nd District, and New York's 1st District, New Hampshire's 2nd District, Maine's 2nd District, and New York's 19th District are all up for grabs come November, and we need motivated, overconfident, semi-drunk assholes from Cape Cod to the Berkshires

and Go Eaps to head out and knock on some doors. So we thought we'd highlight how Massachusetts can help take on Trump in a game we're calling, How Do You Like Dem Apples, Paul Ryan? Would someone out there like to play the game? Guys, we have Sarah Wick in the house to look for somebody in merch who's going to come out. Oh, I see an I'm fine shirt.

Sarah's new at this, so she picked someone very deep in the row. When Sarah's not doing this, she's running our company. She's the CLO of Cricket Media right there. Guys, give it up for Sarah Wick. She built an empire. Sarah went to school outside Boston. Cambridge, I think, right? You guys know where she went.

It's where Ted Cruz went. Boo. What are you booing? Hi, what's your name? I'm Christy. Christy.

And are you from Massachusetts? Yes. Where in Massachusetts? People's Republic of Cambridge. And are you ready to do what it takes to help take back the House? Hell yeah. Okay, so then you're perfect. Question number one.

While canvassing in Maine's second district against Republican Bruce Poliquin, an investment manager who just voted with Trump to cut $15 billion in children's health care, voted to repeal Obamacare, and voted for laws that deregulate Wall Street to benefit millionaires and billionaires, you're going to want to knock on a bunch of doors.

What's the best way to make a good impression with the quiet people of Maine? Is it A? Repeatedly ringing the doorbell and yelling, Yeah, buddy! While offering them a lukewarm keystone light through the peephole. Is it B? You ignore the doorbell and just scream,

Sweet Caroline! Bum, bum, bum! Through the mail slot and eagerly wait for them to reply with, ba, ba, ba. Is it C? Knock politely on the door and then

take a step backward, allowing them to see you with a smile and a clipboard. Or is it D? After they enter the door wearing a UMass shirt, you should yell, Zoom ass, baby!

Zoom ass! Before you ask if they want to see the shamrock tattoo you drew yourself. What do you think, Christy? So my parents retired to Maine, so I can tell you one of those is going to get you shot. Okay. Sorry, John. But I think of those is going to get you shot. Okay.

Sorry, John. But I think the answer is C. That's correct. One for one. Question number two. In New Hampshire's 1st District, Democrat Representative Shea Porter only won her last election by 1%.

Now that she's retiring, the seat is vulnerable for a Republican takeover, so when you knock on the door of someone who reveals themselves as a Trump supporter, what is the appropriate response? Is it A? Smile and say thank you for your time and walk away. Is it B?

Ask him if he wants to take this outside, and when he reminds you that you are already outside, you ask him if he wants to take this inside, because the Celtics game is on and you want to watch a team that lost their two all-stars still beat LeBron and go to the NBA Finals!

That's how you panda. That's good. Or is it C? Can I just say, how come I didn't get her car? Insult him, and then when he insults you back, just yell, you are, over and over again. Because there is no better comeback than you are. Or is it D? You let him know that you can't

waste your time trying to change his mind because that would be a project that took longer than the big dig. I mean, do you remember that shit? Jesus, what a mess. That's you though, buddy, because you're a difficult ass project. Got it? Pretty good joke, right? Go Sox.

Or is it E, walk away, but right when he stops watching you, you start filming him from across the yard so you can know all of his plays ahead of time? What are you booing? What are you booing? What are you booing? Are you booing me? Christy, we need an answer.

B. You know what? Sure. Yeah, why not? It's B. Yeah, okay. That is correct. Question three. In New Hampshire's 2nd District, Democratic Annie... I love that. I love that. Democrat Annie Custer, a champion of women's issues and a strong supporter of the Me Too movement,

needs our help to keep this heat blue. So when you're knocking on doors for her, what should you always bring with you? Is it A? As much as your oversized cargo shorts can fit in your oversized pockets. Is it B? Those flip-flops that have a bottle opener on the bottom.

Because you never know when you might stumble upon a freaking clutch rager in the woods. Is it C, an extra Wahlburger? Because this is the most walking you've done since 2004 when you flipped over that duck boat and had to hide out from the cops at Sully's Duplex in Bill Ricka. Or is it D, comfortable walking shoes, a pen, and a wicked good attitude? I think the answer would probably be Andy.

Sure. Sure, Christy. Final question. In New York's 19th District, Republican John Faso likes to say food stamps cause people to commit crimes and votes with Trump 90% of the time, so you're going to want to go volunteer against him. Why are mass holes the perfect volunteers for Democratic candidates? Is it A?

Because it's about time we start doing something meaningful between all the binge drinking, and honestly, our accents are incomprehensible and we can't really be of use anywhere else. Is it B? Because we need to make it up to America for introducing them to Mitt Romney and Scott Brown. Is it C? Because

we're relentless and determined and we don't mind annoying people to get things done. Or is it D? Because we may be rough around the edges, and we may be too loud for some folks, but we believe passionately in progressive policies, and we're going to work our asses off

to show that Yankees fan Donald Trump that he can't mess with the determined, motivated, proud working people of New England. Fuck the Yankees. That's what it says on the card. So, Christy. What do you think? What do you think?

You know, John, I've listened to you long enough. It's a trick question. The answer is E, all of the above. That's correct. Give it up for Christy, who's won the game. Boston, Massachusetts. In the coming weeks and months, you need to zip up those North Face jackets and help Democrats win in the New Hampshire 1st, New Hampshire 2nd,

Maine 2nd, and New York 19th. Thank you for playing How Do You Like Damn Apples, Paul Ryan. Thank you to Deval Patrick for being here and for being such a good sport. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. We'll be right back with Tommy and Eric's interview with Ambassador Sam Power. And we're back. Well, we're with someone who needs no introduction. She's the former United States Ambassador to the United Nations. She's a huge Sox fan.

She's our friend from way back and a huge Sox fan, so thank you again for being here. Delighted. Sox are down 6-0 when I last checked. Alas, but still in first place no matter what happens tonight. 6-1. That's a great live update. So just to start off on something light, So just to start off on something light, Ambassador Power, let's say American diplomacy is a car. How long can we just take our hands off the wheel before we careen into a canyon? Well, this car, do you happen to remember the Yugos? Yes. Yes, yeah.

That's the car that's being driven at present, and it's sort of sputtering along. It had a lot of fuel in the tank, I think, when we handed over on January 20th, and it's now, you know, in the sub-red zone. I think the truth is that stepping away from all the things that are in our interest to remain a part of, like the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Iran nuclear deal, it's actually in our interest to prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon. That's more in our interest than it is to just gratuitously sanction Iran with no specific objective in mind associated with those sanctions

like sanctions are fine, the Iranian regime is terrible clearly, regionally, in terms of its support for terrorism internally, in terms of its repression of its citizens but to walk away from something that's actually in our interest and replace it with nothing is of course course, not in our interests. The climate agreement, you know, which we spent years negotiating initially with China in a kind of bilateral way and then broadening it out. As you've noticed, the planet is melting. Flood insurance is going up across American cities.

I mean, consumers, Americans who have it tough. I mean, some of the very people who voted for Donald Trump are the people paying these higher premiums now. It's actually hitting home for us. So pulling out of all those things, not only are we not advancing the interests that each of those specific agreements actually promote, but we're pissing everybody off

and when you piss everybody off and then you turn to them and you say excuse me we'd like your help on this over here diplomacy is very human it's just a bunch of people and they have people's reactions and when you've offended them when you've lied to them, when you've ignored them

when you've trampled on something that you've built together, when you've insulted them publicly, you are some of our closest allies, when as Tommy mentioned earlier you make decisions about a very large country that has nuclear weapons, North Korea, without informing them when they have the name that shares one of the two words with North Korea, namely South Korea. They find out about it through the press that the summit is being pulled down. This is not, I mean, again, diplomacy is not an end in itself. Diplomacy is a way to get things that we need and that we want and that we believe advance the interests of the people in this audience and all across the country.

And that car is running on empty. And again, it was a Yugo to begin with because it was Donald Trump's car. So I guess just to rephrase, what's the difference, what's the space between where we are right now and where the point of irreparability is? Well, we were having such a nice light evening

saying fuck the Yankees, and now we're here. No, that is serious. But we can come back to... Seriously fuck the Yankees. Yeah. I think the biggest... So, this is a horrible caveat,

but provided we can avoid nuclear war with North Korea. So let's just put that to one side for the sake of argument. And what would be seen everywhere and which would be a self-inflicted conflict with Iran. So let's put both of those to one side. The biggest game changer about the current moment in answer to your question is the China factor I know there are so many young people out in the audience and just to orient everybody about

the colossus that is bestriding the earth and that will be with us for our lifetimes and that will change the world as we know it and the way the world is organized. That's China. And just to give you one little hint of this, this statistic really sticks in my mind. Between 2011 and 2013, China produced and used more cement than the United States did in the entire 20th century, right? In 10 to 15 years, China is going to surpass us as the world's most potent economic power.

But that's not all. China's model is a very, very different model, and they're advertising it very explicitly as an alternative model to the U.S. model. So they're not taking it for granted that, you know, democracy is just going to continue to spread around the world. They. model. So they're not taking it for granted that, you know, democracy is just going to continue to spread around the world. They like their model better. They want to censor the internet. They want to use, they don't want, they're not like Russia. They're not a revisionist

power that wants to destroy the, you know, the rules of the road because they're not benefiting from those rules. They want to shape the rules in the direction that is in their interest, which means not butting into anybody's internal affairs. We tried that. That's what got us the Second World War, basically. That's what got us. I mean, there's a reason we have chipped away at absolute understandings of sovereignty, and it's because the way governments treat their people tends to have really profound

effects also on the regions that they inhabit and on the rest of the world, and it's because the way governments treat their people tends to have really profound effects also on the regions that they inhabit and on the rest of the world, and it can lead to much bigger conflicts if you don't try to influence things sooner rather than later. China wants us to, it sounds very familiar to Donald Trump, but wants to sort of build a wall up along the borders of a lot of different countries where nobody's really prying in. That's what they say. But then what are they doing? They're bringing their cash in,

they're bringing their bulldozers in, they're bringing their workers in, and they're having profound effects on the internal affairs. But if they have their way and we recede, as we have done over the course of the last 18 months, they will rewrite the rules. And the rules that we have had a chance to write and the international order that we have shaped has not only benefited the rules and the rules that we have had a chance to write and the international order

that we have shaped has not only benefited the rest of the world and brought about you know unprecedented prosperity and helped you know lift millions and billions of people out of poverty but it's benefited us and when someone else writes the rules chances are they're not writing those rules with with us in mind with the American people in mind. So that's a long-winded way of saying, I think that the China rise was happening. I mean, this is not, there are many things we can put at the doorstep of Donald Trump. China's rise is not one of them.

But by stepping away from the Paris Agreement, by handing over the renewables industry, the energy industry, and basically saying, go at it, China. By leaving the Trans-Pacific Partnership, from which China was included, we've now allowed China to build its own trade partnership, which it's in the midst of negotiating, which accounts for a huge share of the global GDP,

and which leaves us on the outs. So having said all that, I know from having been at the UN, when something happens, when you have an Ebola, or when ISIS begins to take over vast swaths of territory, and I think this is still true, I'm sure this is still true today, even 18 months into the Trump administration,

people aren't waiting to hear what the Chinese ambassador has to say. China is not yet flexing its muscles globally. It's doing so regionally, and it has ambitions to do so globally. But there's still a window, and I think the way to think about that window is what are the things that we as citizens, governors in this country,

mayors in this country, are doing on climate alongside an administration that is doing nothing and indeed still litigating the science that is long established. How are we building a record in a way of American leadership and American even diplomacy without having the support of our actual government? What kind of message are we sending in November to the rest of the world

when we repudiate at the ballot box with a colossal blue wave, when we repudiate the decisions that these people have made, which are destructive to us and destructive, again, to everything we believe in? So, I mean, we pulled out of the Iran deal. We are pulling back from these North Korea talks,

at least momentarily. But the underlying problems don't go away, right? I mean, Iran is still a malign actor and is still likely to start back up its nuclear program. North Korea still has 40, 50, 60 nuclear weapons, has an ICBM program. So the threat is still there. China was dragged kicking and screaming

to put sanctions on Iran. And thanks to Obama and you and Susan Rice and all these people who were leaning on them, they helped us and they put on these multilateral sanctions that squeezed them to the point where we got the Iran deal. They haven't really been all that helpful with North Korea incurbing their program. Do we think they just don't share our priorities

on those security threats? Like, if we step away and allow this to exist in a vacuum, does the rest of the world care about nonproliferation and some of the things that we view as our number one priority globally? I think if you, certainly if you ask President Xi, now emperor for life, he has the title that Donald Trump desperately wants for himself.

But if you ask President Xi, and I think even, you know, sort of offline, not that anybody has ever spoken to him offline, give it to me straight on the nuclear weapons thing. I think his absolute preference is for them not to have nuclear weapons. I mean, until Trump, frankly, the occurrence of the summit has had this very unfortunate, or now it's been pulled down, but the scheduling of the summit and the warming between South Korea and North Korea

and the apparent relative warming between the United States and North Korea had the very unfortunate effect of driving China and North Korea into the kind of relationship that many people sort of thought they still had, but that had ceased to exist over the course of the that many people sort of thought they still had, but that had ceased to exist over the course of the last four years. Basically, since Kim Jong-un took office, there hadn't even been a meeting between the two heads of state. So that negative relationship, you know, sort of almost unprecedentedly negative since the Korean War was something that really troubled China. And so if you combine, you know, a demonstrably unstable, ruthless leader who then has assassinated, you know, as you've pointed out, I think on your show, using, you know, anti-aircraft weapons, the one person in the inner circle who's close to China and who's seen to be somebody who has that channel kind of covered,

that man is then assassinated as one of the first moves by this young, unstable dictator. You have almost no channels of communication. You ask them not to test at the time of the Chinese New Year and they just deliberately do a nuclear test basically to ruin your holiday. I mean, that is what the relationship between China and North Korea was. So,

they don't want North Korea to have nuclear weapons. They hate it and that's why the Chinese ambassador and President Xi was sort of himself redlining the text that we got through the Security Council. We put in place the toughest sanctions against any country in more than 20 years against North Korea, and we couldn't do that without China's support. However,

they care more about the risk of state failure and the prospect of millions of North Koreans coming across the border the prospect if that happened then of the 23,000 US troops are in the Republic of Korea coming up prospect then it's the worst of all world North Koreans coming across the border Americans at the border like that was what they tried to prevent in the first place back in the Korean War so it's it's sort of like they have a mattering map and atop the mattering map right is their regional status and is stability and so where we've struggled is you know them actually putting in place those

sanctions and enforcing them and really you know turning up the heat and turning up the pressure yeah i think one of the things and you know in the show we don't always say the good things that the trump administration has done, clearly, because there aren't that many, and one runs out of them very quickly, but I do think Trump did two important things early on, by accident I'm sure. But the first was just the absolute prioritization of this issue, just making it clear, no kidding. And this was because President Obama, in their little, what must have been a deeply unpleasant meeting, for the handover, President Obama said, like, if you hear nothing else, and knowing that he could hear presumably

only one thing, hear this, North Korea, major issue, this is the thing that's going to consume you. And the second thing is being prepared to follow through on secondary sanctions against Chinese companies that were violating the sanctions that we had put in place. So the long and short of it is now is where do you go? The underlying issues haven't been dealt with. One good thing that, again, may have a lot to do with the fact that the Republic of Korea, South Korea, is so frightened by Trump's tweets, Trump's instability, but also have to do with the pre-existing preferences of the president, of the new president of South Korea, there

are now channels between South and North that didn't exist before. Now that was something that president was going to do no matter what, but that has been hastened by such a concern about the risk of some kind of crazy escalation that led to war. As insane as things feel to us,

day to day because of the tweets, because of the corruption and all the bullshit, there hasn't actually been a major international crisis that required global US leadership to manage. I'm thinking of the financial crisis, the Fukushima disaster, Ebola. Is there something on the horizon that you see that makes you nervous or are things calmed down a little bit from when we stepped in the door? Well, I mean, to some extent, what's sad, very sad about

the current moment, and this has been a trend again that predated trump is that you know there's this phenomenon of psychic numbing i mean we're numb to the extent to which conflict is raging around i mean you know there are 67 million people displaced more than since world war ii 67 million i mean every one of those people is a person who had a home and now doesn't have a home either because they're refugees and they've crossed a border or because they're running around their own country, you know, ducking terrorists or their government or whatever or, you know, drought because of the, you know, climate change. So that level of displacement,

the Syrian war, you know, just raging, the brutality of it, the Yemen war, which we continue to abet, backing a coalition that cannot shoot straight and doesn't care about human consequences. And Afghanistan, I mean, you could just go on and on and on. Progress has been made against ISIS. That's very important. just to tweak the question a little bit, there's the sort of steady state shit show. Yeah. You know, it's something we can't look past. And what's tragic about, you know, the last 18 months is that there's been no diplomatic effort,

you know, really of any kind on any of the things that I've just mentioned. And again, I could give Boko Haram, you know, like the list goes on and on and on. I mean, parts of our world are burning and there's like no firefighter right now. Now, Pompeo is showing more energy. It wouldn't take much.

He has a heartbeat. He has a pulse, which, you know, is a contrast. But he's also expressing, I think, importantly, respect for the Foreign Service. He said today, I think, or in the last couple days, there is no deep state already in tension with the president who's attacking the diplomats who are trying to make our world more stable

and advance American interests around the world. So I think there's that. Then the thing I would point to, though, because it could be a perfect storm if you have all of that, and then a crisis that China's not yet in a position to or doesn't have the muscle memory, wouldn't even kind of think to put itself forward to manage, and this administration would presumably run away from

or try to build a wall around. you know you mentioned ebola there is now an ebola outbreak in the democratic republic of congo it's modestly sized so far but that's unfortunately by definition how they all start uh 60 infections so far i think 27 or 30 people have died. Democratic Republic of Congo, as you may know from your geography classes, borders, I think, nine countries. So the ability for it to go from there to a lot of other places in a hurry is great. And people move. And that's the biggest challenge. So at the very time that this outbreak was declared by the World Health Organization, the Trump administration decided to demand basically that the 250 million that we have in reserve from the last Ebola response, which President Obama led heroically,

putting troops and health workers into harm's way when the politics wanted nothing to do with that, including even by Democrats. But Trump decided to ask for that money back and didn't want it to live in this Ebola account. And now what you have is a major funding shortfall for the WHO as they seek to deal with this. But I just, I can't imagine the meetings in the Situation Room. You know, Trump was a person when Obama was doing the right thing and leading the world and ending an epidemic that scientists thought would infect 1.4 million people

within six months of when it first really sort of announced itself on the global stage, 1.4 million. And Obama said, if we don't deal with it there, it's going to come here. And it came here, you came here in very small numbers, but putting, defying the politics, effectively defying both parties out of the recognition that we are connected and that you can't build walls in what was then 2014,

and you certainly can't build walls in 2018 and expect to be able to fulfill your duties as commander-in-chief. But at that time, Trump was the one tweeting, saying, you know, if an American goes over there and saves those lives, you know, they should just stay there, you know. And had that perspective been the one embraced by the United States, not only would you have seen whole countries or swaths of countries disappear, but you'd have had many more deaths in the United States

and in other Western countries. So you've watched a lot of what you worked for, and not to go dark, but you've watched a lot of what you worked for. I think we're already there. I mean, not to go darker. I mean, we're kind of in Thanos territory right now. I don't know if you've seen Avengers Infinity War, but we're in Thanos territory. You've watched a lot of what you've worked for be systematically undone by people who

are kind of careless and messy about the ways that they're undoing it. All they really want to do is undo everything that Obama has done to own the lips, basically. But yet, you're still here. You're still public. You're still talking about this. How do you do it? What makes you optimistic about what is happening right now? What makes you keep going? Well, first, I start with the premise that everything we did and tried to do, even the things we didn't do well or didn't succeed at, like Syria, like the investment we made in diplomacy in Syria, that was all worth doing because, you know, but for, what was it, 78,000 votes in three states, but for Jim Comey, but for Putin,

all those things would still be in place. I mean, it was a very, it's like whatever the expression is about the butterfly, the butterfly's wings. If the butterfly were made of shit. But I guess people are asking, I don't know, Tom, if you find this too, but more and more, like, how does it feel to have Obama's legacy dismantled?

Like, legacy? Like, I care about the fact that our planet is boiling, and I have kids, and I want them, I mean, I want them to live in a safe and secure world. I care about Iran not having a nuclear weapon. Like, we actually meant it. We didn't do these things for Obama's legacy. And so right now, that's part of my answer is it's not about us, right?

It's about our common security and our common humanity and how we promote it and you know before we landed at some of the things that are being dismantled we tried a lot of other things first like we had those conversations in the situation room about what to do about iran racing to a nuclear weapon you know and the military options are not attractive options to say the least, right? We've looked inside the toolbox and there's a reason that a bunch of people who I think were trying to do the right thing for the right reasons, right? We weren't out for profit,

we didn't have corporate motives, we were just looking at the problem and trying to wrap our minds around really, really hard problems, some of which predated us, some of which landed while we were there. And again, like we were not perfect and we didn't have crystal balls and we couldn't see what was coming and there are fair questions about what we might have done differently. But if it was that hard with that set of motives and with that set of experienced, thoughtful people who spoke languages and had been around the world and had been involved in these negotiations before,

it's a hell of a lot harder when you're firing all your diplomats or they're vacating the premises, and it's not clear always that your motivations are about actually solving the problem. But the better answer, I think, to your question in terms of hope and where we can find hope, like I find hope in the fact that a bunch of the diplomats who are fleeing the State Department have gone back to where they went to high school and are running for office. That 25,000 women, or whatever the latest number is, are running for office at all levels.

And that November is actually not that far away, and we are about to not only finally retrieve a powerful check and balance on what the president is doing and also with the capacity potentially especially if we have both houses but even if we just have one to set the agenda and to force them to answer because one of the features

of this first two years, first 18 months and will be two years is the impunity they feel and in America when you do the wrong thing, we have checks and balances for reasons. Like, that's what the founders and the framers were up to. No impunity in this country. We have a rule of law. You don't get to make the rules up. We have rules that apply to everybody and should apply to everybody equally. And that's what's at stake in November. And people are owning the importance, I think, of this moment.

Ambassador Power, thank you for all you did for Obama, for being here tonight. Thank you. Mic drop. Boston, we love you thank you so much for coming out we appreciate you so much We'll be right back. Thank you.