Pod Save America - "Big Liddle’ Lies." (LIVE from Portland!)

Episode Date: September 29, 2019

House Democrats get moving on an impeachment strategy as a cascade of news reports sheds light on even more potentially impeachable behavior by President Trump and his goon squad. Student climate activist Ella Shriner joins Jon, Jon, Tommy, Dan and Shawna Thomas of Vice News on stage in Portland, Oregon. 

What's up Portland? Welcome to Pod Save America, I'm Jon Favreau. I'm Shawna Thomas from Vice News. I'm Jon Lovett. I'm Tommy G. Thorpe. I'm Dan Pfeiffer. I'm Tom Zethor. I'm Dan Piper.

We were road testing Dan Tifa backstage. We'll try it out. We'll see how it goes. We'll check in in a couple minutes. Later in the show, I'll talk to a high school senior and climate activist who helped organize last week's climate strike here in Portland. Ella Schreiner is here also an update we have now raised eight hundred and sixty eight thousand dollars for Fair Fight 2020 which is Stacey Abrams effort to help fight voter suppression what What is it? We have a couple more weeks, another month, to get to a million?

No. So let's get there early. We want it by Monday. Yeah, let's do it by Monday. If everyone here just, like, donates $10, we'll be good. Just go votesaveamerica.com slash fair fight. It's for Stacey Abrams. It's for Stacey Abrams.

Come on. And voting. Well, it's for voting. It's for votingacey Abrams. And voting. It's for voting. The president has every foreign country at his disposal to win the election. We have Stacey Abrams. We need to help her. Here's the thing, guys.

She's up against Ukraine, Russia. Do us a favor, though. Denmark's shitting the bed. They're not helping. Not pulling their weight. Yeah. Yeah, the autocracies, they're in the game. All right.

The finish are nowhere. Why those countries? They should be on our side. Yeah. Bernie Sanders said so. Anyway. You know, after last night's show in San Jose, I emailed everyone and I was like, I don't know how there's going to be, like, more news to talk about in Portland on Friday night.

And then I woke up. Today we learned that members of the House Intelligence Committee will skip a scheduled recess and begin impeachment hearings next week. Wow. I love it. Yay, constitutional crisis.

I mean, you were right. People are pumped about that. I told you. Yay, constitutional crisis. I mean, you were right. People are pumped about that. I told you. I told Chana. He was like, Portland's going to be crazy is what he said. So they've already subpoenaed Secretary of State Mike Pompeo for documents. Yeah, documents. Discovery.

They will be deposing multiple witnesses from the state department including the u.s envoy to ukraine kurt volker who just resigned tonight because of his role in the scandal well and and the asu student newspaper is the one who broke it yes so here's for journalism and journalism here's the college journalism yes broke. Broke the story. Meanwhile, Donald Trump is handling these developments with characteristic grace and calm. In the last 24 hours, he's threatened violence against White House officials and a CIA whistleblower. He's attacked Democrats as sick. He's attacked the media as scum. And he's assailed CNN for reporting on one of his tweets without using the proper punctuation.

So he's in a very good place. Definitely a guy who thinks that impeachment is going to be a political win for him. Shauna, we were joking last night that the best description of Trump's strategy came from Mother Jones' Tim Murphy, who tweeted, I didn't do it, I'm innocent, all the witnesses should die. It's Tim Murphy who tweeted, I didn't do it. I'm innocent. All the witnesses should die. How would you describe the White House strategy?

And do you see any potential holes in the strategy? Well, okay. So the White House strategy, which we've actually seen Republicans on the Hill start to carry out, is a couple of things. It's, number one, this isn't a big deal. Like, that's one thing or and or they had started off this week being like we haven't read anything about anything whatsoever and that's a little bit harder to carry out now but now i mean we saw kevin mccarthy basically say this is the thing they're going to impeach him over that it's not that big of a deal i think there's a lot of legal experts who have said this could be a very big deal. So that's a hard one to keep going.

And the other thing is change the subject, which they did pretty well in 2016 in terms of his campaign. Change the subject back to Joe Biden and talk about Hunter Biden and talk about something that has been debunked multiple times. But feed that to his base, put out a commercial about it, and then see what happens, basically. But try to deflect back to the Democrats. Does anyone see any holes in the strategy? Because, you know, a couple are the news that broke today, right?

We had a couple things. Trump is still doing all kinds of crimes. There was a New York Times story that Wayne LaPierre from the NRA had a meeting in the Oval Office with Donald Trump where he said that the NRA would contribute to Trump's legal defense and then said, also, by the way, you should stop with the gun legislation. So sort of a semi-bribe, maybe. You know.

So, sort of a semi-bribe, maybe. You know. Bribery. We also found out that the White House has also been restricting access to the president's calls with Vladimir Putin and MBS, Saudi Arabia. And then, of course, the Washington Post reported right before we got here. This is literally in the last two hours. Literally in the last two hours. reported right before we got here. This is literally in the last two hours.

Literally in the last two hours that when Trump met with a Russian ambassador in 2017, he said, by the way, I didn't mind the foreign interference because the United States says that too. So that's that. I mean, I think the holes in the strategy, putting his campaign aside and going back to the White House,

the holes in the strategy is that it is very clear that this whistleblower complaint is opening up lots and lots of other reporting. There's lots more to be dug into. That's going to keep happening. And they're going to keep having to answer all of these questions. But really, I mean, the thing is, they ignore a lot of the questions. Right. They do. And that is a strategy that in some ways has worked for them as well. But you're going to keep seeing all this stuff happen. Yeah.

I mean, the challenge of that strategy now, the way they've ignored the questions before is it has canceled the press briefing. Yeah. But now. Well, but Kellyanne Conway comes out into the driveway every day. And just shouts about something. I'm just saying. Yeah. Every day.

But what is different now, and this is relevant in what happened to Mike Pompeo, is the House Democrats, unlike the White House Press Corps, have subpoena power. And because we're now in the context of an impeachment investigation, those subpoenas have teeth. And so these people are actually going to have to answer questions under oath. I love it, yeah.

I will say, I didn't know this until earlier this afternoon. I have a new kink. Is it subpoenas? And it's the chairs of Democratic led House committees

threatening Republican officials in the administration with subpoenas that if they fail to honor will be additional impeachable offenses. So you're really into jerry nadler right now no no he's really i'm into the letter my type is the letter i'm attracted to the letter so i want to talk about the whistleblower the other the the one other part of the strategy is sort of attack the whistleblower, disqualify the whistleblower.

So the New York Times is taking some heat for publishing a fair number of details about this person's identity. Should they have done this, and how much danger is the whistleblower in? Dan, what do you think? I think the entire crux of this very important journalistic debate can be summed up in my New York Times push alerts from yesterday, which was 10.02, Trump threatened execution of whistleblower. 10.07, here's a roadmap to the whistleblower's house.

In all seriousness, I think there is a legitimate debate about the value of publishing information about this person. But the context in which they did it, I think, was very dangerous. And to do it literally within an hour of the president suggesting that the whistleblower and people who spoke to the whistleblower should be executed like spies is problematic and i don't think the times justify the reason was people should know but i think you need more than that well their reason was not just that people should know that like they should know some context of who this person that was the second what is the second reason

and and and his level of import his or her level of importance because i'm not sure we know if it's a woman or a man it's him okay his his level of importance into this story and i think you know i am interested what their internal conversations were like i'm interested in what their conversations with the government were like before they decided to do that because i find it hard to believe knowing what i know about news that they did not contact the cia about that before they did it but it is bolstering their the journalism that they're doing i also think that whistleblower the moment he sent that complaint over he knew that this that that it could lead to him being unmasked well so this is too big yes i think that is true although i think that should be

his call and i think there is a way to meet the standard the times went without being as specific as saying it is a person from the cia who is an expert in ukraine who is detailed to the white house which is like you could say some of that from the complaint but is an expert in Ukraine who was detailed to the White House. Which is, like, you could say But we learned some of that from the company. But you could say this is a career bureaucrat, this is a CIA employee. They made a decision to... Someone close with knowledge? Yes. I mean, they're like,

if they could have accomplished the goal they suggested, because everyone in Washington knew the information the New York Times had. They just wanted to be the first to publish it. And they knew they were opening a can of worms because they quoted Dean McKay, their executive editor, in the story about the decision to do it.

Now, since it was his newspaper, he could have had an answer that made logical sense, but he did not do that. Tommy, what did you think? I mean, they're going to default to publishing, and they're going to default to transparency, and they're going to default to transparency. And I understand that instinct.

And they're probably thinking that everyone in Washington has a sense of who this individual is. There's probably a lot of people who know this person by name, who've worked in government, who work in the Trump administration, who work in the CIA currently, who are probably not necessarily sympathetic to what he did. probably not necessarily sympathetic to what he did. But to just be first and to publish what we know about this individual,

knowing that pretty recently there was someone sending pipe bombs to people that were perceived as enemies of Trump, I think it's not a story that I would have felt the need to break personally if I were the New York Times. I don't know that it added a lot of value journalistically. And on top of that, on top of that, I thought Dean Baquet's explanation, it didn't really hold water.

It didn't really hold up to scrutiny. And he's someone I've worked with. I worked with him and his team during the WikiLeaks disclosures and I found them to be professional and you know I appreciated the interactions like the way they worked with us was it was reasonable in this instance like the New York Times team was very defensive about it on Twitter they were lashing back at critics like it wasn't it didn't feel like a decision that internally they all felt great about. Yeah, I could tell. So speaking of media, in this impeachment fight,

one of Trump's biggest assets is his vast propaganda machine. Though it does seem like not everyone's buying the talking points this time. Chris Wallace said that the White House spin is, quote, astonishing and deeply misleading Shep Smith yelled at Tucker Carlson and has been subtweeting him Gabe Sherman is reporting that

not everyone at Fox is sure that they want to stand by Trump on this one Tommy what do you think? Do they have do they have any incentives to act like real reporters here for this? What's going to happen here? there's two or three real journalists that work at fox they probably get more credit than they deserve uh chris wallace jeff smith yeah i would say chris wallace they don't but they don't have to work

there like you can be a real journalist at an organization that isn't just an extension of the trump white house propaganda arm which is what Fox News is. And so I think what is likely is one of the impacts of the impeachment decision is that there were some folks on the far right in the talk radio, like MAGA world, that were drifting from Trump a little bit. They were questioning things he has done or said that will come home. And they are going to be all in on defending him. And that will be a unique thing in an impeachment fight because Nixon didn't have this. Clinton didn't have a media organization that could influence 40% of the country, you know, which is what Fox can do. So that will be a unique thing

that we have to watch and, um whatever but also like more importantly probably is the fact that this will be the first impeachment in the internet age yeah and that doesn't just mean that like people like us can offer hot takes it means that every other foreign government can inject whatever propaganda they want into our discourse and frankly that we're already seeing that like a lot of the fever dream nonsense that Trump and Rudy Giuliani have been picking up and relaying to foreign presidents has been, you can find the genesis of it in Russian state TV. So it's going to be a mess.

That's fascinating, right? Because this is both ways, right? So the conservative media apparatus exists both to defend Trump through this impeachment trial, but also they are feeding him conspiracies that he then commits crimes with. Because he pressured President Zelensky in the Ukraine to look at this CrowdStrike thing, which was a conspiracy that started in right-wing media. It's not a real thing.

No one knows what this fucking CrowdStrike bullshit is. But it was a right-wing fever dream. Well, and I also think it's not a real thing no one knows what this fucking crowd strike bullshit is but it was a right-wing fever dream well and i also think it's interesting when you look back at 2016 and we look at sort of the russia propaganda stuff that we saw and then facebook put out the ads and we were all like that's crazy um what struck me about those ads and what strikes me about the crowd strike thing is that if it were amer Americans putting out the same kind of propaganda, it wouldn't have been illegal. It wouldn't have been as crazy. And it still would have fed the same thing. And that is what we were seeing. The thing is that because we are in this social media age, we don't need Russia necessarily to feed us misinformation. We kind of do it

ourselves. It's totally right and it's totally right and the seth rich thing is actually the best example of that um in in that it between i'm gonna be careful because i i have friends who work for fox news it's a whole thing i am i am a journalist guys um and y'all can all laugh at that I guess but we can actually screw this up ourselves we can screw the election up ourselves without Russia without Iran, without anyone else and that is actually the scariest part of it love it

you look troubled well it's interesting we're a week into this thing. And what has protected us, I think, even in these early days, is not that there's been infighting inside of the Fox News propaganda machine. It's actually what's been surprising is just how hard it is to spin the Zelensky memo, right? That's the core of this and the complaint itself. Like, this is a virtually unspinnable document.

I mean, Chris Christie gave an interview that said, Trump will be fine unless in the text it says something crazy like, do me a favor. Literally. Chris Christie nailed it. He nailed it. He nailed it. He nailed it.

And even the memo that wasn't a real transcript, but kind of a transcript, still says do me a favor. It still says do me a favor. It still says do me a favor. Do me a favor is very simple, very hard to spin. And so what we've seen is it's like a carnival game, and it says spin the unspinable phone call, and conservative guy rubs his hands together, picks up the hammer, and comes down,

and it just goes up an inch and falls back down to the ground, and another guy lines up, grabs the thing, tries to hit the bell, and it doesn't rise, and there's a line all the way back, but nobody's going to win the fucking bear. And so the divide to me becomes between conservatives, even the most vicious and right-wing partisan conservatives, who still experience shame, and those who don't.

The ones who don't feel shame, Kellyanne Conway, Ted Cruz, Tom Cotton, Hugh Hewitt, others, they're fine. They're in. They can say whatever you need them to say. It's Hunter Biden's fault. That's the real story. Whatever you want.

But the ones that still are asked a question and in their gut have a human desire to respond at least with some semblance of honesty and dignity and self-respect, are really stuck. Well, that's, you know what, like, this is, as you just pointed out, this is an information war, right? That's what this is going to be. And yes, I totally agree. I'd like to see Chris Wallace and Shep Smith, you know, leave Fox News and not work there

because it's Fox and it's awful. But for this impeachment hearing, I'm glad that a whole bunch of people including 40 of independent voters are going to be watching fox news and hear at least two voices be like and when fox news covers the impeachment hearings this is fucking chris wallace will be on set if fox news covers assuming they stay where they are they well that's a that's a big question that's a big these guys always come home. I think their temper tantrums are actually a net negative in the long

run. Because they offer this patina of legitimacy to Fox News. Oh, see, the news site is real. Which is bullshit. These guys get up every single day and work for a racism for profit organization. Like, that's what they do. And these temper tantrums are like

the people at Fox at the top. It's annoying that Tucker Carlson's upset. I'm very pro yelling at Tucker Carlson, but they love it because it proves their point. They are their propaganda beards. And so they get paid a whole bunch of money to have these temper tantrums so they can say we're legitimate news.

Yeah. Love it. The people who actually control trump's fate are the 53 republicans in the senate right now uh and many of them so far have had reactions uh that are similar to iowa senator joni ernst uh who told a reporter quote i haven't read the full report but if you want to talk about ethanol i'm happy to talk about it and i like and that always i like that question because like i have a question will you use ethanol to drive a vehicle to a place where you can read the fucking report

so like you know there's there's a couple of them l The Lindsey Grahams, those kind of people who were just already like, fake news. It's all Hunter Biden's fault. Yeah. Yeah. Totally the change the subject guys. But then there's a bunch of other Republican senators who are at least saying, I haven't read the report, running away from reporters, all that kind of stuff. There were a couple of Republican House members in the hearing yesterday who at the very least said, some of this stuff makes me really uncomfortable i believe like mike turner said something to that effect and it it shows it shows the thing that that a lot of

journalists in dc know and that behind closed doors there are a lot of there are a lot of republicans who don't quite know what to do with President Trump, especially when stuff like this comes out, but also in front of closed doors, know they have to run for re-election. And look at Mark Sanford. Sometimes you come out against President Trump, you do not win re-election. My response to the Mark Sanford example is Adam Kinzinger,

who is a very conservative Republican congressman from Peoria, Illinois, I believe. He's one of the few Republican congressmen that talks to Vice News on a regular basis. Well, so like, listen, I don't agree with this guy on anything, but he's pretty consistently said what he thinks about Trump. Like he doesn't use the terminology we use. He's not as harsh. He's not as scathing, but like he doesn't hold back that often. And he seems to be doing just fine politically. So I do think there is an overlearning of the Sanford, Trump's base will take you out example. I think it also depends on how you act in your district.

Are you connecting with people? There is some of the retail politics there that maybe Mark Sanford wasn't doing. You're right. I agree. But President Trump had an effect on that race. Lovett, do you think this is a hopeful sign for any of these Republican senators potentially voting to convict?

What about your friend Mitt Romney? We have a lot, yes. Well, look, Mitt Romney has found this troubling to the extreme. And, you know, for him to use the e-word uh like that so casually in an interview i mean my goodness he said it he said it he said it and he just like sat down and just just chugged a whole glass of milk but chocolate milk look you know we've seen these reports there are 30 30 republican senators who if it was a secret vote would vote to remove donald trump from office but of course it's not

a secret vote uh you know there has been a collective action problem with trump from the beginning it is extended from the primaries to where we are now the our politics would change if all the republicans who privately deride and dislike Trump intensely were to speak publicly about it and show that that division is real, it might have an impact on the public opinion that ultimately shores Trump up and prevents people from being honest about what Trump does. It is a, you know, it's a catch-22. That said, I'm hearing Dan in my head. I was waiting. I'm going to go to Dan last so he can just brainwash me. So I do not want to say

I think that cynicism is earned by what we've seen over the past three years. It is an earned response to the way Republicans have behaved during Donald Trump's tenure.

That said, this week is extraordinary and it is very different than last week and we didn't know that this week was going to be so different from last week. What's going to than last week. And we didn't know that this week was going to be so different from last week.

What's going to happen next week? So, you know, you look at what's happening. You're running out of countries. But you look at what's happened, right? So Will Hurd, right? Someone who may have an opportunity to vote with Democrats on articles of impeachment at some point in this process, right?

Republican from Texas. Republican from Texas. Republican from Texas. And you start to see... Former CIA. You start to see how, wait a second, is it possible that a Republican in the House votes with Democrats and all of a sudden impeachment has some bipartisan support? And then you see someone like Cory Gardner, who's a little bit reluctant to come full bore out in defense of Trump.

And you start to see the kind of cracks in this facade begin to show. Does that mean I think the facade comes crumbling down and they all start showing integrity and a love of country that rises above partisanship, that evinces a deeper sense of their place in history in this moment in time to stand up for the fundamental tenets of what it means to be American? I do not.

But... But what? No, but, last thing, but... Hard but. But, let's force them to prove us wrong rather than assuming they'll prove us right. That's all. Dan's like, none of these fucking people are voting to impeach.

Hey, Dan. Hey, Dan. I would just personally, myself, never bet one single dollar on the conscience or capacity for shame. But what about odds? In the 21st century. What if we give you odds? What about Jeff Flake, Dan? Dan, I did hear that Paul Ryan, Fox News board member, wants to influence the... No, I'm not going to do it.

No, no, no. Wait, no, no, no. I'm not going to do it. No, no, no. I'm not going to do it. We're out of time. Wait, wait. Don't take this from us. Dan, Dan, Dan. Here's what's really interesting. You know what he said?

He said now that he's not Speaker of the House and he's a board member of Fox, he finally has the opportunity to do something about Trump. What did you think, Dan? What did you think when you saw that, Dan?

You know what? It's Friday. We deserved it. We deserved it. You know what I It's Friday night. We deserve it. We deserve it. You know what I thought? That's exactly fucking right. That's exactly how Paul Ryan would think. And it actually says a lot about Paul Ryan and the Republican Party that he would believe

he would have more influence when he was not the Speaker of the fucking House. Yes. Anyway. There was an Onion headline that was Paul Ryan. Something like Paul Ryan inspires millions of cowards into public service. Nice. All right.

On that note, we're going to play a game. Now it's time for OK Stop. We'll roll a clip. We can say OK Stop at any point to comment. Some people go on an all-night Coke bender. Others, the gentler among us, go on all-night Diablo 3 benders. But ever since the Ukraine news broke, Rudy Giuliani has been going on a different kind of bender.

A cable news bender. Let's watch what happens right before he left Fox News to begin his nightly routine of screaming obscenities outside Judith Nathan's house at 2 a.m. Very specific. Let's roll the clip. All right, Rudy. I want to start with these texts with Ambassador Volker.

Are you, Rudy, concerned that you're unnecessarily dragging, you know, his name into this. Who? Whose name? Volker's name. Okay, stop. Volker's name. Has he just been on this set the whole time? Has he gone home? I think he has.

They hit him with a poof of foundation, three fingers of scotch and they sent him out. You know, I will say, we tried to pitch him on letting us follow him around as he just rotated into New York from network to network. And we got 80% there, and then someone in his orbit was like, not so much. I think there's a chance. Like we were really interested in like what happens in between basically walking back and forth between MSNBC and Fox news because they are across the

street from each other in New York city. And he does both. I think there's a chance he was confused and thought you were the vice squad for people, for people listening. Uh, For people listening, you should know that what is on screen are screenshots of Rudy Giuliani's text messages with Kurt Volker, who was the special envoy to Ukraine. Was.

Was. Just resigned tonight. Just resigned tonight. But many people have noted that despite Rudy's sterling reputation as a lawyer, these are perhaps evidence of crimes. Well, yes, he should step forward and explain what he did. The whistleblower falsely alleges that I was operating on my own. Well, I wasn't operating on my own. I went to meet Mr. Zielinski's aide at the request of the State Department.

Okay, so I wasn't operating on my own. Glasses off for dramatic effect. It was, in fact, a criminal conspiracy. She's like... The best part of all these Ingram Giuliani interviews is Laura Ingram for as horrible a person as she is. And she is. And she is.

You've got to watch them and watch her face. She seems like her heart's not in it. So John, there's a little bit of what is happening. Yeah, like I don't know if i really want to be part of this so i've been thinking a lot about this okay and and here's what i actually think is going on she has a devil on one shoulder saying this is such good tv so and then she has a devil on the other shoulder. Because it's just two devils saying this isn't good for Trump. And the other guy's like shut the fuck up. It's such good TV.

He's like, but I'm supposed to help Trump. But you're a brand. But he's a brand. Here's Kurt saying great. I will tell Yerm Mac and he'll visit with you there, thanks. Mr. Mayor, how was your... So, did he bring the iPad? Yeah, so... Or did they give him the iPad? For those listening at home, Rudy is holding up a large iPad with his text on them,

which I didn't know this would happen until Kamala Harris had a tweet today that was very funny. It was a very serious tweet about Rudy Giuliani and this whole conspiracy. And she was like, Rudy Giuliani did hold up his large iPad with text, and I do think it was very troubling. It was like his gigantic message. Yeah, it looks like the sideline of an NFL game. That's the Surface Pro showing the replay.

Do you think he walks around with that iPad texting? He's definitely the dad. Well, that's the question. Is it his or was it Fox's? I would have guessed him to still have a flip phone would have been the way I would have thought about this. I will tell you, though, there's something that I know with 100% certainty,

which is he is definitely the kind of guy that uses his iPad to take pictures You're meeting with Andre do you have time for a call best Kurt Now they're all over me the the Ukrainians who came to me back in November of 2018 told me that we've been trying to get to you for over a year. Okay, stop. He is...

Giuliani, tech show, State Department, encouraged me. He is a former U.S. attorney. He is the former mayor of New York. What he was doing is possibly illegal, and I don't know, and I am not a lawyer, but this is... It's...

Seems dumb. But here's my question. He's also making no sense whatsoever. Well, I also just, I'm like, he goes on television, he does these things, but at this point, this doesn't seem like someone who's on television defending Trump. This seems like someone who feels as though

he has to go on television to make clear that the state, as long as he is, what he's trying to say is, I was not rogue. I'm the hero. I will be the hero. But more than that, I was,

I'm an independent, I'm a citizen, private citizen. I was just sent by the State Department. I was conscripted into service by the State Department. Yeah, I'm doing my duty. I do love that he is throwing his arm around Mike Pompeo,

who desperately wants to run for Senate and to be president one day. I'm not sure Mike Pompeo is going to throw his arm back around Mr. Giuliani. He is rat-fucking the State Department and Mike Pompeo with every interview he does on Fox News, and it is glorious. I mean, just so we're specific about the crimes here, which is if federal government employees, during their job are doing political work, that is a violation of the law. And he is showing text messages

from taxpayer-funded State Department officials who are setting up meetings that Rudy is using to pursue a campaign agenda for Donald Trump. So that is what it says. That's not good. Those are... It is crimes on crimes on crimes.

But the entire circle is bad. That doesn't help Giuliani. No, he doesn't seem well acquainted with his own best interests in this case. Okay. That's the story of this interview and several divorces. And an SNL appearance.

I also just think too with these texts, I also think it's really hard right now to understand who was part of this effort between Trump and Giuliani to influence the 2020 election by using the powers of the federal government to get dirt from Ukraine versus who was desperately inside of this system seeing all this happening around them

and trying to manage having a stone cold 90s lunatic wandering around kiev uh so i that's just that's just a note that we just don't know which is why we need to see more from this investigation because these texts are you know as marco ruby would say raise more questions than answers we have solid evidence of collusion not r Russian, Ukrainian, not with Trump, with Hillary and the DNC. We believe George Soros is behind it because his company. OK, stop. So my favorite thing is just dropping a George Soros. Boom, Soros, out of nowhere.

Out of nowhere. And how, he's not even, is there a way he's related to this? And I've missed it. The way that he's related to it is that he's an old Jewish scapegoat for Republican politics. He's rich. He's rich. He's rich.

Don't forget the rich part. That's it. That's all you need. That's all, that's the only reason I wanted to stop this is because, like, just drop a George Soros and you're good. You're good.

What's involved in it? What do you say to Mitt Romney tonight, given that he runs to the cameras to express his deeply troubled opinion about this? One time Bill Clinton asked me, what's this guy Romney like? You know what I told him? He's our Al Gore. All right, Rudy, hold that thought. Stay right there. My producers are telling me

that we need to squeeze in a break. I would urge everyone listening at home to do a quick little Alta Vista search for the body movements we got to see in the theater. And that's OK Stop! That is amazing. I like the ten people who laughed at the Alta Vista joke. Very 90s.

Alright, let's talk about how impeachment is affecting the democratic primary which as far as i can tell is still happening um there's no evidence of that fact yeah no we have not seen it uh i also want to talk about how the democratic candidates should handle it chanda let's start with joe biden who is obviously most directly affected by this yeah uh in many ways trump rudy the rest of the gang are rerunning the play that they ran against Hillary Clinton in 2016, accusing Biden and his family of criminality and corruption. What, if anything, do you think is different about this time around?

Well, the issue is, and I mean, maybe this is going to speak badly about the media in general. I'm not sure. That's very popular here. Okay, great. But the issue is, what comes along with this story is the fact that Hunter Biden did work for this or was on the board of this company, this Ukrainian company. And that means that Joe Biden will maybe won't have to continue to answer questions about it because I feel like a lot of that's played out. But even as I read sort of Washington Post and New York Times stories from today in graph six, seven, eight, there is this explanation that they have to put in that does say like none of these things are substantiated, blah, blah, blah, but has to explain all of those things. And so that now becomes an issue. And what we saw over the past week is that Elizabeth Warren had to answer a question about, hey, would you be okay with your vice president, if you were to become president,

working for or being on the board of a company of a foreign country? Son, the vice president's family. Yes. And originally she answered, no, I wouldn't be OK with that. Then she and her team kind of went back and sort of backtracked that a little bit. But that means that is now a question in people's minds. And that's no question in journalists minds. And I have to admit, as a question to Elizabeth Warren, I thought it was a good question. I thought it was a good question. I thought it was an interesting thing to think about,

especially when it comes to how she has conducted her campaign and what she is running on of like, okay, should your family members be on, if you are actually the president or the vice president of the United States, should your family members be on foreign country companies' boards? I think it was specifically like under your ethics plan, would this be acceptable? And she was like, I'm not sure. Yeah, and then they had to clean it up and say under ethics plan, would this be acceptable? And she was like, I'm not sure. Yeah.

And then they had to clean it up and say under her plan, it would be acceptable. But that is the kind of question someone like Elizabeth Ward is going to continue to get, which then affects Joe Biden's campaign. Yeah. But I do think like in 2016, obviously the Hillary email story had lots of bullshit to it, right? But Hillary Clinton was under investigation right we like and she had a server of emails at her home so I'm saying so what we've

now done and I and I say this so there was like a nugget of a story but it also was related to her specifically right now in this campaign we have it is not anything about the real story like Trump's making up all kinds of bullshit but the, it is not anything about the real story. Like, Trump's making up all kinds of bullshit. But the real story is not anything about any wrongdoing that Joe Biden himself has committed. It is now, Joe Biden is now responsible for his son's decisions, however bad they may be. Which also makes me think that, like, right now. But we also hold Donald, I mean, there is a cadre of people that holds Donald Trump's children and sort of talks about this idea of like when they travel around the world and they're doing business dealings and that whole thing, how does that affect the presidency? Now, I know it's because Donald Trump still makes money from his own company in the emoluments clause and you can, don't look at me like that. I know what you're thinking.

I'm just saying, I was trying to think. Yeah. Because Donald Trump's the president now right yes it was less about don and eric and ivanka when he was running when he's president now like if joe biden's president and his son is on a foreign board yeah then we have some questions for sure um but i guess what all i was saying is it makes me think that we have now reached a level where right now in september of 2019 it's's Joe Biden and Hunter, right? Yeah.

Like they will do this. Donald Trump will do this to any one of the Democratic candidates if they are nominee. If it is Elizabeth Warren, he will find something that the media will like, okay, we have to at least talk about this in Elizabeth Warren's life. We have to at least talk about this

in Kamala Harris's life. Politically, it worked in 2016. Right, right. So like, Dan, if you were on Joe Biden's campaign right now, how would you be handling this? Because I think they have been trying to figure out how much does Joe Biden defend himself, defend his son? How much does he talk about Donald Trump go on offense since obviously Donald Trump has committed quite a few crimes here? What would you be doing if you're on the campaign right now? I mean, I think there is great peril for Biden here because there's just going to be

this huge discussion and people are not going to get to the seventh paragraph of the story. And what was effective about the 2016 strategy was it wasn't just the email survey. It was just Wall Street speeches, Clinton Foundation, blah, blah, blah. And the basic point is you're just going to make it seem so messy that the, like the persuadable voters, people who pay the least attention to politics will just default to their natural instinct, which is all politicians are corrupt. And Biden is vulnerable to this because he's been in politics for a long time, even though he has been someone who has always been above reproach and has sort of been known for his integrity. So if I was on his campaign, the first thing I'd do is I would punch back very hard at Trump. I don't think Trump wants to have a conversation about what people's

family members are doing, right? Like Don and Eric are running around this country, running around the world, getting rich off taxpayer dollars. Ivanka is selling trademarks to China out of an oval of a West Wing office. Yeah. Right? Like, there is a... Jared is WhatsAppping Mohammed bin Salman about God knows what. So, like, that's not a conversation Trump must have. So I would hit back hard on that.

And I would also, you know, for better or for worse, one of the fundamental arguments that Biden's campaign has put forward is electability. And he could make the point here that trump is so scared of biden that he had to engage in a ham-handed international criminal conspiracy to try to take him down because it is like i like we know and believe that general election polls this far out are bullshit yeah but biden has been leading trump in 70 consecutive polls and that is clearly in trump's head to the point that he's got fucking Rudy Giuliani running around Kiev

and doing all these other things. And we even learned today because from our secret source, Donald Trump, that Trump instructed billionaire... Trump is deep throat. Yes. There's the episode title.

That's it, we did it. We learned today that Trump instructed Steve Schwarzman, who is this billionaire hedge fund person, who is Trump's unofficial emissary to China, he asked Steve Schwarzman to find out how Hunter Biden made money in China. Another story. We forgot about that story.

Another break today. So I think you've got to punch back very hard on this and be very, like, I'd be very nervous about the fact that there's a 10 million dollar ad campaign that is dropping in this country yeah so that yeah there's a 10 million dollar ad campaign that donald trump is now going to run over the next week against joe biden and it's an ad that is uh very inaccurate like just all of this bullshit about biden and firing the prosecutor to all the story but they're going to run it everywhere and when i watched the ad i was like yeah a bunch of people who don't

know that this is inaccurate are going to watch this not just trump's base but people who are sort of you know and ten million dollars is a big ad especially this early on when there is no nominee on the democratic side yet. That is a huge ad. It's an anti-Biden ad, but it's also an anti-impeachment ad, which will, I think, just generally help Trump. Yeah. Now, Lovett, what do you think the other candidates should do? We just talked about Elizabeth Warren getting that question. Michael Bennett got the question too, said, oh, my, you know, vice president's son wouldn't be allowed to sit on a corporate board either. Beto O or rourke tonight tweeted

like every single democratic candidate should come to joe biden's defense and denounce this ad it's bullshit we should all come together this is propaganda like how should the other democrats handle this because on one hand you know on one hand they want a united front against donald trump on the other hand they're running trying to beat Joe Biden, right? Yeah. Well, I actually don't think those things are in contradiction, right? You can say that there is something. I mean, this is what, you know, to Dan's point, the great success Trump had in 2016 was elevating the kind of quotidian DC shenanigans of giving paid speeches and the

raising of money that kind of speaks to influence peddling without it being entirely direct in ways that have largely been accepted but are seen as some in some sense wrong or uncomfortable for people elevating that and putting it side by side with Trump's sort of rampant corruption criminality unfitness for the job, in part because many reporters were looking for something to set against Trump's criminality and abuse so that they could cover a story sort of in a quote unquote unbiased way. So, you know, you see that playing out here. I think that there is a you can be defending Joe Biden and talk about this without being forced to say, I think it's great when the children of politicians serve on corporate boards for foreign companies that have business before the United States.

You don't need to do that. We can just be kind of honest about that. That said, I think for these other candidates, I saw Kamala Harris. She's trying to find a way into this because it's like, you know, she is a prosecutor or she's going to prosecute the case against Donald Trump. This is a big legal matter. And I just see her just sort of like trying to find a fucking way into this thing because to Dan's point, the story feels pretty frozen, right? We have Biden who I don't think is loving the way this is unfolding. You have Elizabeth Warren, who was rising right before all this broke.

And then you have a bunch of other candidates who are in the midst of trying to rejigger their message to try to find an opening right before the entire country focused on impeachment and took their eyes off of the race, a situation that may last for months. So it's a tough situation for the other candidates. Tommy, what do you do if you're any of those other candidates right now, besides Joe Biden, that we could have impeachment hearings for the next couple months? It's really tough. I don't think you need to get into the details and talk about what Hunter Biden did or did not do for a living.

Like, that's not your job. But I do think that, like, right now, politics is a team sport. And the accusations that are being made against Joe Biden are lies and they're unfair. And I think that the politically smart thing to do is to defend him against those lies and attack Donald Trump. Right. And so it's to turn it's to turn the subject back to the president. Push it back on Trump. Now, the challenge then becomes, how do you become a part of a news cycle that is impeachment focused?

And that's gonna be harder. So I do think there will be some constant jujitsu, smart events that might be impeachment related. But ultimately, your hope here is that the constant discussion of Biden and Ukraine is going to impact his electability argument. And so if I'm one of these other candidates, I think I would just go to an early state and camp out and try to make an argument for myself about why I'm actually the best person to beat Donald Trump. I have the best

chance in blah, blah, blah, swing state. I don't have the baggage that he might have, right? Like make the electability. If you overtly make the argument that these totally unfair arguments that Trump is making will hurt Biden, I think that will cost you among voters. And I frankly think it's like an immoral, shitty thing to do. I do think, though, it's going to be very hard on Biden to weather this storm of people constantly attacking him for something that's both unfair but also digging into his family.

I think a lot of this, I actually think, for a little while, it's a little bit out of their hands because to Tommy's point, they cannot determine what the narrative around Biden will be. They can only hurt themselves

in trying to make it the one that's more favorable to themselves. But I think to Dan's point, I think there's a question, how will this sort? Will this sort into Biden is the most electable? He is the standard bearer of the party. That is why Donald Trump is going after him. He will be elevated by this story and be kind of set against Trump over the months to come and kind of fight back against what Trump is doing. Or will this sort into peace, people seeing what happened in 2016 happening again and saying, oh, they're running that playbook. I'm terrified it's going to work because we can't go through that again. And therefore, this electability argument Biden was offering no longer appeals

to me. And I think that is not up to the Democratic candidates. That's up to the news. That is not up to the Democratic candidates. That's up to the news. I think a couple of points on this. One is, I think there are plenty of arguments that are good faith arguments that can and should be made against Biden, right? If you support a different candidate, if you're a different candidate,

there is a case to be made that he is not the right person to be president at this time. But it is the argument that you should not make because it does Trump's job for him and is a bad faith argument is that Joe Biden is corrupt. Right. Because he is not.

You can say he is too moderate. He's been in the system too long. We need a fresher face. There are all kinds of legitimate arguments. You don't agree with his policies. Imagine that as a reason. But the other argument that I don't think that people should take into consideration is that oh they're doing this to biden therefore it's going to be like 2016 they are going to do this to everyone now that's what i was saying

this is so important like donald trump runs the justice department if you don't think bill barr is going to find a reason they make shit up like there is asking ukraine about crowd strike yeah they're like like donald trump is going to pressure Bill Barr in the Justice Department to somehow open some investigation into the nominee or someone close to the nominee so they can run the 2016 play over again. That is going to happen with our nominees, Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, Pete Buttigieg, anyone else. And this is why impeachment is so important, even if he's not convicted.

It's because you at least need to say, no, this is fucking wrong. But we cannot reverse engineer our nomination process off of what Trump is going to do. I also think part of this, going back to what Tommy was saying, and these candidates need to camp out, is they need to listen to the voters. And one of the things that, you know, when up until now, and I suspect the voters are going to change a little bit in what they want to talk about. But up until now, every time I've gone out on the road, my team has gone out on the road. The voters don't ask questions at candidate town halls about impeachment. They just don't. That is not what people in Iowa and New Hampshire have been focused on when we've gone out there or South Carolina. That may change. Understand what point you want to make about impeachment. And I think a lot of

them will start to make the case that y'all have made on this podcast a lot, that that's just something that needs to happen because of constitution. But I also think be ready to talk about what they want to talk about because they are trying to figure out what their definition of electability is and it's not just joe biden yeah um all right when we come back my interview with ella schreiner She is a high school senior and climate activist who helped organize last week's climate strike here in Portland, Ella Schreiner. Hello.

Hello. How are you? Good, thank you. Happy to be here. Thanks for being here. Appreciate it. So last Friday, you and young people all around the world organized a global climate strike. How did you all come up with the idea of a strike, and what were you hoping that this specific action would achieve? Well, the strike was part of a global movement led by Greta Thunberg called Fridays for Future. And this strike was a little different than the past ones that occurred in the spring because this time we were inviting adults to strike with us from work. So youth and adults came strike with us from work. So youth

and adults came together in Portland and globally. And it was a very inspiring day, I think, both internationally and here in Portland. We had estimates of up to 20,000 people that striked. And we wanted it to be a way that people could find a way to engage in the movement without just limiting themselves to one day of screaming and shouting and then going home and waiting for the next strike to come up. So the goal was to let people find a way into the movement and to make these demands to the city government on how they can be acting to prevent

the climate crisis. So you've been at this since middle school. You're now a senior in high school. What made you go from someone who cares about climate change to a climate activist? Because I know there's a lot more young people now who care about climate, but I think there's a lot of young people who probably talk about it, they post about it. What made you go from feeling so passionately about this issue to saying, I'm actually going to go act, I'm going to do something?

I think the thing that led me from just being a concerned citizen to someone that wants to take action is finding my voice. In middle school, at the school I went to, Sunnyside Environmental School, we were encouraged to join a cohort of other youth to educate ourselves and act on an issue that we feel passionate about. So I chose climate change. And through that, we were able to testify in front of the city hall

regarding the fossil fuel infrastructure ban and then meet with activists from around Portland. And I found out I learned how to speak up and use my voice, even though I knew I had a voice, obviously. But it was through that empowerment that I realized that I could really make a change and that I was so passionate about helping other youth find that voice. That's great. that I was so passionate about helping other youth find that voice. That's great. So you've had some pretty specific demands of leaders here in Portland on climate. What do you want to see the city do?

Yeah, so we have five specific demands that we came up with. When we started planning the strike, it was just a lot of youth in one room, and we didn't really know what our goals were, but we eventually came up with. When we started planning the strike, it was just a lot of youth in one room, and we didn't really know what our goals were, but we eventually came up with these demands. So the first is that the city declare a climate emergency resolution. And the mayor actually has been working on this, but there's a little more to the story. So a few months ago, the mayor was invited to speak as a guest speaker at the C40 Mayor's Climate Summit in Copenhagen in October. And when he received this invitation, he began creating this resolution. But he fast-tracked it quickly through the government without considering even communicating with many of the offices within the city government. And he did this without community engagement.

So that means engagement from frontline communities and youth, the people that are least responsible for but are most affected by the climate crisis. So we demand that he slow down this process and engage the communities in creating this resolution. Was what he was going to talk in Copenhagen about not ambitious enough, not bold enough? What were some of the things that you guys wanted that he didn't have? So he was invited to speak about climate leadership in Portland. And so that could go back to the fossil fuel infrastructure ban, which actually faced some legal challenges soon after.

And they were told that they needed to change certain aspects of it in order for it to be implemented. And that has not been on his priority list, so those have not been achieved yet and hasn't been implemented. So basically there are just several policies, including the 100% renewable resolution that passed a few years ago, and there was supposed to be an update on that this June, and there has been no update on how our city is achieving those goals. So we're just looking for more response and more action.

What's the status now? Is he being a little more receptive, or what are the next steps on this? I think he is trying to slow down the process. They're trying to get lots of stakeholders and community members in one room, but it's a long process, and it will be a while. Can everyone here help? How does everyone here help us? Yeah, so I think it's very important to pressure the government and to show up and say that this is something we care about and find out a way that you can get engaged in the process and share your point of view because

they really do listen. So you have talked about the need to be a little bit rebellious because that's what really gets people's attention. Once you get their attention, how do you persuade people who believe in climate change? They're not the deniers. They believe in climate change. They know that we need to act, but they don't quite feel the same sense of urgency and ambition that you do.

What's the argument you make to people who are sort of sitting on the fence there? It's a really good question. I would say that we're facing something unlike humanity has ever seen before, and that there are people out here fighting this fight so hard and so bravely, even though they get shut down time and time again, because it really does matter. And there's a real problem here. So we need to all unite in order to address this crisis and come together. To what extent are you and your movement focused on 2020 and electoral politics and what's happening in Washington? Is that part of the equation?

Yes, I would say yes, because it's very important who we have in office in order to see what will happen in our future. We need strong policy and we need strong action from a governmental level. So it's very important. Last question. This is such a, like you said, it's very important. Last question. This is such a, like you said, it's an existential threat. Obviously, there's a deadline that's rapidly approaching. How do you keep doing the work that you're doing without getting discouraged?

What gives you hope? For me, it's all about engaging with the people and the people that are part of this movement and that are fighting and seeing how people are coming together from different backgrounds, different ages, often with different motivation, all with the same goal of stopping this crisis. And I think if you ask people that are part of this movement a year ago whether they thought they would be seeing all these people striking together across the globe,

I think they wouldn't have expected this. So it's really coming to an exciting time in the movement and things are starting to change. And if anyone here, anyone listening, wants to get involved and wants to help out, what should they do? I would say contact your legislators, contact People in Power, and there are organizations all over Portland

and all over the state on how to get involved. So you just need to look a little bit and educate yourself. Ella Schreiner, thank you so much for being here. Thank you for the work that you're doing. Appreciate it. Give it up for Ella Schreiner. Ella Schreiner. All right, now we're going to play another game, I guess.

Portland. Portland is an American trendsetter. You were obsessed with beards, and America became obsessed with beards. You started riding bicycles, and then we all did. But you've also helped start a trend that has reshaped the fabric of every American city,

and that, of course, is craft beer. Here in Oregon, as of 2018, there were 281 breweries in 79 cities across the state. Oregon breweries produced almost two-thirds of all draft beer consumed by all of you. Wow. A generation ago, there were fewer than 100 companies in the brewing business. Today, there are more than 5,000 breweries in the U.S. You guys helped start that. Now every third-tier city has their own grandpappy blue dog IPA.

But the empire is striking back. The industry has consolidated with four companies now controlling almost half the market. And those companies have been buying up craft breweries left and right. They've been hopping on the bandwagon. They're trying to put the little guys out of business. So it's time for a head-to-head matchup. All the puns. We are going to do a beer taste test.

All right? One will be a local Portland beer. The other will be owned by Miller Coors or AB InBev. And we'll see how Portland's craft beer does. Are you guys, what are you booing? or AB InBev. And we'll see how Portland's craft beer does. Are you guys, what are you booing? And because we wanted to make sure this wasn't just us drinking on stage for no reason and we wanted some substance,

I'll be throwing in some facts along the way about, I don't know, monopolies or whatever. So let's play. We're here. We're beer. Get bruised to it. We're sorry. It's funnier written out.

I liked it. It was good. Let's bring out the first beers are coming out for everybody. Oh, my goodness. Thank you. Thanks, Travis. You guys each have an A and a B in your hands. As you guys try A and B, I'm going to read a fact,

and then we will find out what you liked and move on from there. Fact, you guys should just start tasting. Taste A, taste B. Got it. The reason small breweries were allowed to thrive in the beer industry, an example of how good regulation can help industries thrive. After Prohibition, market regulations broke up the industry into three divisions, brewing, distilling, wholesaling, and retailing. The idea being that vertical monopolies promoted bad behavior.

And that's it. There was more facts, but you're good. All right. A or B? A. B. A. A.

Three say A. One says B. B was Stella Artois, mass produced. Shauna. A, the winner, opened his Wayfinder, which opened in 2018 and was ranked as one of Bloomberg's

11 best beers in America. Let's bring out beer number two. So far, not bad, Portland. Portland's gonna hate me. Where'd that dude go that was helping? Let's not talk about that guy. Alright.

He was thirsty. Beer number two. You guys start sampling A and B. Fact. In the 1980s, the Ronald Reagan Justice Department made revisions to antitrust laws that allowed extreme consolidation between brewers and retailers. Mergers between brewing companies reduced the field from more than 48 major brewers in 1981 to two today, Anheuser-Busch InBev and Miller Coors. A or B? B. B. B. A or B?

B. B. B. A. Well, Dan, you've chosen Bud Light. But B, the winner, was Breakside, a proud Portland beer. According to their website, Breakside pushes the boundaries of technique and flavor.

I can't believe I'm... That is horseshit. I can taste the technique thing. It sounds like a Tinder profile, but okay. Anyway. Time for beer number three. Guys, give it up for Travis.

Beers are coming fast. And Belinda. Belinda Travis. And Belinda. Belinda. Thanks, Travis. Don't say tug. Never say tug. Were people just cheering tug? They said tug.

All right, you guys are sampling your beers fact fucking terrible yeah what fact between 2007 and 2016 shipments from the major brewers fell by 14% they hate these

beers what's it gonna how's this gonna turn out which one do they hate sales strunk for the four most popular beers, Bud Light, Dan's favorite, Coors Light, Miller Light, and Budweiser. But the major breweries have been on a craft buying spree, trying to secretly get a piece of craft market. You ever been booed by 2,000 people before? Happens to me all the time. A. Oh, Jesus Christ. B. B. A.

B. Wow. Interesting. So it's close. It's interesting because they both had such visceral reactions. But I thought it would be, therefore I thought it would be not even. You know? Unanimous maybe?

That's the phrase. Or word. Speech writer. even you know unanimous maybe that's the phrase or word speechwriter a a was blue moon mass produce with beer with beer with beer we're not saying wheat beer anymore right i don't know i'm gay i drink sparkling rose it's the diet coke of alcohol b was cascade brewery B was Cascade Brewery. It's a Portland beer. The motto is, pucker up and join the sour revolution. No shit.

No thanks. It was so sour. Pucker up and join the sour revolution was also an alternate campaign slogan for Tim Palenti. campaign slogan for Tim Pawlenty. The space between where I started the joke and ended the joke was trying to think of who would work. Final beer coming out now. There's another one? Yeah, there's another one, Shauna.

You're doing so well. Thank you. Thank you, Blenda. That is a good idea, bring back the Malort. Bring back the Malort. All right, you guys are sampling. Fact. In 2019, craft sales continued to grow at a rate of 4%, reaching 13.2% of the U.S. beer market.

And retail dollar... Shut up, I'm doing the substance. Take your vegetables. We will learn about corporate consolidation during this drinking game. I'm definitely starting to understand it more. I'm definitely starting to understand it more retail sales of craft increased 7% and now account for more than 20% of the US beer market

that's it, that's the fact A or B? B I think I should say A but I don't like IPAs so I'm saying B inner monologue Sean that's okay I think I should say A, but I don't like IPAs, so I'm saying B. Inner monologue, Sean. It's okay.

I'm going to leave the stage now. One, these both suck. Two, IPAs suck. Three. A. What did you pick? A. A.

I pick A. Tommy is very angry, though, because he's trying to do this game and calculate his net carbs at the same time. Yeah. Yeah, the real, look, no matter who wins, the real loser tonight is ketoacidosis. Well, B was Miller Lite. That was delicious. Obviously from our friends at Miller Coors, and it is the greatest beer ever made. And A was Ecliptic.

It says here the brainchild of Oregon's craft brewing icon. Shut the fuck up. No. I said it right. I said it right every time. Oregon. I said it right every fucking time. I got it right every time.

You are the worst. I said it right again and again. One time. One time. You brittle Portlandian bastards. I got it wrong one time. I know it's Oregon. I know.

I know. I didn't wait. No, I know it's Oregon. I know. I know. I didn't wait. No, I've tried to say it exactly right. Portland, you've won the game. Wait, I just want you guys to know that the most nervous I've ever been on stage about Lovett getting killed, besides tonight, was when we were in New Orleans,

right after they were robbed. It was not the Super Bowl, it was the playoffs. Tennessee Championship game. Oh, yeah. And he decided to talk shit about the New Orleans Saints. In fairness, Lovett, he had no context. He had no idea what he was talking about.

And Mitch Landrieu had to save him. Literally, the former mayor of the city had to come on stage to protect me. Someone jumped on the stage tonight, and I felt safer than when I was losing control of that crowd. Thank you for playing. We're here where beer get brews to it.

You've won. You've won. Portland, your beer's won. Your beer's won. Yeah, you guys. Other than Dan's affinity for Bud Light, City did great. I'm a man of the people. Elitist. All right.

Thank you, Portland. Thank you for coming out. We appreciate you. Thanks to Ellis Schreiner. Thank you to Shauna Thomas. Thank you, guys. We'll be right back. I'm out.