Pod Save America - "Grand Orgy Party."

Episode Date: March 31, 2022

Republicans face new challenges from Donald Trump and cocaine orgies, Representative Katie Porter joins talk about Joe Biden’s proposed budget and billionaire tax, and Tommy joins for the March Badness Fascist Four.Vote Save America is launching its biggest volunteer effort yet and asking you to be part of your region’s Midterm Madness team: East, South, Midwest, West. Sign up to receive actions you can take every week to get involved in the most important elections in 2022 at votesaveamerica.com/midterms.For a closed-captioned version of this episode, click here. For a transcript of this episode, please email [e-mail] and include the name of the podcast. 

Welcome to Pod Save America. I'm Jon Favreau. I'm Dan Pfeiffer. On today's show, Republicans face new challenges from Donald Trump and cocaine orgies. Congresswoman Katie Porter joins to talk about Joe Biden's proposed budget and billionaire tax. And Tommy is here to take us through our March badness, Fascist Four. But first, as we mentioned on Tuesday's pod, Vote Save America is launching its biggest volunteer effort yet and asking you to be part of your region's midterm madness team. East, South, Midwest, West. Pick a region. Sign up. Learn more at vote. Save America dot com slash midterms.

We will send you actions you can take every week to get involved in the most important elections of 2022. I like that that was written that way. We've now exhausted saying most important election of your lifetime, so we're just saying it's the most important election of that year. Was there another option? What's the other one? There's probably some special somewhere. A local student government election?

There's probably a local, yeah, but this is it. The midterms are the main event. Also, if you haven't already picked up your tickets for our upcoming live shows in D.C. and Boston, make sure to grab them soon. They're going fast, but we still have some left. We're very excited to be joined in Boston by Jane Koston and Mayor Michelle Wu.

And in D.C., we'll be joined by White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki, our guest co-host Simone Sanders, and Mike Birbiglia. So that'll be very fun. We're also excited to announce Akilah Hughes and Beto O'Rourke. They'll be live on stage for Love It or Leave It, live or else, in Austin

on April 7th. That's coming up. Akilah will also be there for the Love It or Leave It Dallas show, along with Luke Warford, on April 9th. Tickets on sale now for these cities and more. Go get your tickets. Crooked.com slash events. All right, let's get to the news. As Vladimir Putin continues his murderous rampage through Ukraine,

recently declassified U.S. intelligence has revealed new tensions and distrust between the Russian dictator and his own military. has revealed new tensions and distrust between the Russian dictator and his own military, while Putin's favorability ratings among Americans in this week's NBC News poll has hit 1%. That's Osama bin Laden territory, Dan, 1%. But in the midst of this horrific invasion, one of Putin's few remaining fans here in the United States just asked him for a favor. As long as Putin now is not exactly a fan of our country. Let him explain where did because Chris Wallace wouldn't let me ask the question. Why did the mayor of Moscow's wife give the Bidens, both of them, three and a half million dollars?

And that's a lot of money. She gave him three and a half million dollars. That's a lot of money. She gave him three and a half million dollars. So now I would think Putin would know the answer to that. I think he should release it. I think we should know that answer. The admiration, of course, is still mutual. On the very same day, a Russian state television host said that it's time for regime change in the U.S., quote, and to again help our partner Trump to become president. So there's a temptation to laugh this off

if Trump wasn't currently the frontrunner for the 2024 Republican nomination. So sadly, we cannot. What do you think, Dan? What did you make of all this that happened this week? People might not have heard this that happened this week? People might not have heard this or seen this because it did not receive too much news coverage. I'm not going to

deny myself the joy of laughing about this. No, you shouldn't. Look, if we can't laugh in this dark time, what can we do? What are we doing? Because something can be deadly serious and funny at the same time. And I think this is that. Look, I get there's a lot happening in the world right now.

There's a Russian invasion of Ukraine. We're still in a pandemic. We have inflation. We have a Supreme Court nomination. One of the world's most famous people slapped one of the world's also most famous people live on stage at the Oscars. Like a lot of shit is happening, right? A lot's happening, yeah. But this should be a giant fucking story

because it shows just how deranged and out of touch with what's happening in the world Donald Trump is. And as you point out, he's not just a frontrunner for the Republican nomination. He is, in some cases, the frontrunner to be the next president of the United States if you look at the polls.

In some polls, he is a hypothetical matchup. This is not to say that these polls are right or any polls are right, but it's not a far-fetched idea that Donald Trump will be president of the United States again. And here he is taking the adage of the enemy of my enemy a little too far. And the reason it's serious is Trump did this once, as you may remember. And you know what happened? Russia interfered in our election. So it's like a big, giant fucking deal. And every republic should have to answer for it. More Democrats should talk about it. The press should cover it more. It's a big fucking deal. Donald Trump publicly proposed entering a scheme with a murderous dictator who hates the

united states and has threatened us in numerous ways and is currently murdering civilians in ukraine that's that's what that's what donald trump just did he said and the key key line there too as long as putin is not exactly a fan of our country. So there is this acknowledgement that he understands that the reason that Putin would want to help him is because Putin hates America. And so if Putin hates America, then maybe Putin will want to ally himself with Donald Trump. It is fucking gross. It is fucking gross. It is gross. Now, do you think there are any Republican voters who might reconsider their support for the candidate who the Russian government is openly telling us they prefer in 2024? Meanwhile, we have that going on that the Russian government's like, we got to get Trump back in there.

We got to help him get back in there again. I mean, the statement from the Russian television host that you read could easily have been a statement from Fox News. That is the actual position of the majority of elected Republicans. A majority of House Republicans voted hours after a violent destruction of the Capitol to refuse to seat the legitimately elected president of the United States in Joe Biden and put Donald Trump in. So I don't know this is going to cause a lot of people to take their MAGA hats off, but it's sort of, it's a big deal. And I think it is a reminder of sort of the chaotic insanity that was Trump's era.

I do think that that is some, that it's not going to affect Trump's hardcore base, but it does have electoral impacts around the margin with some people if and only if they hear about it now and remember it later. And again, Trump and Tucker Carlson and a few of these Putin fanboys that we hear from so much in right wingwing media like they are a bit out of step with the republican base on this one again that's why i read that nbc news poll it's not like putin has the usual 30 percent of americans which is the republican base number that loves trump that loves all the bullshit they talk about he's a one percent like so and Carlson and some of these idiots cozying up to Putin, that is not what not even most Americans, the vast, vast, vast majority of Americans want them to do.

It will be interesting to see if Republicans use this against Trump. Republicans other than Mike Pence, right, who I don't really count as a real candidate. But, you know, in North Carolina, I did an episode of campaign, sorry, I did an episode of Political Experts React. I always forget that Elijah forced us to rename the show in order to adhere to the vagaries of the YouTube algorithm. But with our friend Jason Kander looking at political ads about Ukraine and Russia and gas prices, and in the Senate Republican primary in North Carolina, Pat McCrory, the former Republican governor who was so right wing, he was one of the only Republicans that lost in 2016 with Trump on the ballot, is running an ad against the Trump endorsed candidate using that candidate's praise of Putin against him. And so I think you could see more of this in Republican primaries going forward. And I think that could have some impact in the contours of a 2024 primary if Trump is involved and some people decide to run real campaigns against him.

against him. You could easily see a number of Republican candidates finding a lane where they, you know, do their bullshit criticism of Joe Biden for being too, quote unquote, weak on Ukraine, but then also hit Trump, whether directly, indirectly, obliquely, whatever it may be, for cozying up to Putin. And they're going to be the hawks who are tough on Putin, but also handle the situation better than Joe Biden. So they're not going to be as friendly to Putin as Donald Trump, but they're going to somehow do better than Joe Biden. I actually think that is the politically smart position for some of these Republican candidates. Let's see if they're, some of them may just be too afraid of Donald Trump to actually do it. Or more likely too afraid of Tucker Carlson.

Or too afraid of Tucker Carlson or also too dumb. True, true. We have previously expressed some doubt on the show as to whether Democrats can successfully brand Republicans as the party of Putin. Does this change that in your mind? Or is just this is this just something that might stick to only Trump or Trump like candidates or those kind of people? I mean, I like Sean Patrick Maloney. He was a great Ponce America guest. I think he's actually doing a very good job in a very tough situation ahead of you. We'll see. His quote in a Politico story a few weeks ago about how his message is that we're

the party. They're the Putin Republicans and we're Zelensky Democrats. I'm still cringing from that. Like it hurts my, like my intestines hurt from it. It's so bad. And I don't think you can. He's really a quote machine these days. It was that he's talking about doing Molly on Morning Joe when he was in college. You know what?

That's a point of evidence for this the next or the next section of this podcast so we'll get we'll get just wait everyone we're they're coke republicans we're molly democrats how did we get here all right okay anywho i think i think that there is value in reminding voters about the chaotic stupidity of Trump, which is embodied by courting Putin's electoral support in the middle of a war. believe that every Republican or even most Republicans are like Trump in that way, that they agree with Trump. Even if they're silent on the matter, I don't think the voters will not naturally assume that Republicans are like Trump. The fact that Trump is sort of over here separate from the vast majority of established Republicans is his political strength, but it also helps them in the sense that it inoculates the party from some of his stupidity. Yeah, I think people, you can get people to believe that Trump cozies up to Putin and Trump likes Putin because he says it all the time. When you have a bunch of other Republicans who are constantly criticizing Putin or speaking out, it's hard to be like, yeah, they may be speaking out, but they support the guy,

Trump, who was also cozying up to Putin. Like it's just too, voters don't process information that way. It's just hard. If there were a bunch of Republicans who are like afraid to talk about Putin or condemn him or criticize him, yeah, then you have an opening, but there doesn't seem to be too many right now. I mean, this is a little confusing, I think. I don't think you can say that all Republicans are pro-Putin because Trump is pro-Putin, but the fact that Trump is pro-Putin makes pro-Trump Republicans more politically vulnerable. I think that's right. I think that's right.

But again, the more dots you have to connect, the harder the case to make, is my point. We also got another reminder this week that Trump doesn't actually need help from foreign dictators to do crimes. He can clumsily commit them all on his own. Here's a Washington Post lead from Robert Costa and none other than Bob Woodward himself. Quote, internal White House records from the day of the attack on the U.S. Capitol that were turned over to the House Select Committee show a gap in President Donald Trump's phone logs of seven hours and 37 minutes, including the period when the building was being violently assaulted. So in response, the committee is investigating whether Trump used a burner phone during that time, a term that Trump said he's never heard of,

even though former National Security Advisor John Bolton cbs the other day that he's heard the former president used the term several times because of course he has before we get into the the politics of this how excited was bob woodward that he broke this story 50 years after he took down a president who used a gap in his phone logs to help cover up his crime. Do you think Bob Woodward is still capable of excitement? I don't know. I mean, he's just serving Ben Rhodes soup and getting all the good gossip. He spit his soup out right on Ben Rhodes.

Why are you asking me? Ask Ben Rhodes. He's Bob Woodward's soup friend. I just can't. It's like too much. I'm like, oh, Trump had a gap in the tapes, just like Nixon. And we're finding out from Bob Woodward. What the fuck?

How pissed do you think Carl Bernstein is? It's like he's just been replaced with Robert Costa unceremoniously. Brutal. It's too bad. What do you think the committee is looking to learn about what trump was doing during that time that hasn't already been made public well i mean i guess we should just say but it's possible that donald trump didn't use the phone in the seven hours or maybe he was in solemn prayer during that period of time it's it's not possible because we know. We know he was on the phone with Kevin McCarthy.

We know that he was on the phone with multiple other members of Congress. Some of the call logs show that he was talking to Hawley, that he was talking to Jim Jordan, and then they stop, and then there's the seven hours and then whatever. But in reports, public reports since the insurrection, we know he was talking to a bunch of other people.

So the question is just what phone was he talking to them on? Right. So that, I mean, this is part of the issue to give it some sort of explanation is the call logs will refer specifically to calls placed through the White House operator from his landline as president or his official cell phone, I assume if he were to have one. It would not include calls that he made on a personal cell phone, not include calls he made from a staff member's phone, which you're really not supposed to do as president because you're supposed to adhere to these presidential records. It would not include any calls he made on a burner phone, which I think would be truly amazing. He's just got like Dan Scavino going to buy like Boost Mobile prepaid phones. Obama phones.

They're going right to HHS. They're getting all. Obama phones. They're, they're going right to HHS. They're getting all the Obama phones. They're using that. Then they're flushing them down the toilet with the, with the other presidential records. I did some research on the Obama phone thing the other day and people still believe it.

And if you Google Obama phone, there are still companies who have bought the search term to try to get people to buy grifting cell plans. Wow. That is something. That's a real conspiracy. I mean, no one cares about that. But anywho, back to this point.

What I think they want to, they need to know to be able to put together everything Trump did. Who did he speak to? What did he say to those people? And the call logs give you, the investigators, a roadmap of who to interview, right? And then there is a question about, were there specific steps taken to evade White House and Presidential Records Act? Were records destroyed? There is a report, which I can't say it's credible yet, but that a senator received a call from an official White House number during that period. So why was that

not included in the call logs? Were those logs destroyed, which I would say Woodward and Costa say the investigators have found no evidence of that as of yet? Was there a specific decision because it was in the middle of a historic crime to not keep the records? And we also need to know what Trump did or did not do to either encourage the violence or take steps as the commander in chief to stop the violence. And all of that, that roadmap comes from the calls made and what he said to those people. already public and what we know already through public accounts and through trump's own actions is that he um incited the violence and did nothing to stop it for a long long time like he we all saw the speech that he said we're all gonna march to the capitol we're gonna try to you know and then he refused to act to protect congress he didn't send out the national guard for hours we We heard the

whole story about how he talked to Kevin McCarthy and he said, well, Kevin, those people that are storming the Capitol must be more upset about the election results than you. Like, we know all this, just like everything else with Trump. Most of it is out in the open. But I do think the key that I think the committee is looking for, the key evidence that they're looking for is like, But I do think the key that I think the committee is looking for, the key evidence that they're looking for is like, did he communicate in any way with the attackers, the rioters themselves or the people planning some kind of attack or a riot on the Capitol? Was there any communication there? And like you said, any communication about, you know, whether it was DOD, whether it was members of Congress, whoever saying, hey, we get to somehow stop this violence. We get to act. And he was like, no, no, no, I don to somehow stop this violence. We get to act. And

he was like, no, no, no, I don't want to. Right. So I think that's what we're looking for. So we'll see. We also found out last night, I think the Washington Post broke this, that the criminal investigation into the January 6th attack on the Capitol has expanded to examine the preparations for the rally that preceded the riot as the Justice Department aims to determine the full extent of any conspiracy to stop Congress from certifying Joe Biden's election victory. According to people familiar with the matter, there's a federal grand jury in Washington that has issued subpoenas to some officials in former President Trump's orbit who assisted in planning, funding and executing the January 6th rally. 6th rally, which so it seems to be that for all the shit Merrick Garland's been getting about moving too slow or not, you know, widening the probe to include, you know, not just the riders themselves, but the people who planned and helped them.

It does look like the Justice Department is investigating a wider group of people here. Yeah, I mean, it seems very clear there's investigation happening. It seems very clear that everyone involved, including the president, is in some measure of serious legal danger. The question will be, can they make the case? Is there evidence to back up the specific criminality that's there? And this is always a problem with Trump, is he commits... Is Trump guilty of inciting a violent insurrection against the United States? Yes, 100%. That is obvious.

That is true. He does all of his crimes, as you said, out in the open. Is there evidence to get him on a specific violation of a specific statute? That is a different question, and that is why this is probably taking longer than everyone wishes it would so we just talked about the russian government uh basically pleading to get trump back into office we have donald trump trying to enter into another yet another scheme with vladimir putin um to destabilize the United States government. We got more evidence that Donald Trump was potentially covering up his incitement of an insurrection to try to overthrow

the last election. That's in the headlines again. So this all just happened in a week. Our good friends at Politico weighed in on all of this with the headline, could Trump blow the midterms for the GOP? And they argued that, quote, the January 6th committee's major reports, when released this year, will force every candidate to discuss Trump in 2020. And as the midterms approach, Trump himself will be a central player in campaigns everywhere, whether either party likes it or not. What do you think about that? Obviously, elections are decided by a more complex set of factors than one thing or one person, the state of the economy, the state of

the pandemic, just the map, right? Does the Senate map come up on a good year or a bad year? All of that is going to play into this. But I do think that Trump being in the news is good news for Democrats, right? There are some Democratic strategists, not many, but some who I think are under the view that like, we shouldn't talk about Trump, we should ignore Trump, because if you talk about Trump, you get Trump turnout. Well, I think it's worth looking at Virginia for a second, because even though Terry McAuliffe awkwardly and terribly said Trump's name all the time, Donald Trump did not campaign in Virginia. He was not in ads in Virginia. He had endorsed Yunkin, but was really sort of distant from that race. And

they saw a huge surge in Republican turnout over 2017. And so if Trump is in the news, it means a couple of things. It means we're talking about Trump and his crimes and his chaos and his stupidity and not just the price of gas, fights among Democrats, Joe Manchin, Kyrsten Sinema, all this other stuff. And in Virginia, think about it this way, which is there were about 2.4 million people who voted for Joe Biden in 2020. 2020. Terry McAuliffe and Joe Biden won by 10 points. Terry McAuliffe lost by a little bit less than two points, and he got 700,000 votes less than Biden. So that 700,000 people is two groups. It is some people who voted for Joe Biden and they voted for Glenn Youngkin. The other are people who voted for Joe Biden and decided not to vote in 2021. And any chance we have at the midterms involves activating people who voted for Biden and getting them turned out in the midterm and keeping people who are Republican or Republican-leaning who voted for Biden with us in 2022. And Donald Trump helps on both those fronts. And so having him up there in the news, it doesn't mean you have to do it deftly. You can't just say Trump's name all the time. You can't call people Glenn Trumpkin. But having a – it raises the stakes of the elections,

reminds people the chaotic criminality that made a lot of people get involved in politics, made a lot of people leave the Republican Party. And so in that sense, I think it could, whether Donald Trump on his own will vote or not, no, but it will certainly help Democrats give us a fighting chance. I firmly believe if you polled Republican strategists, they would all tell you they want Trump turnout, but they don't want Trump in the news or necessarily campaigning around their state, especially if they're in competitive districts. You know, like that's just look at it from their perspective. They know that Trump in the news all the time is not great for them. Again, this is a very complicated,

nuanced thing, because just saying Trump's name, calling someone Glenn Trumpkin, calling your opponent Trump, whatever, that's not going to do it it can't be clumsy like that but but trump in the news is not something republicans in purple in competitive districts in competitive states really want that much they do want the turnout they want the trump level turnout but they don't want those swing voters who voted for joe biden who might have been independent or republican to be thinking about Donald Trump. So, yeah. Could he blow it? We don't know.

But we'll see. Speaking of blowing things, we'd be remiss. I would go with speaking of blow, but however you want to do your transition. Speaking of blowing things, we'd be remiss if we didn't mention this week's Madison Cawthorn drama.

Knew we'd get there. The North Carolina congressman said the following during an interview this week. Being kind of a young guy in Washington with an average age of probably 60 or 70, and I look at all these people, a lot of them that I've looked up to through my life, always paid attention to politics, guys that, you know. Then all of a sudden you get invited to, like, well, hey, we're going to have kind of a sexual get together at one of our homes. You should come.

And I'm like, what did you just ask me to come to? And then you realize they're asking you to come to an orgy or the fact that, you know, there's some of the people that are leading on the movement to try and remove, you know, addiction in our country. And then you watch them do, you know, a key bump of cocaine right in front of you. You watch them do a key bump of cocaine right in front of you. This is the best story in the last several months. I mean, I cannot get enough of this story.

You and I have done hundreds of podcasts together. We've talked about all kinds of things. And I've never known you to be more excited for a segment than you have been for this one over the last 24 hours and and i will say i was a little late to uh this story like i saw i like tommy said something about it a couple days ago i was like really busy with something else and i'm like what madison cothern's talking about orgies this has got to be like blown out of what is going on this must be blown out of proportion and then then i heard that clip first of all it's like he's just talking he's like oh yeah washington you don't know you don't know what's coming and then then he starts with sexual get-togethers which is uh you know i i

quite a quite a way to term an orgy sexual get together and then suddenly he's just accusing he's just accusing republicans of having orgies and doing key bumps i think that's i mean we honestly could talk about this for an hour maybe we will but like he talks about the orgy part of this as a real nafe, like a sexual get together. I don't know. Then he very specifically swerves into a very specific way of doing cocaine. He's just like an orgy. I've never heard of that. And then they're doing key bumps of cocaine.

So Madison Cawthorne says this. Keep in mind, Madison Cawthorne has said a number of completely batshit crazy things. He cheered on the insurrection. He's had a racist website that he's been called out for. Like, the guy is bad news. He's like fringe, right, Marjorie Taylor Greene territory. But this, Dan, this statement about the Koch orgies, this got Republicans pretty upset. Kevin McCarthy was very angry. All the other Republican members of Congress were very angry.

And so McCarthy and Steve Scalise demand that Cawthorn has a meeting with them on Wednesday. And Steve Scalise, like, demand that Cawthorn has a meeting with them on Wednesday. And McCarthy comes out of the meeting and he tells reporters, Madison Cawthorn admitted that he exaggerated, that this wasn't true. He said, as a result, that the young congressman has, quote, lost my trust and is going to have to earn it back. Which also is like, think about what Kevin McCarthy said about Marjorie Taylor Greene and Paul Gosar attending a white nationalist event where the crowd was cheering on Putin as he was invading Ukraine. And he said, oh, she said she wouldn't be going to one of those again.

But Madison Cawthorn talks about a coke orgy and he is pissed. McCarthy is pissed. Why do you think that is? Well, everyone knows what the first rule of Republican orgy club is. Look, I don't know whether there really is a secret Coke-fueled Republican orgy circuit, but if there were... It's a circuit. I like that you've expanded it to a circuit now.

But if there were... It was at your house I like that you've expanded it to a circuit now. But if there were... It was at your house last week. It's at my house this week. It's at Chuck Grassley's house the week after. It's a tough one. Everyone's like, oh, no, not the Grassleys. But I'm just saying that if there were such a Coke-fueled orgy circuit, this is exactly how the organizers have said coke-fueled

orgy circuit would respond to it yeah they doth protest too much it's it's got it's it's they're but they haven't been this upset since a member of their own caucus tried to hold donald trump accountable for an insurrection they they last were this angry at liz cheney for and mitt romney for like voting to impeach donald trump for inciting an insurrection um and now they're they're this angry at madison cawthorne for you know talking about for spilling the beans on the coke orgies which by the way also wonderful the next day uh roger stone yeah speaking of coke fueled orgies roger stone is like i have it on good authority that madison cawthorne uh when when when kevin mccarthy said that madison cawthorne recanted his story about the coke fueled orgies

he was just lying it's true he really believes it so like like Roger Stone's trying to walk it back again, which is just fantastic. I hope this story, I want to talk about this story every day from now and from now until November. At one point in some of the reporting, it said that Madison Cawthorn admitted that he exaggerated the story. So what's the,

so. Yeah. Exaggerated how? What's the kernel of truth in there? Maybe it wasn't, maybe it wasn't a key bump, right? Maybe it was, uh, you know, maybe the orgy was, was smaller than he led on. It's just the, the amount of jokes that I'm self-censoring right now. I know, I know, I know. I believe me. That's why I'm not really, nothing's coming out here. I think it is probably great for, it's in some ways,

it's a tragedy that this fell on a Thursday. Like I'm very happy about it, but it seems like there's no, there's no question that Lovett is going to find a way to get this into the Tuesday pod. No, I mean, forget about the Tuesday pod. Like I'm, I'm afraid for what he's going to say on Lovett or leave it. Look, he's already floated a few jokes to Tommy tommy and me and i'm you know it's he's really he's gonna go right up to that line no pun intended um okay we just had a little fun

with this that's all no one thinks it's a big political thing except for the fact that it is crazy that the republican party is angrier about this than any of the white nationalist, racist, corrupt behavior of the rest of their caucus. So that, I will say, is completely nuts. All right. When we come back, I will talk to Congresswoman Katie Porter about Biden's budget proposal and billionaire tax. on monday president biden released his 5.8 trillion dollar budget proposal for 2023 a plan that would increase spending on economic and national security priorities cut the deficit by a trillion dollars and pay for it all with 2.5 trillion dollars in higher taxes on corporations and the rich including a new minimum tax on billionaires. Here to break it all down for us is California's own Katie Porter,

Congresswoman from the 45th District. Good to see you. Good to see you. Thank you for having me. It's great to have you here. You're in Congress right now. Where are you coming from? Well, it's interesting. It turns out that in the U.S. Capitol, there actually are no workspaces for Congress people to do their work. So, so far today, I have been booted out of the Speaker's Lobby, the room off the cloakroom, the cloakroom itself, the women's bathroom, which I finally resorted to, which is definitely not an appropriate workspace. And now I'm coming to you kneeling on the carpet of the Rayburn room where I'm very certainly shortly going to learn that

workspace is not, work is not permitted here either. Can we get Katie Porter a cubicle here? What's going on? Well, I mean, it's really interesting. The workspaces we have, there are no actual table and chairs because apparently we're not supposed to actually, well, I mean, it's really interesting. Like, the workspaces we have, there are no actual table and chairs, because apparently we're not supposed to actually, like, write or, like, do real work. We're supposed to be like, I really, we really need to create spaces where we can take meetings with constituents who come to the Capitol, where we can get on remote hearings, where we can do things. And, you know, this is part of modernizing Congress that we just don't seem to be moving toward. and printers and landlines and courts. And they said, well, there's no place to put my iPad on this area.

And I said, by the way, are those printers wireless? And they said, oh, no, you can't print to those. Technology and government is tough. You're really much better off at a Starbucks, I think is the message, or particularly a Starbucks that's unionizing. better off at a Starbucks, I think is the message, or, you know, particularly a Starbucks that's unionizing. But we really need to think about if we want to see our members hard at work, creating workspaces where they can do exactly that. So you don't have to kneel for Pod Save America. So I literally am kneeling here at the Pod Temple in order to be in conversation with

you about the budget, which is so important. Outrageous. Well, let's talk about the budget. Biden's budget proposal is just that. It's a proposal. A lot of hopes and wishes. You guys in Congress are the ones who actually have to write it and pass it. What do you like? What do you want to change? Yep. So let's start with what I like. I like that we're seeing deficit reduction. I like that this is a president who is directly responding to concerns about how the pandemic reshaped our spending. And I think that's a really important thing for people to take a look at. This is a budget that was very carefully put together, not one that's just there to score quick political points, but one is to set our country up for economic success for the decades to come.

I like the funding for pandemic preparedness. Congress should get this done, but we clearly haven't. So the president is pushing us and that's a healthy relationship. Climate crisis, incredibly important. The longer we wait to spend to address the climate crisis, the higher the price tag gets. So the president's budget allots $44.9 billion to address the climate crisis. If we don't spend that money today, next year, that price tag goes up and the tools we have to address the climate crisis become more difficult, become reduced. So I also like the money for medical research. I think that's really important. And I want to make sure, and I spoke with the White

House staff yesterday about this, about making sure that medical research dollars, our tax dollars that we are allotting, that we are putting clauses in those medical research contracts so that we are able to actually afford the life-saving drugs and cures that come out of it. The last thing I like is I like the approach on taxation. It is really, really important that every American, regardless of their income level, feel like they're paying their fair share, feel like they're chipping into our collective well-being. And so I think the effort to crack down on loopholes globally is important. I think the minimum tax for billionaires is important. And raising the tax rate for

corporations, I want to mention one thing about that. You can set that tax rate for corporations at anything you want, but if you don't fully fund the IRS and you don't close those loopholes, they won't pay that rate. So I think people often too often focus on the rate of taxation and not on the effective collection of taxes and what corporations are often paying. So while I applaud President Biden trying to put the tax rate back where it has been, it would be the lowest rate ever in modern history, taking it back to 28 percent. Still, you have to do the work of collecting those taxes. So that's what I like. What don't you like? What do you want to change? Well, so I think one of the concerns I have is taking a hard look at the Pentagon and defense budget. Now, so everybody knows that number in the defense budget is bigger than the number

in the non-domestic spending. But this president proposed a smaller increase for the Pentagon, 4% than he did on the domestic spending side, which was like 5.5%. But I think we have a duty with every tax dollar to look at where is it going? What are we getting for this money? And I don't think that there's any cost for the DOD or for the Pentagon on that. We have to be doing that work. And so I'm going to be digging into that defense budget in more detail. I do see some signs of progress, for example, being willing to, you know, kind of take a harder look at the F-35 program, which is not taking flight, shall we say, and being willing to crack down on that. I think there's two, I think one of the things we saw last year was the Pentagon made their request,

the president fully met it. Then right at the last minute, the armed services committees voted to add 10% to the amount that even the Pentagon told us they needed. So I just think there's often a gap between giving our service members what they need, which I will always support, and giving generals what they want, where it's my job to really ask,

is this serve the bottom line? Does this keep our country safer? I got all excited about this billionaire minimum tax, and then Joe Manchin killed it like he has done to so many of our hopes and dreams over the last two years. What do you think can actually get done on taxes between now and the midterms or in this budget or in whatever reconciliation bill you guys end up? Yeah. I mean, look, I think people oppose this billionaire's tax at their own political peril. The American people understand that this is not fair. And fundamentally, they understand that this is crippling our economy. Our economy is doing

great. Families are not. And the reason for that is that we have a wealth inequality problem. We have an income inequality problem. So I think this billionaire's tax, the polling on it is off the hook. The reaction of the American people to it is off the hook. And, you know, I think this goes back to really, you know, the American people want us to understand their situations to, you know, this is what people like, but I, the American people want us to, to understand their situations to, you know, this is what people like, but I drive a minivan. I mean, yes. Like, I don't know how else to get three kids around suburban Orange County. When the pandemic hit, people were like, oh, look at Katie's kitchen. It's so comforting. It's like, she has this like shitty white

refrigerator. And I was like, yes, because that's all I can afford. Like, you know, right. So, but the reality is we have a lot of people in Congress for whom that billionaire tax might have a bite and, you know, it'd have a bite for them and have a bite for their big donors. And I think that kind of cycle of cynicism and skepticism, because we don't advance policies that serve literally, in this case, 99.99% of Americans. The billionaire's tax would apply to the 0.01%. People with over $100 million. Let me tell you, if you're asking yourself, is that me? It's not. If it were you, you would have already had 42,000 high-paid lawyers and accountants calling you in a panic. If it were you, you would have already had 42,000 high paid lawyers and accountants calling you in a panic. So if you're wondering, is this billionaire's tax going to apply to me?

I assure you it's not. Do you think it has any legal issues at all? Because some people are saying, you know, if it's a tax on unrealized gains, that's hard to do. Like, is this all legally sound in your opinion? Let me give you an example. Property tax, which, you know, big issue in California. Trump made it a bigger issue with his terrible cap on assault deduction. Property tax is a tax on unrealized gains. My house may go up in value and my taxation rate goes up. I'm not selling my house or moving out of my house. I'm just paying tax on the increase in the value.

So there is precedence for doing this within our taxation system. And look, I want to keep this in mind. Anybody who wants to say, oh, you know, I don't want to do anything unconstitutional. Keep in mind, this tax, this billionaire's tax only kicks in if you're not paying 20%. So if you simply would just pony up your fair share, like all of the rest of us who get in our cars and go to work and get in trouble if we get there at 935 instead of 930, you won't have to worry about this. So if you're already paying 20%, this is not going to be an issue for you. So it's a minimum tax, which I think is really important for people to understand. It's just trying to set a floor. So I personally understand the legal arguments. But I think when you look at what

happens to people with property tax, that is a great example of an unrealized game where we all feel our taxes go up on it. It's hard to figure out where the sweet spot is here because I've heard Manchin say he's happy to raise rates on the highest earners and then Sinema doesn't want to raise the rates. Like, is there some kind of tax increase on the wealthy and big corporations in general that you see satisfying both the Sinema concerns and the Manchin concerns, who both seem like in theory they want the wealthy to pay more but continue to shit on all these proposals? want the wealthy to pay more but continue to shit on all these proposals yeah i mean i think the venn diagram of what senator mansion and senator cinema support is actually like two circles that don't touch so you know there's no there's no overlap there it's very it's a thin line um but we have to try to try to find and it's like a you see the line and then it disappears on you

yeah yeah so you know look i, I think that there's two points to make. One is anytime you hear someone say, oh, I'm good with this or I'm good with that, you should ask yourself why. And one of the reasons that we often hear people who are not really supportive of a fair taxation system offer to raise the rates is that they know nobody actually pays that rate at the top. So for regular wage earners, if you move the rate up from, say, 18 to 20, we pay that extra. But for the very top, when you move the rate from, say, 25 to 28 or 30 to 35, they don't end up paying that because they have all of these strategies to basically keep their income year after year,

generation after generation from being taxed. So for me, if I earn an extra dollar, which I can't because of house ethics rules, but if I ever did earn an extra buck, then that extra buck goes on my tax return and it gets taxed. But when someone gets hundreds of millions of dollars of shares of a corporation, nobody doubts that has value. Nobody doubts that's being given to them because of their work as a CEO or as a board of director. To not tax that, you know, doesn't really capture what they're really earning and what they're really living on. So, you know, do I think that, you know, I hear Manchin, I hear Sinema, I think the reality

is there's a lack of trust in what they say. They need to put forth a proposal. The burden should be on them to make their pitch to the American people. I want to talk about inflation. I've seen a lot of folks on Twitter say, you know, people are worried about gas prices and inflation in the economy because the media and the Republicans are focusing on that narrative. You're talking to constituents all the time in Orange County. What do you think? Oh, listen, John. People, I put back blueberries at the grocery store. They were $5.99 and I can't afford it. I told my kids, they're like, mom, we never have bacon anymore. And I was like, right,

because we're going to have pancakes and you're not going to have the bacon and you're going to be just fine because it's too expensive. So I buy it when it's on sale. So I do think people are feeling the pinch. I will say, I think the overarching increase in things like food actually hit most families harder than gas, but that depends a lot on how much you drive and how often you drive and your commute. So I don't think it's just talking points. But here's what I think, where I think the Republicans are being disingenuous, and I think we have to call them out. What they're really saying is, inflation's a problem, so we have to lower wages. That is a corporate talking point that directly benefits businesses.

What we need to do is lower costs. So when we make healthcare more affordable, when we make childcare more affordable, we crack down on profiteering, right? You know, the oil and gas companies paid out $38 billion in stock buybacks, but they can't take down the price of the pump by 38 cents a gallon. So what I wanted, I do want to tackle inflation. I think it's incredibly important. I do think it's having a bite. I see it in my own family, but the way to tackle it is to bring down costs, not to bring down wages. And I think behind a lot of the Republican hype on inflation, when you ask them, well, what are you going to do about it? The answer is people shouldn't have so

much money in their pockets. And that is the wrong answer. Well, so the other thing I see is a lot of, you know, well-meaning liberal economists saying like, oh, Democrats shouldn't be talking about how corporate consolidation and price gouging are affecting inflation or causing inflation because that's not the cause. So Democrats should stop talking about it. What do you think about that? Yeah. No, listen, I mean, I think we should just name names. Mary Summers. Listen, the reality is corporate consolidation. Let's go back to fundamentals. Let's talk about what makes a market work. Let's talk about the premises of capitalism. Competition and markets are what make supply and demand work.

It's what brings them into balance. So if you have consolidation, which we have in the meatpacking industry, where guess what we've seen? Inflation. Where we have in the travel industry, guess what we've seen with Carbonyl? Inflation. So when you don't have competition, you don't have an actual market. We don't have a market in healthcare because you can't figure out what anything costs. And you can't shop around because your insurance company

limits you. You can't get a price quote on getting a mole removed if you think you have cancer. You just pay what you pay. Where we don't have competition, whether it's due market consolidation or market failure, then we're going to see prices go up. So the solution here is to simply any economist who is claiming to be a capitalist and should be basically saying, I stand against market failures. I believe in healthy markets. Here are the markers of a healthy market. And everybody knows that a marker of a healthy market is competition. It's consumer choice. It's price transparency. We don't have those things in most of our biggest expenses. We don't have it in health. We have very few choices in child care. It's very difficult to find right now. And so we need to create more competition. So I really

applaud. I think this is an area where the Biden administration has done transformative work in putting people in place that really believe in capitalism. They don't believe in corporate cronyism. They believe in capitalism. And they're trying to force these large companies to actually compete. They're trying to make room for small businesses to innovate. That's capitalism.

I know the Congressional Progressive Caucus met with the president on Wednesday. I know there was a lot of talk about executive actions. We've talked a lot about how the president could act on student debt relief. What are the other sort of top executive actions you hope the president will pursue between now and the midterms? And how did you walk out of that meeting? Did you get a sense that he was going to take some? Yeah. So I walked out of the meeting with three little packages of M&Ms for my kids because I just wanted to take one little White House piece of swag.

And I said, I'm going to give this to the kid I like best. And the president said, no, no, you can have one for each of your children. That's very generous. Yeah, I thought so. I don't want to have to pick a favorite. But look, what the president said is dead right. He said, I'm focused on things that will help address the costs families are facing. And this is exactly what the Progressive Caucus was saying. So prescription drug pricing, education, whether it's preschool, whether it's community college, whether it's student loan debt child care right which remains unaffordable and is keeping people out of the labor market

and then climate because we really do face a need to get ourselves out of the cycle of energy exploitation that we're in and so those were the four big things that we talked about there are other urgent needs including investment in housing and other things. But I think prescription drugs, climate, education, child care were kind of the four main talking points that both we raised with the president and the president raised that with us. Did he seem amenable to taking action on some of those priorities on his own if it doesn't end up in reconciliation or reconciliation for some reason doesn't work out? it doesn't end up in reconciliation or reconciliation for some reason doesn't work out? Yeah. I mean, you know, I think the thrust of the kind of discussion was there's a lot of, there's sort of a bottleneck in Congress where it's like, well, we don't want to act on these things. If we're going to do it through reconciliation, we don't want to take individual

action. And we don't want to take individual action if we're going to do it through executive action. But we have to have a sort of order of operations. What is the best way? What's going to go first? What problems are we going to tackle in what order? And I think it depends on the issue. I think there are some things like raising leasing rates on oil and gas on public land that the president can and should do the executive action. I think there are other things like some of the larger tax credits and things around electric vehicles that we need to do through congressional action. So I think the goal is to get unstuck. I mean, as I often said, just because Joe Manchin decided to refuse to build back better doesn't mean that any of the problems that the American people face cease to exist. Just because Washington ceases to act doesn't make those problems go away

in my constituents lives. So last question, Republicans are the party out of power. They're trying to make this election a referendum on the president. Democrats are the party in power. You're trying to make this election a choice. How are you framing that choice when you're talking to folks in your district? Yeah. So look, I think it's really important that we talk about where the Republican party is today. And it's also important to talk about what we've done been able to get things over the finish line. But do you know why we haven't been able to get things over the finish line? Because we have zero Republican support. So the number of Republicans who are willing to step up and act on climate, zero.

The number of Republicans who are willing to do something about child care costs, zero. The number of Republicans who are willing to help make college more affordable for your kids, zero. If you have a Republican-controlled house, families can count on getting zero help going forward. That's good. I like that. Katie Porter, thank you so much for joining us. I hope they give you a workspace somewhere to do some work for next time you talk to us. I hope I can walk when I get up from kneeling. I'm sorry you had to kneel during this interview.

Oh, my God. Well, thank you for doing it. We always appreciate you coming on Pod Save America. Thank you. And we're back, and we have with us Tommy Vitor to take us through the March badness final four. The moment is here. Hello, John. Hello, Dan.

It's great to see you. It's great to see you. I've never needed you more in my life than I did on Monday's show. Love it stepped on or did not understand all of my basketball jokes. It was it was devastating. did not understand all of my basketball jokes. It was devastating. I have to say that his failure to laugh at and also interrupt you during your Donald Trump,

Coach K joke is a crime against humanity. How do you, the Coach K reference, how do you drop that? I don't know. You don't have to be a basketball fan. You just have to be sort of alive. Anyway, all credit to Elijah for that joke, by the way. Okay, welcome back to our second annual

March Badness Tournament. If you did not listen to the Monday pod and you're wondering, why is that guy Tommy here? It's because March Badness is happening. It's when we rank the eight worst Republicans in the country, and then we make them compete. On Monday, Lovett and Favreau voted to advance four of the awful eight to the Fascist Four. awful eight to the fascist four. Today, Dan and John will choose the winner of our fascist four games and the final contest to determine

who is our national champion shit. The joke still works. Okay. Yes. So Dan and listeners, here are the results from Monday. In the West, Congressman Paul Gosar edged out

the Arizona Republican Party. In the East, Ginny and Clarence Thomas slapped an injunction on Dr. Oz. It's very hot right now. In the South, we had arguably the biggest upset of the tournament when one seed, Donald Trump, was defeated by the rest of Florida.

And in the Midwest, America's least favorite blow-dried insurrectionist, Josh Hawley, beat a belligerent Buckeye named Josh Mandel. So our final contest, our fascist four, is a six seed, three seed, four and seven seed. Madison Cawthorn would be disappointed that we didn't go all chalked in. You know, I was going to say there's two reasons Tommy's here today. One is, of course, for March badness. The second is this was a slack actually sent by Tommy Vitor yesterday.

Why does Dan get all the orgies? Because he knows we were talking about Madison Cawthorn today. So I'm glad you got a Madison Cawthorn joke in there. Very jealous. Okay. We also asked our audience

to vote on the Awful Eight. They did so on the Pod Save America Twitter account. They were mostly in agreement with Lovett and John's choices, except they had Donald Trump beating the rest of Florida to advance. Dan, any thoughts on the results from Monday or the audience input? Yeah, I think it's hard to fault the audience for choosing Donald Trump. They don't

like Donald Trump. That's probably what brought us here. That's what brought them here. But I think the status of Florida as a Cinderella is a little bit overstated. Sometimes you have teams that are just – they're very talented, but they're underseated. So I think that Florida is actually Butler 2010. Oh, OK. So everyone thought they were a great Cinderella story. There's no way they could possibly beat Duke, which has a lot of Trump-like qualities, as we said. But when you look back on it, they were a very talented team.

They had Gordon Hayward, NBA player. Shelvin Mack, NBA player. And the only problem with the Florida Butler analogy, maybe it's not a problem for me, but is it makes Brad Stevens Ron DeSantis. Oh. Maybe it's not a problem for me, but is it makes Brad Stevens Ron DeSantis? Oh, and I just wanted to say that we wanted to move on from Donald Trump and America disagreed, which is unfortunately tells you something. Yeah, that's a good point. But we wanted to move on to Ron DeSantis. So there you go. No. Okay. Well, that brings us to our fascist four. I believe we have an all insurrectionist tournament, although admittedly, I'm assuming that the rest of Florida all was pro-insurrection. It seems like a safe bet.

It's hard to avoid an all insurrectionist final. Yeah, that's probably right. Okay. So first, our first matchup, our first game is Congressman Paul Gosar versus Justice Clarence Thomas and his wife, Ginny. Guys, doing some research. Clarence Thomas and his wife, Ginny. Guys, doing some research. Gosar once compared himself and his crew of MAGA dead-enders to a Japanese soldier who hid on an island for three decades

and refused to recognize the end of World War II. I don't have a joke here. It's just like, yeah, man. Exactly. That's a level of self-awareness that I did not expect from Dr. Paul Gosar. He tweeted this yeah look the guy is fucking nuts he's a looney tunes looney tunes individual um gossar is going head to head

as i said earlier with clarence and jenny thomas uh guys we know that jenny puts in the work in the film room she does her own research he texts youtube links like, Trump sting with CIA director Steve Piznik, the biggest election story in history, comma, QFS blockchain. She sent that to the White House chief of staff. So, who do you guys got? The Thomas family or Paul Gosar? So, here's my thoughts on this.

Paul Gosar, fucking crazy as they come. You have someone almost equally as crazy in Ginny Thomas, also a big insurrectionist, also sending nutty links to everyone. But also on her team is someone with real power, which Paul Gosar doesn't have. Clarence Thomas, one of the nine justices, has been just sort of handing down the worst possible opinions

for decades now. I think I got to go with the Thomases. Yeah, I think this is very clear the Thomases. They are incredibly dangerous, incredibly crazy, incredibly fascist, so it fits in here. And additionally, Arizona always loses in the tournament. So Gosar, the only Gossar's even here is he was playing someone from Arizona. And so there you go.

There you go. Mike Baby would like a word, Dan. Also, Justice Thomas is also routinely spotted in Washington with eight other sexy seniors. And Madison Cawthorn keeps telling us about the value of teamwork among, you know, elite Republicans. So the second game, the second game, we know it's ever, ever referred to the Supreme.

That's next month. C block is ranking the eight sexy seniors. I don't know, Dan, we got some big download targets for sexual get together, sexual get together. Like everybody talks whenever, when someone's pitching...

Would you say that's the highest court in the land? Yes! Wow, nice. Nice. Okay. Second game in our fascist four. We have Senator Josh Hawley versus the rest of Florida. Josh Hawley was recently described as

partially melted Ken doll, Ted Cruz, which I thought was harsh. Um, but he's a decent shop locker guys. Cause he gets his fist up. So that's Josh. That's our guy, Josh.

Thank you, Dan. What can I say about the rest of Florida here? I think love it. Once described them as America's cocaine straw. I think that was at a show in Florida. Do you guys remember this? No,

I actually have no memory of that. Maybe it was during a text with Madison Cawthorn, but Florida got a big in Florida. Do you guys remember this? No, I actually have no memory of that. Maybe I was hearing a text with Madison Cawthorn. But Florida got a big endorsement recently, Dan, when Alex Jones said Ron DeSantis is better than Trump. But there are also lingering questions about whether authorities will let Matt Gaetz cross state lines for away games. So there's a question about whether they can fully travel.

So who do you guys think it'll be? Sound fundamentalist, Josh Holly going to the championship, or are these Florida Republicans just too good at getting to the line? If you know what I'm saying, Dan, you go first on this one. So in this basketball related analogy,

So, in this basketball-related analogy, Matt Gaetz cannot travel to attend the national championship match. Is that correct? Potentially, yes. Much like Kyrie Irving cannot travel to Canada, were they to play the Toronto Raptors in the NBA playoffs? That's right. Excellent. Okay, just wanted to get that out there. I think it has to be Florida. Look, I think Josh Hawley has done a lot with what little he has, but in the end, he does not have the... He's a one-man team, right?

He does not have the talent to take on the... Really, the all-stars, the fascist five, I think maybe we would call Florida, given all their opportunities there. That's good. There are few states in our union that have a collection of Republican goobers as fucking awful as the state of Florida. And we always feel bad picking on Florida, right? There's a lot of great Democrats in Florida.

I feel for all them. A lot of just wonderful people in the state in general. I might guess. But I guess, you know, I'm just kidding. Honestly, I'm just trying to say it. But look, my parents used to live there. I get it. I spent a lot of time there.

But the collection of assholes in that state, from Ron DeSantis to the legislature, to Matt Gaetz, to the other members of Congress there. Marco Rubio. Marco Rubio. We haven't talked. Marco Rubio. Marco Rubio. We haven't talked about Marco Rubio. Rick Scott. Oh, my God.

Yeah, it's a collection of asshole talent unmatched by any team in modern fake basketball history. It is awful. In fact, I think they're, yeah, I'm going to go with Florida. I also think they're heavy favorites in the national championship. Oh, championship but oh wow okay so i don't want to give anything away rick scott good for a double double with this 10 point plan so your national championship guys uh is it jenny and clarence thomas or will there be an orgy at the villages when florida takes it what have you got here?

What would this segment have been without Madison Cawthorn? I don't know. Zero jokes. I mean, that's all we talked about today is Madison Cawthorn. So wait, are we picking now or do we wait until Monday? Yeah, I want you guys to pick now.

Oh, you want to wait for Lovett to win on Monday? We can't extend this bit all the way to Monday? We can try. I mean, we'll get Lovett's input on Monday anyway, or Tuesday, whenever we do that other pod. I sort of gave it away. I have to go with Florida. I just think from the threat of DeSantis to become president,

to their two fucking goofball senators, to their terrible delegation, to their legislature, and all the horrible laws that they've passed recently, Florida sucks. There you go. See, I think this could be an upset. I think that we are staring down the barrel of another insurrection. Ron DeSantis, Matt Gaetz, they're one of many Republicans who participated at equal levels

in that insurrection. Maybe they'll storm the Capitol. Maybe they'll send some fake electors. But Clarence Thomas, along with his partner, Ginny, are one of nine votes to potentially overturn an election. Something I will note, Clarence Thomas has done once before. Wow. So we got a hanging chat election in the championship game. Yeah. That's right. All right. So Love It will pick the winner on Monday. Love It will pick the winner. That's the kind of power he wants.

Okay. So that was dumb and fun. The serious ask here, John, look at this turn I'm making. My voice is signaling seriousness. Get involved with Crooked Media's midterm madness campaign because we can't vote out Clarence Thomas, but you can work to defeat goobers like Adam Laxalt in Nevada who led the efforts to overturn the 2020 election results in his state. Josh Hawley is not on the Missouri ballot this year, but an unbelievably disgusting human being

named Eric Greitens could be, right? So that's why you got to go to votesaveamerica.com slash midterm dash madness to pick a region, get involved in the 2020 midterms with us. We will make it fun. We will do stupid crap like this all the time probably. Yeah, and it's fun. You pick your region. You get a little competitive about it. Right now we're doing it for March Madness, but there's plenty of ways for regions to feel competitive from now until November.

Dan, have you noodled on your region? I don't know when I get to pick. Do I have the first pick, the second pick? Oh, we're going to do a draft. Yeah. I feel like we should give Dan the first pick. I'm making that executive decision right now. You don't have to do it right now,

but we got to pick eventually, the four of us. We haven't talked about this because we've been so busy making Madison Cawthorn jokes and doing Marsh Badness. But I think we give Dan. He's our elder statesman. I think he gets the first pick. Wow.

Wow, Dan. Seems fair. Seems fair. Number one overall pick, lottery pick, Dan Pfeiffer. And Lovett's not here, so he gets the last pick. Hopefully Dan won't hit the transfer portal because that joke was so harsh, much like a lot of his Georgetown Hoyas are lately. You know what?

That's okay. We can swap out some members of the team that lost every single game in the Big East for some other players. I'm okay with that. Okay, that's fine. Well, that's it for my time here. Great to see you guys. Tommy, thanks for joining the Thursday Pod.

Katie Porter, thanks for joining. And Madison Cawthorn, thanks for letting us know where the party at. Jagged edge over here. Have a good weekend, everyone. Bye, everyone. Pod Save America is a Crooked Media production. The executive producer is Michael Martinez. Our senior producer is Andy Gardner-Bernstein.

Our producer is Haley Muse, and Olivia Martinez is our associate producer. It's mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick. Kyle Seglin and Charlotte Landis sound engineer the show. Thanks to Tanya Sominator, Sandy Gerard, Hallie Kiefer, Ari Schwartz, Andy Taft, and Justine Howe for production support. And to our digital team, Elijah Cohn, Phoebe Bradford, Milo Kim, and Amelia Montu. Our episodes are uploaded as videos at youtube.com slash crookedmedia.