Pod Save America - "Of MAGA and Midterms (with John Fetterman!)"

Episode Date: September 8, 2022

The final stretch of the 2022 midterms have begun, but it is still Trump vs Biden on the campaign trail. The Mar A Lago investigation hits the skids as DOJ announces a new investigation of Trump’s Super PAC. And Pennsylvania Lt. Governor John Fetterman joins the pod to talk about his exciting run for Senate. 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, the final stretch of the 2022 midterms has begun, but it's still Trump versus Biden on the campaign trail. And joining us later is the Democratic candidate with maybe the best chance to flip a Senate seat, Pennsylvania Lieutenant Governor Jon Fetterman. Exciting. Exciting. I'm excited. Did you hear me knocking on wood when you said best chance? Yeah, best chance of I was saying of any other Democratic in any other state.

Alright, come on people. Also, I think Mandela Barnes has a very good chance too but I think if you're looking at numbers, you know, Pennsylvania probably the best chance. This is a numbers free podcast. We're all vibes. If you are not caffeinated enough we got a coffee sale for you now through this weekend get free shipping when you spend 35 or more on crooked coffee use code fuel up at checkout when you head to crooked.com slash coffee that's the code dan it's fuel up i know you're wondering

about that do you know i was you know I was at the White House yesterday for this? I know you were at the White House. Many people asked me about you because you obviously could not attend for a work obligation. I just told everyone that you were a coffee salesman now, an online barista.

I can't believe you ignore the shoes that we're moving. Ignore them, I'm wearing them. Very quickly. Thank you. Yes. Also, check out Crooked's newest show, Dare We Say. This week, the hosts explore the ongoing erosion of the separation between church and state and what this shift means for their Gen Z peers and their futures.

New episodes of Dare We Say drop every Thursday wherever you get your podcasts. Finally, Dan, get ready. The wilderness is back. The trailer for season three is out today. The first episode is out Monday. I talked to Biden voters in Virginia, Pittsburgh, Orange County, Las Vegas, and Atlanta who haven't yet made up their minds about the midterms. haven't yet made up their minds about the midterms. And then I sat down with some of the smartest people in politics to talk about these focus groups and get their thoughts

on how Democrats can reassemble the 2020 coalition for the 2022 midterms and beyond. Everyone should take a listen. You'll be surprised, might be a little frustrated, but hopefully you'll be energized and hopeful. That's what I'm going for. It may be late for this, but had you'll be energized and hopeful. That's what I'm going for. It may be late for this, but had you considered as a title for this season,

return to the wilderness question mark? You know, Dan, it's sort of how I start episode one. You're on my way. It's weird I don't get invited to more branding meetings at Crooked. All right. Anyway, check out the trailer, subscribe.

You'll hear the first episode on Monday. Okay. Let's get to the news. Labor Day is the traditional kickoff to the final stretch of any campaign. And even though we're heading into 2022, the conversation this week has been dominated by Joe Biden and Donald Trump, who just held dueling speeches in Pennsylvania.

One of the judges Trump appointed also granted his request for a special master to review all the documents the FBI found in his beach house, which will have the effect of temporarily pausing the investigation into the 2024 Republican frontrunner, who, according to a new Washington Post story this week, had been hiding highly classified information about a foreign government's nuclear weapons program in Mar-a-Lago, as well as documents so secret that only the president and a few cabinet members could authorize other government officials to know about them. Naturally, Trump is doing what any good strategist or lawyer would tell a candidate to do

who's under criminal investigation for stealing nuclear secrets. He's making it part of his stump speech. Let's take a listen. The FBI and the Justice Department have become vicious monsters. It was not just my home that was raided last month. It was the hopes and dreams of every citizen who I've been fighting for since the moment I came down the golden escalator. The Mar-a-Lago raid was a desperate effort to distract from Joe Biden's record of misery and failure. As you know, this week,

Joe Biden came to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to give the most vicious, hateful and divisive speech ever delivered by an American president. Vilifying 75 million citizens as threats to democracy and as enemies of the state. You're all enemies of the state. He's an enemy of the state. You want to know the truth? The FBI didn't just raid his home, Dan. They raided your hopes and dreams. I love that part. Just terrible speech writing. All right. Lots to unpack there. Let's start with Judge Eileen Cannon's decision to stop the investigation until a special master can look through all the documents they found in Mar-a-Lago and separate the nuclear secrets Trump stole from his old porn stash. What are they going to do? What do you make of the ruling?

What happens now? Well, as we have stipulate every episode since we got really deep into Trump's crimes over the last month here. So we are not amateur lawyers. We are not lawyers. Right. But we do follow a lot of lawyers on Twitter. So I feel like I can speak with some authority on this matter. Let me tell you, they are outraged. Yes. matter let me tell you they are outraged yes and some of your favorite twitter lawyers think this

ruling is bullshit including new attorney general of resistance nation bill barr who thinks it's absurd he called it a crock of shit bill barr called it a crock of shit this ruling that's what you need to know resistance hero bill barr get your bobblehead doll. Get your votive candle with Bill Barr on it. We got a Mueller doll. We got a Christopher Wray doll. We got a Bill Barr doll. We got an Eric Hirschman doll. All right.

Anyhow, I mean, this you don't really even have to be a lawyer or even follow top lawyers on Twitter to understand why this ruling is idiocy, because one of the main, you're going to have a huge debate about whether executive privilege, which is the reason for the special master, the special master is going to go through these documents and see which might be subject to executive privilege. Now, it's worth stipulating that executive privilege has never applied to former presidents. It certainly doesn't apply to documents moving within the executive branch, which is where the FBI and Department of Justice is. But there's like a massive factual error of this ruling where it says that President Biden did not weigh in because the sitting president makes determinations on executive privilege because they are the executive, not the fucking Yahoo in the beach house.

Whether he had not weighed in on whether executive privilege could be claimed here, but he did in the letter from the archivist that Trump's team foolishly weirdly released last month. And so this is just a bunch of idiocy. The impact of this is everyone has sort of written is that this will delay, but not necessarily derail the investigation. But the delay does matter because if it kicks it down the curve for a long time, you're going to be put in a position where the context in which a potential indictment could be announced is in the middle of a presidential campaign, which it should not be more complicated. There is no special provision in the law that says if you're running for president, you can't go to jail for crimes you committed. But as we know, everything is political, and that will add some of the complications of such an announcement if that were to happen. add some of the complications of such an announcement if that were to happen. Our boy, Billy Barr, has said he's he's like pretty certain this would be overturned because to just know how crazy the executive the executive privilege ruling is here, the ruling about

executive privilege, that there is some dispute over like whether former presidents can ever have a claim of executive privilege. But the ruling that that's the Supreme Court ruling that's based on took place before the Presidential Records Act was passed into law. The Presidential Records Act makes very, very clear what you just said, which is that the current president gets to decide what documents are privileged or not, not the former president. So now if you get a special

master, first of all, to find a special master, you have to have both sides agree on candidates to be this person. The person has to be classified at the highest level in order to even see some of these documents. And then this person has to make some determination about which documents are privileged and which aren't, even though the law does not spell that out at all, because the law says that nothing's privileged because Joe Biden gets to make the privilege, make the decision on privilege. So it's like preposterous. So the government, the DOJ has an option. They either go down this route trying to find a special master with all those qualifications who can do that, which seems very, very difficult. But I guess they have to this Friday, both sides to come up with a list of special potential special master candidates they agree on. Or the DOJ appeals this ruling to the 11th Circuit. Now, the issue there is the 11th Circuit has 11 judges, six are Trump appointed judges and five are not.

But people like even very conservative people like Bill Barr think that even though there are other Trump judges on this 11th Circuit Court, there's no way they would uphold this. We'll see. There's an interesting story in the New York Times today about the dilemma the Justice Department has, which is I think they believe on the merits, they would win this and win it easily. Department has, which is I think they believe on the merits, they would win this and win it easily. But there are two challenges to an appeal. One, it further delays the special master issue. And there is a concern that you could just get a run of Trump judges running up to the Trump Supreme Court, which could create an entirely absurd new expansion of executive power to include former presidents. And so there's a potential challenge to this.

So even if they are 100% right on the merits, there are timing and larger issues beyond Trump they have to wrestle with as they make this decision. But it seems like they're going to have to appeal because even if they don't want to criminally charge Trump, the national intelligence assessment of the damage and the fallout from Trump having these secrets can't even continue. The judge said it technically can continue. But in all reality, like you can't do a fair assessment of this if like the DOJ and the FBI can't be involved in looking at the documents and help with the investigation into what damage has been done

from Trump holding these documents. Like it's not, there's, there's, they're trying to build a fake wall between the intelligence officials and the justice department officials and saying that the intelligence officials can keep going with the investigation, but the justice department can't. But in reality, that doesn't work. So like, if they want to do this assessment, which they have to for national security reasons, they're going to have to appeal this. It's the whole thing is so stupid. Like the fact that we're in this place is so dumb. It has nothing to do with the point is they're not his documents.

No one has ever suggested documents. There's no precedent. They're his documents. He took them. He wasn't supposed to. He lied about it. He obstructed the investigation. And because Mitch McConnell ran through some fucking Yahoo to sit at the court of Mar-a-Lago, we're in this position where Trump is once again using the tyranny of the political minority

to avoid criminal prosecution. Good argument for fighting pretty hard to keep the Senate. Because even if Democrats lose the House, if we keep the Senate, Joe Biden can keep nominating and confirming judges. So we don't have more fucking Trump judges who do yahoo rulings like this anyway so you heard trump at the rally he said that this raid was a distraction from joe biden's failures and called law enforcement officers vicious monsters who didn't just raid his home again but raided the hopes and dreams of every citizen he's been fighting for you think think that defense works with anyone who's not a diehard Trump supporter?

Do I find it ironic that the Blue Lives Matter crowd are the ones who are accusing federal law enforcement agents of being enemies of the state who are planning evidence on a former president and are apparatchiks in Joe Biden's political army? Yeah, I find that ironic. Do I think this is going to be particularly persuasive for the plurality of Americans who think Donald Trump is dangerous and unfit for office? No. But it is an argument with political power because modern conservatism, particularly Donald Trump's amped up version of it, depends on the propagation of a conspiratorial, apocalyptic victimization, right? Everyone's coming after us, because what that does is it creates permission structure to do anything and everything, suppress votes, steal elections,

seize the electoral apparatus, political violence. And so this is something worth paying attention to. He is trying to create a sense of grievance and victimization among his base to get them to turn out. I don't think it's moving anyone from the Trump camp to the non-Trump camp or the non-Trump camp to the Trump camp, but Donald Trump has really understood from the beginning that his political power is tied to just how fired up his base is, which is a minority of Republicans. And if they're fired up and they're amped up, then every other Republican has to bend to me. And so this message will protect him within the party. And that's the first step to protecting him more broadly.

Yeah, it doesn't enlarge the base, but it further radicalizes the base, which is quite dangerous at this point. It's just so ridiculous, though. Like, I realize that that's the demagogue authoritarian move, that they're not coming after me, they're coming after you, you know? But it's just so funny. It's like, yeah, people think it's a raid on their beach house. Who among us hasn't left intel on chinese nuclear submarines lying around on a lounge chair

if that can that can happen to him it can happen to anyone i mean it is just sort of wild if you just sort of think about it you back up which is the fbi raided the home of the former president he is under multiple criminal investigations in fact between when you and i spoke this morning and the recording of this podcast another criminal investigation dropped yeah he's now there's now like federal grand jury investigating his super pack for fraud or fundraising scams or whatever else and yet at that moment every republican on the ballot ran to stand next to him in pennsylvania's insane. Like if you like, it makes sense in this moment, but if you were to like try to explain this 10 years ago or 10 years from now, I'd be like, what the fuck is happening?

Well, it has been fun listening to Republican candidates try to defend Trump's theft of highly classified nuclear secrets. Here's an answer from the guy who once said that Donald Trump can't be trusted with the nuclear codes. A storage argument that they're making, right? They're arguing there are documents there. They don't deny that he should have access to those documents, but they deny that they were not properly stored. I don't think a fight over storage of documents is worthy of what they've done. Dan, how many politicos would you give Marco Rubio for his take that it's just a storage issue? This is a storage issue. Somewhere between four and five hundred would be my answer.

I mean, this is a euphemism for the century calling the theft of classified documents being stored in unlocked desk drawer a document storage issue would be like calling bank robbery an overly aggressive financial transaction i misplaced some funds yeah that's right i mean and also i don't even want to get into the butter emails of it all but like hillary clinton turned out didn't have any classified emails after all that after all after the determination that maybe it was sloppy and this and the server like no classified emails on her this guy has fucking nuclear secrets in his beach house on fucking real all right i do want to talk about the broader midterm context here

in that clip we played earlier we also heard trump talk about biden's speech in philadelphia where he accused the president of vilifying millions of citizens as enemies of the state. Here's a clip from Biden's speech. Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic. Now, I want to be very clear, very clear up front. Not every Republican, not even the majority of Republicans are MAGA Republicans. Not every Republican embraces their extreme ideology. I know because I've been able to work with these mainstream Republicans. But there's no question that the Republican Party

today is dominated, driven and intimidated donald trump and the mega republicans and that is a threat to this country all right there was an interminable amount of debate about this speech that i'd rather not rehash for our poor listeners i i felt grateful we didn't have a pod earlier in the week so we didn't have to talk about the fresh takes on this speech but like let's just let's let's go to this question what do you think the white house strategy was with this speech prime time speech big speech he goes to philadelphia why do you think they did it there has been over the course of the last six or so months, this sort of debate among Democratic operatives, pundits, campaign folks about what the fall message should be about.

Should it be about what Democrats have delivered? What have we done? Should it be about kitchen table issues? Should it be about January 6th or something else? kitchen table issues? Should it be about January 6th or something else? And I think by giving this speech, which is to a call to make this election a referendum on Republican extremism, the White Joe Biden in the White House sent a message to every Democrat, every command, and frankly, every reporter covering these campaigns, what this should be about, that basically the central issue here to be the extremism of mega republicans

and it is like this is like what the white house can do to help enforce some sort of message cohesion among the party is to give a big speech give it in prime time get a lot of attention and hope that everyone follows and so i think that's what the goal is here is to lay their cards down for what they think the best message is for the song. We see there's a new navigator poll out today, which there's also a new Reuters poll, which both show the power of this extremism argument and the willingness of a majority of voters to believe that Republicans are dangerous extremists. Yeah, the Reuters poll today is taken after in the days after Biden's speech. Yeah, the Reuters poll today is taken after in the days after Biden's speech.

It's interesting. 58% in the polls say that Trump's Make America Great Again movement is threatening America's Democratic foundations. That includes 25% of Republicans. Some of you are probably thinking only 25%. That's pretty good. 60% of Republicans don't think Trump's MAGA movement represents the majority of the party, which I thought was interesting. But then 59% said Biden's speech will further divide the country, though half said that they didn't watch or follow the speech at all, which I think those numbers,

those sort of conflicting, seemingly conflicting numbers kind of say it all. But like, do you think Biden's speech should be the basis for the Democratic midterm message? I do. I think we have an overwhelming political and frankly, moral obligation to turn all of our firepower on focusing on the dangers of this Republican Party. And it's not just dangerous to democracy and extremism in these vague ways. It is abortion. It is attacking marriage equality, attacking trans people, book bans, privatizing social security, overturning elections, all of it. And I think that we've talked a lot about how the Dobbs decision has sort of catalyzed democratic movement. We've, you know, we've seen these stories about people getting fired up and people are answering the vote. We saw what happened in

Kansas and then the New York special election with Pat Ryan, whom you guys talked to last week. But ultimately what the, I think the Dobbs decision did is it crystallized the impact of Republican extremism. And if you can convince, and I think what is important to us is that we use is that abortion is an absolutely central issue in this race, but it is a gateway issue into a broader conversation of Republican extremism. on abortion, that they want to ban it in cases of rape and incest and life of the mother, that they're going to start attacking IVF and all of these other things. If people understand that, then they are more likely to believe, and this is correctly believed, that these same Republicans will overthrow elections.

They will attack marriage equality. They will eliminate Social Security. They will do all of these things. And so I believe that, that i mean we talked about this a little bit last week but there is a very very dangerous strain in this country right now and we have to call that out and there is no political downside in doing it there's a whole heck of a lot of political upside in it yeah let me ask you this no interesting we're off script do you think because i've thought about this a lot, do you think that anyone who watched that speech who wasn't already voting for Democrats would be convinced to vote for Democrats based on that speech? I think that we, that is a, maybe. I don't, the speech is the speech.

Right. Not that many people watch the speech. The overwhelming amount of people who consume the speech are going to be consuming it in just the conversation around it. Most of our target voters will consume neither the speech nor the conversation. And so it's the tail effects of the message. It's what the various campaigns like John Fetterman, who we're going to talk to in a little bit, put in their messaging, in their paid messaging. That is what is going to matter. It's like, there are no undecided voters watching live primetime speeches other than in moments of

extreme national crisis. So I think that's the wrong way of looking at it. It's also, that is, I think it's an overly narrow view of politics to be like, hey, I'm definitely voting, and I'm trying to decide between voting for Dr. Oz or John Fetterman. What role is his speech going to play? The other question to look at is what does that speech in that broader message do to turn out more people who voted for Joe Biden in 2020 who would otherwise sit out these midterms out of complacency or lack of political engagement? That is how to think about, I think, more than persuading a narrow swath of voters. Not that those voters aren't going to matter, but we really just have to keep people in our camp more than take people who voted for Trump and move them to our camp in

order to hold the House and keep us out. Yeah, so that I completely agree with. I also agree with the general strategy of making the 2022 midterms a referendum on republican extremism i think that's correct i think that the headlines out of that speech because the media is annoying but also predictable is like you know biden draws line in the sand it's it's you know biden versus maga and you know here's dark Brandon and all that bullshit. I would in a democratic message, if I was running a democratic campaign, I do think I would try to separate. We talked about this before the speech sort of separate MAGA from Republicans writ large. I think that's useful, but you heard Biden try to do that in the, and he did do that in the clip that we played.

He specifically said not all Republicans are are mega republicans i think it would help to be more specific and talk about mega politicians so that it's clear you're not trying to talk about voters or guess what voters might do are there a whole bunch of people in this country who are part of the mega movement some of them of them stormed the fucking Capitol on January 6th. Yeah, absolutely. But if you're a politician, if you're running in one of these races, and you are trying to get voters to choose between you and a MAGA politician, you want to focus all of your attacks possible on the politician themselves. And to the extent that you're talking about Republican extremism or MAGA extremism, you want to be, I think, as specific as possible about how that extremism

is going to affect your life. And you were just saying that, right? So you have to be explicit about the abortion bans, explicit about the fact that they want to overturn elections, explicit about the fact that they're going to privatize Social Security. So all the things, all the freedoms that they're going to take away, all the policies that they're going to put into place, all the votes that they've taken in the past, you have to be extremely specific about what they are for people and get that message out. And I'm just saying this because, like, having talked to all these voters for the for the wilderness like i was struck by so these were all biden voters right but they haven't made up their minds these were not people who voted for donald trump in 2020 this is part of our coalition and um there was not a lot of love for the republican party from these people and a lot of them thought that the republicans

were pretty extreme there was a lot of disgust with politics a lot of disappointment about politics and a lot of feeling about democrats in general a lot of disappointment about politics, and a lot of feeling about Democrats in general, though it's funny because we're about to talk to Fetterman and they all in Pittsburgh, they all love Fetterman. But what the people who are making up their minds, not just about whether to vote for a Democrat versus Republican, but whether to vote at all, wanted to know what are Democrats going to do for me? What is it that Republican, the Republican candidate is going to do that, that, that Republican candidate stands for that is so bad. I don't really pay much attention to the news. I do feel like politics is very divisive and everyone's yelling at each other. And the Republican seemed kind of crazy, but like,

I don't know, why do I need to go vote at all? And so it is, I'm not saying that the White House could have solved that challenge in one speech that you're right. Most of these voters probably did not watch. But I wonder as we move forward and as Democratic candidates craft their own message, just like how specific they have to be. And like, here's the politician, here's the bad things they're going to do to you. And here's what I'm going to do instead. So two points on this. Yeah, I agree with the general thrust here. I think even if Biden

had said exactly what you wanted him to say, like was super specific, like repeated that distinction 100 times, the press coverage would look 95% the same. I agree. And Republicans would have said 95% the same thing. But the two points here are one,, your mileage may vary on whether you want to light Independence Hall blood red for your speech. But what is true and important is controversy and conflict are what drive conversation in this media age. Most of Biden's speeches are neither controversial nor contain a lot of conflict. And therefore, they have driven very little conversation. controversial, nor contain a lot of conflict. And therefore they have driven very little conversation. Here we are one week later talking about a Biden speech delivered on, yes, it was in prime time, but it was on the Thursday before Labor Day in a heat wave. And so he achieved

something is that he is dominating the conversation. And that always comes with downside because if you're in a conversation, there are two sides of it and they're going to be people trafficking. The second thing is not to get back on my usual bullshit here, but is this is just like the one millionth argument for why Democrats are at such a disadvantage when they rely on the traditional political media to get their message out. Because of course, you're going to have reporters who feel a need to just both sides of shit out of it. You have one of the two cable networks who aired it live in the middle of an identity crisis where they're trying

to appeal to billionaire Fox News viewing board members of their new company. And it's going to be stupid. And you had the Disney Corporation, Comcast deciding whether to show the speech to their audiences. And so we're in the hands of this corporate media. And that's just, Republicans also have that challenge, but then they have this other apparatus to get their message out. And it is like the challenge for the White House here going forward is, are they taking the core of that message and finding ways to get it in front of their viewers in ways that don't depend on CNN, right? And so that is always what is hard about this. And I know it's everything, but it's all confirmation bias for me with every new story

I write on that issue. But this was, I think, a pretty vivid example of one when the president goes out, gives a speech about a existential threat to our democracy. And then you have people having optics arguments about the use of Marine guards and color lighting and all that and it's all just so i'm i'm all set with that but i'm saying i'm saying for us and this is the point you're making too we're agreeing here is that like we as messengers have to remember not to be lazy about the message and just to shorthand it as like oh yeah obviously republicans obviously, Republicans are bad and crazy and extreme. Like and if I were Joe Biden, you know, like you do an event where he can talk about how seniors are going to pay less for prescription drugs for the first because Medicare is going to negotiate, going to be able to negotiate directly with with drug companies for

the first time. Meanwhile, Blake Masters and a bunch of Republican candidates want to privatize Social Security and Medicare completely. Right. There's a choice. You go to one of the states where some of the worst abortion bans are taking place. And you highlight those bans. You highlight the candidates who are behind those bans. You know, like I think you have to and I'm sure the White House is going to do this and other Democratic candidates to do this. But because we live in this this media environment, which is both noisy and both sidesy, you really got to be specific about the examples of the extremism and who the bad guys are here, which are the MAGA politicians and Donald Trump himself. And so I think that just takes a lot more work in this media environment is the only issue, as you know. One very pedantic point is this Reuters point you mentioned, spelled it out,

make America great again, Republicans. Do not do that, Democrats. Say MAGA, right? Do not repeat your opponent's chosen branding. It'll be like Bud Light referring to Miller Lite as tastes great, less filling Miller Lite. Do not do that, right? Just say MAGA. And again, it's telling voters and telling voters who may have voted for Trump in 16 and then came over to Biden, right? Or voters who were voting for the first time were on the fence. Like, these MAGA politicians, they don't fucking care about you. Again, there is no one who has more contempt for their own voters than Donald Trump and his MAGA politician allies. They don't care for them.

They don't help them. They don't pass anything to improve their them. They don't help them. They don't pass anything to improve their lives. They do not like them. And I think you'd have to try to separate those voters from the politicians who claim to represent them, but constantly screw them over, just like they screw over the rest of the country. So, all right, when we come back, we will talk to the Lieutenant Governor of Pennsylvania, John Fetterman. Joining us now is the Democrat running to become the next senator from Pennsylvania, John Fetterman. Welcome to the pod. Thanks for having me. How are you feeling? And how's your recovery going? I'm feeling really great and

that's the truth. I have been feeling really great as I've had for quite a while and living a normal life. I'm walking miles and miles every day. I'm going to the grocery store. I'm picking up my kids at their activities. I'm going out with my wife. I'm driving everywhere. So the truth is, is that 999 out of a thousand people, you know, would have no idea that I just had a stroke and because I'm living a perfectly normal life. And now you have Dr. Oz, you know, out of being, you know, his situation, acting in a way that I don't believe any doctor should be, where they're kind of trying to mock and make fun of somebody that just, you know, had a stroke, and also, I think that's a very, very risky bet here in Pennsylvania, because I

go around, and I ask people, it's like, hey, who's had a major health challenge in their lives, or they have friends and loved ones that have one, mostly of the ends end up coming up and i'm like uh well i hope you don't have a doctor in your life um mocking it and making fun of of your situation um but i do i have a doctor in my life doing that and it just happens to be some uh weirdo celebrity TV star. Yeah, no one wants that kind of doctor in their life. You said yesterday that you're looking forward to debating Dr. Oz. His campaign responded this morning and said,

you're lying, you won't say where and when. Do you want to settle this here? Yeah, it's just so funny. We've always said from the beginning that we're going to have a debate. And it's just a matter of working out through some of the technical issues as well, too, because that's the truth. And we've been very transparent about that the entire time. That sometimes I may not miss something because I have some auditory processing. And that's the truth. And when I'm able to make sure I know exactly what's heard or what we're talking about, let's, we're thrilled to be able to talk about these issues. And I really think there's a lot

of issues he has that I don't think he wants to talk about too. So, you know, we're going to have a debate. We've already acknowledged that always. And here after in the meltdown after the crudite gate kind of thing, he's been shrilling about, you know, debate, debate, debate, even though we all know that we're going to have a debate. And that's really the truth. Do you think it's fair you'll have something of a home field advantage because the debate will take place in Pennsylvania? Yeah, exactly.

I was going to say, here's a guy that has 10 homes that never had a home ever in Pennsylvania. And now is just really a commuter. He's a commuter. He's a commuter, you know, and like, I'd love to see what his EPZ, you know, are his records, because I'm sure he's not spending a whole lot of time at his real house here in Pennsylvania. It's actually not under, you know, it's under construction. But the truth is here is that Dr. Oz has a really, he's got a tough challenge right now too. And that is to bring MAGA into the fold because everywhere I go across Pennsylvania,

I run into a lot of Republicans that come up to say hi and not say, hey, you know, like I'm a Republican and I'm going to vote for you though because, you know, Dr. Oz, he's a fraud or he's a weirdo. From here, he doesn't understand my life. And I'm like, well, Oz, he's a fraud or he's a weirdo. He's from here. He doesn't understand my life. And I'm like, well, one, say thank you. But it's really the truth. And there's two things here.

There's supporters and then there's voters here. And I have never genuinely, and I'm not just trashing, I'm not talking trash. I have not run into anyone that come up to me and says, you know what, Dr. Oz is the best candidate I've ever met in my life. I dream to vote for him. You know, I haven't everywhere. So the people that are going to vote for him are doing it just because they have an R after his name. You know, they're not anyone really believes that he's the kind of person to, to, uh, uh, to represent, uh, Pennsylvania. So I have to ask, what was your reaction when you first saw the Crudite video? First of all, I was like, Hey dude, you know, there is no place called Wagner's, you know? And, and then the next thing was, I was like, what the hell is a Crudite? Like, I thought, like,

honestly, it's like a stroke, a stroke joke. I was like, what the hell is a crudite? Like, I thought, honestly, it's like a stroke joke. I was like, did I hear that? And I had to ask somebody. I was like, you know, what's that word? And someone on the staff said it's called a crudite, and they texted it. And I was like, so then I Googled it, and I was like, okay. And I just laughed and I'm like well you know you learn everything in every election and crudités is one of them and what's

really funny too is is that I tell people it's a joke that I tell people that sometimes after the stroke I will mush two words together that really don't exist and I was like dr. Oz did the same thing. It's like he, you know, he heard of Wegmans and he's actually in a Red, a Redners. So he called it Wegners, you know, as a result too, he does the same thing. You know, the Oz campaign has been pretty transparent that they're going to try to get their mojo back by going hard negative on you, particularly on crime. They attacked you for hiring two people who were wrongly convicted of murder. Crime has been their, the Republicans quote unquote, Trump issue for the last couple election

cycles. How do you plan on fighting back? No, I, you know, the, the, how we, we fight back from it is really the, the, our, our record on, on crime here. As mayor for four time here in Pennsylvania, in Braddock, I stopped gun violence and deaths for five and a half years during the time. And that had never been accomplished before or since then after I became lieutenant governor. And that was done by partnering with the police and partnering with the community. And we developed something very successful. And I'm actually proud of it. And that's something that Dr. Oz and his Gucci loafers has any idea of what crime is, except when you're talking about some of his associates or those kind of people. Like here's a guy that is pro-pardoning the insurrectionists from January 6th, but here's a guy now that is bashing us for giving pardons for people

that have some stupid weed charge as well too. And they are trying to scaremonger and they're lying. I mean, that's really all they have. And the two people, Lee and Dennis Horton, two people that roundly, roundly believe that he's innocent. And these poor men lost almost three decades of their life for something that they have not done. And as a result, I made making sure they getting out was one of the most important things i've ever done in my career and we got them out and i wanted to hire them because their story is important because that's really the truth about second chances and that's the talk about our criminal justice system too

and now with those two men the warden the warden said they men have no being here you know I hope they live next to me I'm going to take them out to dinner and treat them after they get out they said they are the two finest men in the entire DOC right now and everyone unanimously agree of that and in dr. Oz chose to kind of Horton, they tried to Horton the Hortons. And I'm not, I, you know, I, it was never, you know, I, I absolutely understood, you know, years ago that, that that was going to be weaponized. And of course, Dr. Oz, you know, I've chosen to do that. And he, of course, I think he's gotten blowback on that as well too. Of course, I think he's gotten blowback on that as well, too.

Earlier this year, Dr. Oz ran a digital ad against you with a bong. You have made legalization of marijuana a central part of your. That's the thing. Critics try to plate me as like a Jeff Spicoli or that I'm just a stoner. And of course, I don't use marijuana. And but but you should be able to do it legally adults should be able to do it as adults and that's a freedom thing as well too and if South Dakota if South Dakota can vote democratically to say yes let's do it then you know really how controversial really is that for anybody in

one of the reddest state in the country is on board with it. And again, I ran on that because I know it's to be the truth. And I run that on for a lot of different issues. One, to stop people having their lives ruined by a charge. I'm also talking about the revenue. I'd rather have it come to Pennsylvania Treasury than the cartels. And I would want to make sure that it's now a pure product, too, instead of God knows where it is and where it comes from. Dr. Oz was recently caught on a hot mic calling abortion murder. He's now trying to say that he doesn't want to criminalize all abortions. What should voters know about Dr. Oz's position here? Voters need to understand that Dr. Oz doesn't know what he really thinks.

Dr. Oz has changed a different position everywhere he is. But the truth is that Dr. Oz would vote down, and he believes that the choice for women belong with him, not women in Pennsylvania and in the nation as well, too. And I have been my entire career standing with and fighting for abortion rights. It's a basic, very simple choice as well, too. Dr. Oz will fight to make sure that it's ending, and I am going to spend my career fighting to make sure that it is there because it was already a settled issue for over 50 years. And it's absolutely bizarre to me that a man is willing to say one thing depending on what audience he's in front of and people don't realize that all he does is lie

and how can you believe truly truly and i'm not saying this you know to be a partisan how do you believe anything out of any person that was willing to sell magic diet pills on tv so much that he was fined five million dollars having to pay as a result in as a settlement to, you know, that that's, you know, that, you know, I make the joke about if anyone gets the reference, Joe Isuzu, you know, where like, hi, he's talking and saying it's a lie. And it's like, that's the line. How do we know Dr. Oz is lying about anything? It's like, well, he's talking. So. So I recently sat down with a focus group of Biden voters in Pittsburgh, and they're disgusted with politics. They don't follow it closely. They don't know if they're going to vote in November.

They they seem to like you. They seem to not love Dr. Oz, but they are still not sure they were going to vote. Like, how do you reach voters like that? And what do you say in this in this homestretch? I'm just going to try to reach out to them by just being who I am and running on what I really believe in and running on the right side of all these issues too. And I've always, you know, want people to understand that we understand the kind of lives that you have. I understand what Pennsylvania really is about. And I've spent my career working here to make a community, especially one like Braddock that is facing some of the most severe challenges any community has here in Pennsylvania, versus if you genuinely believe to having an individual that has 10

gigantic mansions in different counties all over here, really not one in Pennsylvania, different counties all over. You're really not one in Pennsylvania that doesn't stand for anything and has made a career of lying on television. I just believe it's self-evident that you have somebody that is unfit to be in the Senate. That's really a choice there. From afar, your campaign feels very different than the typical Democratic campaign. It feels more fun, more aggressive, more bold. How's that working? How are you making that happen? Is that the right assessment of your campaign?

Well, I believe that we're running on the right side of the truth, too. I mean, that's the truth, too. And arguing things like the minimum wage or the union way of life or healthcare, especially my person situation, really personal. That makes it easy. But we also want to be fun too because often Dr. Oz gives us the gift of being Dr. Oz to provide us with ample type of material to work with too. And we've never run like an oppo kind of campaign. It's just like pointing out that Dr. Oz lives in a gigantic mansion in New Jersey that he lives in. It wasn't me saying that. That was People magazine that had the, come on in. Hey, and I didn't film him undercover watching him go into a grocery store talking about crudités and wagers. He actually, their team slapped that down and was like, you know what, Dr. Oz, that's good.

Let's send that one out. It's all material. And we've never run a nasty or mean kind of campaign. We've only talked about the truths. And, you know, if you ever wondered what was Dr. Oz's position on incest, you know, I didn't make up lies about that. It's like, oh, wait, it turns out there is an interview with him pointing out that incest, okay, okay, hump the brakes on the first cousins, but everything else, you know, incest.

I can't make it up. But pointing out who he is and what his record is, is not mean and it's not fear-mongering the way he has chosen to attack me or even very, very personally about my health. It's really just talking about who he really is about. Finally, and least importantly, the NFL season starts tonight. As I understand it, you're a huge Steelers fan.

I think you once made Jake Tapper wear an Eagles mask. So two questions. How are you feeling about the Steelers? But also, in order to win, if I do my electoral math correctly, you need a lot of Eagles voters to turn out for you. So are you getting some sort of peace offering? How are you going to square the circle there? No, I've always run on the

truth here in pennsylvania one sheets is better than wawa and i also know that the steelers is the best team you know um and you know what i think voters really understand the truth too uh so and and uh that that's that's that's the truth here. These are very important issues here, especially in Western Pennsylvania. They, you know, the Steelers, Dr. Odd doesn't even understand any of them. I can't even imagine what he would come down on other than saying, I sure hope the team wins,

whatever, he just doesn't have any idea what they're talking about. I'm sure he roots for the Stegals. The Stegals. Yeah, the Stegals. But that's the truth. And when you think about Pennsylvania, you think about, you know, I mean, Friday Night Lights. You know, that is absolutely sacred here in Pennsylvania. That is absolutely sacred here in Pennsylvania.

I don't think a single person in the bleachers watching high school football here in Pennsylvania is thinking about, I really think Dr. Oz really could relate to the kind of life and things that mean to me. And that's the kind of campaign that we're going to continue to run for the next 60 days, is talking about the truth and talking about running on our record, especially like crime, especially where he believes that he can weaponize my record and lie about that. But I feel really good. And that's the kind of campaign we're going to continue to run. Well, that is good to hear. It was good to have you here. Thank you so much for the time. We appreciate it. John Fetterman, take care. No, no, I appreciate all of you. Thank you. Big, big fans. And thank you for the work that you all do too. And hopefully we'll,

we'll see you more again. And thanks again for having me. Pod Save America is a Crooked Media production. The executive producer is Michael Martinez. Our senior producer is Andy Gardner Bernstein. Our producers are Olivia Martinez and Haley Muse. It's mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick. Kyle Seglin and Charlotte Landis sound engineer the show. Thanks to Tanya Sominator, Sandy Gerrard, 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 Montuth.

Our episodes are uploaded as videos at youtube.com slash crooked media.