Pod Save America - "Our lawless, wall-less president."

Episode Date: August 29, 2019

Alyssa Mastromonaco and Jon L. discuss reports that Trump has promised pardons if aides break the law to build his border wall, the winnowing of the Democratic presidential field, and a new Senate seat opening in Georgia. Then, Massachusetts Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley joins to discuss the House, the Squad, and the fight for gun control and policies rooted in empathy.

Welcome to Pod Save America. I'm John Lovett. And I'm Alyssa Mastromonaco. Alyssa, this is very exciting. Lovett, I just wish we were closer. I know. I think that if we were together, we might be able to match the natural chemistry I had with Dan, which is white hot. I know. I listened. We can do our best. Today, we're talking about Trump encouraging his aides to break the law to build the border wall, a new Senate race in Georgia, the winnowing of the Democratic field.

And we're joined by Massachusetts Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley to talk about the prospects of gun control, the squad, the latest on impeachment and the attacks she's faced in recent weeks. Two quick notes. In the new episode of Ponce of the World that dropped this week, Tommy and Ben answer questions from listeners and share stories from their time in the White House. Ben also talks with Congressman Ro Khanna. So check that out. And Love It or Leave It will be at Radio City Music Hall on Friday, September 13th. There are just a few seats left and I'll have more confidence if it sells out. Head to crooked.com slash events to get tickets. I'm very excited about that show. Alyssa, you'll be there. I will be there front row so I can tell you you look like a model. It's all I need. That's all I need in this world. All right, let's get to the news about our lawless, wall-less president.

Here is what The Washington Post reported on Tuesday night. President Trump is so eager to complete hundreds of miles of border fence ahead of the 2020 presidential election that he has directed aides to fast-track billions of dollars worth of construction contracts, aggressively seize private land, and disregard environmental rules, according to current and former officials involved with the project. When aides have suggested that some orders are illegal or unworkable, Trump has suggested he would pardon the officials if they would just go ahead, aides said. He has waved off worries about contracting procedures and the use of eminent domains, saying, take the land, according to officials who attended the meetings. The piece goes on. Don't worry, I'll pardon you, he has told officials in meetings

about the wall. He said people expected him to build a wall and it had to be done by the election, one former official said. You know, Trump denied this immediately, claiming that the Washington Post is out to get him. But even inside of the story, aides refused to deny that Trump discussed pardons outright, claiming Trump was joking. Trump also not one for subtlety, apparently also is insisting that the wall be spiked and painted black, even though painting the wall black will cost so much money that the wall will end up being four to seven miles shorter. Alyssa, there is a lot to unpack here. So I want to start with the political pressure Trump is feeling, then talk about how he's paying for all this and finally dive into the corrupt and criminal elements. So Trump has promised to build 500 miles of his wall before the election. But as of now,

he has built no new fencing along the southern border, none. They've replaced some fencing. They've managed to do some construction to replace some fencing, but that's it. He seems to be panicking about this. A new Quinnipiac, Quinnipiac, doesn't matter, found that Trump's approval rating on immigration, his signature issue is at 38% with 59% disapproval. So Trump views this as essential to his reelection. We just went through a midterm fight in which Democrats produced a huge majority in the House despite immigration fear mongering. Alyssa, what did you take away from this story in terms of Trump's immigration politics? Someone scared. Someone made one promise in 2016. I think the chant was build that wall. And he has the one thing, the one thing people wanted from him. He can't do. He hasn't done. And, you know, he he's like, that's it. Love it. It comes down to this fucking wall. It comes down to a wall. He knows it. We know it. And there's no wall.

So you were in a job in the Obama administration that was very much about tracking projects like this. Of course, the Obama administration would not pursue a project like this. But you were in a job. One of the jobs of president and the people that work for president is setting priorities for an administration and keeping things moving forward. of the wall, which seemed like almost ordinary politics from Trump. How much of a failing is it for a White House to be so flat footed on a signature issue like this? Well, I mean, Levitt, can you imagine if after as many years as we were in the White House back in 2009, 2010, if we had done nothing on health care, if there were no discussions, if there was no progress, if there was no, you know, gang of eight, whatever the group was called. And here he is now being getting whooped, you know, last fall in the midterms. And now he's cruising into, you know, his reelection. And he he hasn't done anything to deliver on the fear mongering race baiting that he did. And, you know, his core constituency, his core supporters, they want to see this fucking wall. They want to know he scared the shit out of everyone. He said a caravan was coming. He said everyone was climbing over things, breaking through the country. He put a video. It's his pin

tweet right now that has what looks like video of this completed black wall. And he says things like the wall is going up as fast as it can. But it's it's a lie. But he'll do anything to try to tell people he's actually making progress when there is absolutely no progress. No, it's interesting. It does seem like he is caught between his two instincts. One is his understanding that he made a promise. And even though politics is barely functioning, even though he can say whatever he wants to his base, even though he'll be backed by a propaganda network,

even though people are shouting, finish the wall at his rallies, despite the fact that he has not really begun the wall, at least not built any new wall, that he understands he actually has to do something while at the same time recognizing that if he can't do anything, he still is free to lie about it, that he can just simply claim the wall is being built and have footage of construction and call it a victory just so that he has something to campaign on. It's a real choose your own adventure inside his head.

All right. So one other facet of this is how he's paying for the wall. In July, the conservative majority in the Supreme Court affirmed Trump's ability to take two point five billion dollars from the Pentagon and put it towards wall construction, despite Congress's explicit refusal to devote money to this project after Trump repeatedly walked away from immigration deals with Democrats and Republicans that would have funded the wall. Now we learn that for the second time in a year, Trump has taken funding from FEMA to pay for his immigration policies. Last September, the administration took almost $10 million from FEMA and sent it to ICE. This week, the administration announced it was taking $271 million from FEMA, including $155 million from the agency's disaster relief fund,

and directing those funds toward the border, including towards detention beds. This came in the midst of hurricane season. Hurricane Dorian was striking the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico, and it's a storm that's currently intensifying as it heads toward Florida. Even as Puerto Rico was bracing for the storm, Trump was attacking Puerto Rico on Twitter. Puerto Rico was largely spared from the brunt of Dorian, but still not great. You know, we now have Trump. He claimed Mexico was going to pay for it. That's become a joke in and of itself. But he's taking money from FEMA. He's taking money from the Pentagon. We have Trump telling aides to take the land from American citizens through eminent domain, all to give his reelection a boost. Alyssa, how would you be

telling Democratic candidates to talk about this, the way that he has decided to fund this pet project? So this is very personal to me because as White House Deputy Chief of Staff, I oversaw disasters. And one thing that I think candidates, I think that you need to make it vivid and I think you have to drive it home. And one of the things as it relates specifically to him taking the money from FEMA and Homeland Security is that the costliest hurricanes that have hit the U.S. all happened in late August, September or October. right? Katrina, Harvey, Maria, Sandy, Irma, Ike,

and Wilma, right? Since 1980, the United States government has paid over $862 billion to hurricane recovery. The average cost about $21.6 billion per hurricane. So the question for everyone is if most hurricanes hit the U.S., the costliest, the deadliest hit the U.S. between September and early November. Why is he moving money now? Like this is the worst time. This is like when your parents give you a thousand dollars for food and books your first semester of college and you, I don't know, decide to go to an Indigo Girls concert in Amherst, Massachusetts and use half that money. Like you still got to pay for the food for the rest of the semester, which only means calling your parents or getting another job. But you got to find the money. And in this case, the money, the parents are Congress. Are you worried that that analogy was too specific or maybe not specific enough? I mean, it's something that I was thinking about when the Indigo Girls came on the radio on my way here. And I was like, it's just like that. I mean, it's obviously not just like that, but you get my point.

This is nothing but robbing from Peter to pay Paul. And if there are things Dorian right now is is on track to make landfall in the U.S. as a category for many of the hurricanes that have been that have had the damage they've had were less than a category for. So he's just it's it's all such fucking garbage. So let's talk about the other. This story to me was like there was something about this Washington Post story that captured sort of every element of the threat Trump poses. It is focused on a cruel and inhumane immigration policy rooted in the animus that he has no care for the functioning of the government whatsoever and has been sort of abetted by the Supreme Court, abetted by Republicans in Congress who don't seem to care to hold him accountable. But there was also this final piece of it, which is what the Washington Post reported on pardons that CNN has confirmed, others have confirmed, that basically says if aides have to break a few federal laws to get the wall done more quickly, it's not a big deal because he can just issue a pardon. Alyssa, what was your reaction when you saw this sort of pardon offer

as part of his race to get the wall done? I mean, on the one hand, not really surprised. I mean, I guess I would have thought he was, you know, offering this out sooner, you know, like he did with all the other people who have gone to jail because of him. But, you know, for me, I guess I just remembered, you know, my very first day in the White House when Barack Obama made it clear, the White House when Barack Obama made it clear, literally said verbatim, you report, you serve the people of the United States. And I think what's so clear in this West Wing specifically is that they serve one person who is mercurial to be kind. And it is not at all about the people or doing what's right or doing things the right way or adhering to anything. I don't know. It's just like, I mean, Lovett, what did you think? Were you surprised?

You know, when I saw it come over the wires, as it were, I read it. And for a moment, it just felt like another Trump story. And then I thought about it again and I I read it again, and I thought, wait a second, I know we're inured to a lot of Trump's worst abuses. And I know the immediate reaction political is, well, even if Democrats impeach Trump, the Senate won't do anything, nobody will care. There's a kind of learned helplessness that when you see something like this, you already jump to the fact that you're aware that everyone's going to move on. But when I saw it, I didn't want to move on because it does to me feel like a real escalation.

Trump has dangled pardons for Paul Manafort, for Michael Flynn, for Michael Cohen. Mueller documents Trump's abuse of the pardon power in the report. Dozens of references to how he has tried to use the pardon to cover up crime. Trump's also pardoned people like Joe Arpaio, Dinesh D'Souza, right-wing hardliners, and his lackeys, who he just wanted to give a favor to, no deeper principle, no sense of kind of what the pardon power is meant to do, which is to bestow mercy for those who deserve it. But this to me is is new. This is saying break the law to help me win reelection and I will pardon you, which is not far from saying federal laws do not apply.

If you are helping Donald Trump hold on to power, that if you are going, whether it's campaign finance laws, whether it's laws governing how you can build a wall along the southern border, whether it's laws around electioneering, whether it's laws about what Kellyanne Conway is allowed to say on the White House lawn, violating the Hatch Act by basically treating the White House as a campaign platform for her boss, that Donald Trump doesn't care about any of it. He doesn't care about any of it. The law does not matter. All that matters is his ego, his not being wounded by negative attacks or by or being defeated in reelection. So to me, this was a kind of dangerous escalation. Yeah, it's hard to it's actually hard to imagine like he's done so much, like you say, to make us numb to this. But I just for a

minute think it's like, you know, the other day was the anniversary of Barack Obama's scandal of wearing a tan suit. And I think about if any other president, if we had heard that Bill Clinton was offering out pardons for people to lie to Ken, to do something, to Ken star like I'll take care of you perjure yourself I just think that the the world would have been on fire that the you know Tom Brokaw would have been you know having break in special news that you know five o'clock instead of six and now we're just like like we know it's terrible but there's so much other bad shit he does that you're like, OK, you know, I guess here's another thing. and viciousness and all of it has become in many ways sort of the status quo ante of politics that we can't treat it that way in the moment, despite the fact that in the back of our minds, we fear that that's what will ultimately happen anyway. So it's right. It is it is what it is,

the strategy. Right. We are exhausted by the many different abuses of Donald Trump. But I do think this one, you know, we have now seen a steady trickle of Democrats coming out for impeachment. But it is worth noting that right now there is a kind of brazenness to what Donald Trump is doing. He is floating, having the G7 take place at Doral. He is telling aides to break the law, to proactively place at at Doral. He is telling aides to break the law, to proactively inform them that he will pardon them if they break the law. An abuse of the pardon power that has been warned about since the founders were giving the president the pardon power, this unlimited power that everyone has recognized was ripe for abuse. So, you know, we come back to this question, is it worth impeaching Donald Trump or do we just simply have to repudiate him at the ballot box? But I do think it's also worth just pausing and saying, this is new. This is dangerous. This is an unprecedented move by Trump

in a very tough category of abuses. And beyond that, it's about pressuring Democrats to take it as seriously as they should to not buy into the kind of learned helplessness that we see in the media, that we see in the sort of political coverage. Right. It's kind of like if impeachment isn't for this, then what is it for? Right. Right. I mean, you know, that that it and that has been true. We could have said that. It's interesting. That sentence has been true for a long time. That was true of the abuses outlined by Mueller. But this to me is an even new level. The president is telling people that they can break the law with impunity to help him retain his office. That is an abuse of power at the core of checks and balances. That is why we have an impeachment power. We can't declare a vote of no confidence. We can't go up to Queen Elizabeth II and say, can you put the parliament in the fridge?

This is what we have. And it may not lead to removal in the Senate, but it's still the power that we have. He is so brazen at this moment because he doesn't believe there will be any mechanism to hold him accountable. And we know that he is not nuanced, right? He's not slick. He's not. So what I think about is, is what what has he done and said, you know, in this vein that we don't know about? Like, what's he saying to people at the State Department about what we're doing in Syria or Yemen or Africa? Or, you know, it's just it's this is just the tip of the iceberg. You know, that's what I think about when I hear this.

It's like if this is what we are hearing, then this is just the beginning. This is just the beginning of the like cockeyed shit that he's doing from his very empty desk. First of all, you feel the imbalance between those who don't give a shit about decorum, about civility, about mutual respect, about treating people fairly, who want to defend Trump, and people like Mattis, who is a complicated figure, who does not deserve unalloyed praise, let's say, but who nonetheless, you feel kind of bristling against his desire to remain quiet out of respect for the office of the presidency, who nonetheless does seem to want to speak out about what he saw behind the scenes. And there's a moment in this interview where, where Mattis basically says, I feel as though I have a moral obligation to provide silence, but it won't last forever. And you do seem to think you do see that there are people inside who have not yet told us enough about the truth of what they saw when they were working with this president. And something that I think is interesting that I always think is worth

sort of shining a light on, you know, Susan Rice and I a couple months ago did an event together. It was this big event. And one of the things that I asked her was, you know, people like John Brennan and Jim Clapper, you know, have they done they are apolitical. These are not members of the security of this country who wanted to come out and make statements that make them appear political. But because they know what a menace, what a threat this president is to national security, they have felt the need to speak out. And I always think it's worth just saying this was not in their DNA. This wasn't something that they ever wanted to do. They served multiple presidents of different parties. And, you know,

but this is this is where we are. It's, you know, everybody feels the need, like, see something, say something. Yeah. Now, you know, these are these are heavy topics. But before we move on, I did want to read one tweet from Trump about this question as to whether or not the G7 should meet at Trump Doral. Here it is. Quote, no bedbugs at Doral. The radical left Democrats, upon hearing that the perfectly located for the next G7, Doral National Miami, was under consideration for the next G7, spread the false and nasty rumor. Not nice. There has never been anything that has convinced me of the opposite of what it is claiming more than this tweet. Beginning a tweet, no bedbugs at Doral,

is such an admission of bedbugs at Doral. Like, do you think that Angela Merkel and President Macron just like tweet links to each other of his tweets? Like, like, not sure if they should use the wide eye emoji, the LOL emoji or the crying emoji. But like, this is the person they have to deal with. And you know what, there are a lot of reasons that it shouldn't be at Doral. One, it'll be during hurricane season. But also, it's a funny thing because as, again, part of my job, I oversaw things like the G7 summit and where we would host things and hosting foreign summits and everything. And you know that in our administration and several others,

it never would have passed vet because of all the liens that it had against it. Too many controversies around Doral. And I also do think bedbugs is an issue. Disgusting. I want everyone to know that I attempted a French accent of Macron and Merkel making fun of Trump Dural having bedbugs. But for your benefit, I did cut it. Alyssa, you speak French. Is there anything you'd like to add? Merred.

Let's move on to 2020. We're headed to one debate night in September, Thursday, September 12th. Ten candidates will take the stage. They are Biden, Warren, Bernie, Booker, Mayor Pete, Castro, Kamala, Klobuchar, Beto, and Yang. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York dropped out of the race yesterday following recent departures of other candidates, including John Hickenlooper and Seth Moulton. The field is narrowing. Alyssa, how do you feel about that? You know, I just, you know, I love Kirsten. And I think that she went out in a really elegant way and went out on top. And, you know, she stuck her neck out for she she said what she felt when it came to Al Franken. And she never backed down despite the

pressure. And, you know, many of her colleagues now say, oh, you know, I regret it. I didn't do it. And so I just, you know, I dig her. She stood up and good for her. And we love her and we hope to hear more from her. You know, for the debate, for the, you know, for the bigger picture, I think it's really good that we're down to one debate stage. I don't know why, but I feel like if there had been two somehow, Warren and Biden wouldn't have ended up on the same stage again. And I just don't know how much more we can endure. And also, just watching them, you see the people who are sort of in the lower tier who are really just sort of like doing the breaststroke trying to get, you know, a moment so that they can get more money so they can make it to the next debate. And so I feel like the group that we'll be hearing from is pretty steady,

and it will be substantive, I hope. Do you that we'll be hearing from is pretty steady and it will be substantive, I hope. Do you think it'll be substantive? I hope so. I do think we may also be headed back to a double debate next time because a few people are so close. Steyer was close. Tulsi Gabbard was close. So we may be back to a two-night debate. You know, I ultimately think it is good that they're all in one stage. But at the same time, given how many people have been on each debate stage already, I also wasn't averse to there being kind of six and five, just have two more substantive debates just to mix it up. But I also think that, you know, a lot of people are kind of pointing criticism at

the DNC at this point that really isn't earned given basically how like these thresholds, they were there for everybody to see. And we've seen candidates be able to surmount, be able to surmount these thresholds from, you know, people like Julian Castro, Mayor Pete, others who have managed to kind of fight their way into this category. So I don't know. I think it's ultimately good that we are guaranteed a debate with Biden and Warren on one stage. But I also think it would have been fine if we had a bunch more people. The only reason I was so for one debate night is because I didn't want to conflict with Love It or Leave It. one debate night is because I didn't want to conflict with love it or leave it. Yeah. So speaking of Biden and Warren being on the debate stage together, Biden released a health care ad that I wanted to play because I thought it captured something essential about his campaign

and the debate we're having right now over health care. I was sworn into the United States Senate next to a hospital bed. My wife and daughter had been killed in a car crash. Lying in that bedroom were my two surviving little boys. I couldn't imagine what it would have been like if we didn't have the health care they needed immediately. Forty years later, one of those little boys, my son Bo, was diagnosed with terminal cancer and given only months to live. I can't fathom what would have happened if the insurance companies had said for the last six months of his life, you're on your own. The fact of the matter is, health care is personal to me. Obamacare is personal to me. When I see the president try to tear it down and others propose to replace it and start over, that's personal to me, too.

We got to build on what we did because every American deserves affordable health care. I'm Joe Biden, and I approve this message. Alyssa, what did you think of that ad? So I thought it was really powerful. You know, I saw it before I even had my coffee the other day. I thought it might have been more powerful without sort of like the veiled swipe at the end at sort of Medicare for all. You know, I just it's because the ad is so personal because he he talks about his family and his struggles. But he he's really never used them sort of in this type of ad before.

And but no, it was really powerful. I just think that, you know, I just probably wouldn't have I wouldn't have done that at the end. have, I wouldn't have done that at the end. Yeah. You know, the reason I wanted to play it is because to me, I, I was incredibly moved by his willingness to tell the story and I, it was, it's emotional to listen to. And you're reminded that this is somebody who has been sort of steeped in grief throughout his career, that that has been, that, that the pain that he has had in his life has been, I think, part of why he has been able to retain a kind of ordinariness and ability to relate to people because he has been through something so wrenching. His life in politics is bookended by these tragedies. And you're reminded too in that, that that's part're reminded, too, in that that

that's part of his strength as a candidate that goes beyond just name recognition, that goes just that goes beyond electability, that goes to the affection people have for Joe Biden. And then then it turns and it becomes about health care. And the critique of Trump is valid and good. The defense of Obamacare is good. And then it is used to issue a kind of very small minded attack on other Democrats health care proposals that isn't very fair. And I thought it really did capture the kind of the promise of a Biden campaign and also the weaknesses of a Biden campaign in one ad that he would share this incredibly personal story in a way that was incredibly effective and then have the message of the ad ultimately be an attack on a kind of health care plan that isn't that isn't particularly accurate.

You know, so that's why that's why I wanted to that's why I wanted to share it, just because I do think of that. There is that that duality inside of it. Well, and I think that for me, too, part of my initial takeaway, it's like, look, we've all been through campaigns before. We've all watched them unfold on television. We've lived them in real life. And to me, that he almost missed the point that he missed is that the thing that the other campaigns are saying is they fundamentally believe that health care is a human right. Right. Like that's the underlying that's the through line. And I feel like he that that's where he jumped the shark at the end, because, you know, I don't know.

I just I thought that that was that when I hear Sanders or Warren or anyone else talk about Medicare for all and how it's that it's that we all deserve to be able to go to the hospital. And like the story that Kamala tells, you know, not sit in the car with your kid in front of the emergency room, knowing that when you walk in, it's going to cost you five thousand dollars because of your deductible. So, yeah, I just I thought it was really powerful and moving. And I just really didn't like the last like 45 seconds. Yeah. And it was it also to be pointed. I thought, well, what I thought the ad was going to be. I mean, it's this incredibly personal story. And it really could be about a larger argument about pain people are feeling about what he wants to do as president, about the stakes of of right of what's facing the country.

And it doesn't do that. Two other races I wanted to touch on. One, Republican Senator Johnny Isakson of Georgia announced he will be retiring for health reasons. Republican Senator David Perdue of Georgia was already up for re-election. Now both of Georgia's Senate seats will be on the ballot. Stacey Abrams has again said she will not run for the Senate. Nonetheless, these are two pickup opportunities now for Democrats. The path to taking the Senate. Nonetheless, these are two pickup opportunities now for Democrats. The path to taking the Senate has widened a bit and has also now focused on Georgia a bit more. Alyssa, what do you think this means for Democrats in the fight for the Senate?

Think it means we have to have our act together. I mean, look, we have a we have an opportunity. we have a we have an opportunity. We have a state that's getting that's creeping bluer. Right. Stacey Abrams showed us that, you know, in the last election, you know, Abrams got something like I think it was forty eight point eight percent. And John Barrow, who is a white man, got 40 who is running for secretary of state, got forty eight point.7%. So it's showing the Democrats are bringing out people to all kinds, for all kinds of candidates. And, you know, I just think that there is, there's a lot, there's a lot to be done. They have to find some good candidates who can keep sort of paving the path that Stacey Abrams specifically sort of blazed in the last cycle. One other aspect of this, too, is the fact that both of these seats are up for the same time.

And apparently the last time two Senate seats were up in a state at the same time and split, as in didn't both go to the same party, was apparently 1966, so more than 50 years ago. So it also does seem that the odds suggest that these seats will move together. The other facet is this is a this is a special election in which if no candidate gets 50 percent, then it could go to a runoff. And so many have been noting that this introduces the possibility that the Senate could be determined in January by a runoff in Georgia. It is a terrifying possibility that gives me a knot in my stomach. And I wanted to share that with all of you. Thanks for bringing us into your anxiety.

Before we go, one other race. This is about the North Carolina 9th. During the 2018 election, Democrats came extremely close to flipping North Carolina's 9th congressional district. It initially looked like Republican Mark Harris had beaten Democrat Dan McCready by 900 votes. It then came to light that Harris had hired a shady political operative who stole ballots. State officials called a new election, which will take place on September 10th. McCready and his new challenger, a Trump-loving state senator named Dan Bishop, are neck and neck in the polls. Trump will be going to North Carolina to hold a rally right before election night. So that gives you a sense of how important the Republicans view this race.

To learn more about how the Republicans stole the original election, check out this month's Crooked Mini, rigging North Carolina, led by Shaniqua McClendon, our political director who did an incredible job. And if you want to help to win this seat, go to votesaveamerica.com slash states, and you can find out how to get involved in North Carolina. Alyssa. Yeah. Thank you for joining today. Love it.

Thank you so much. I can't wait to be your biggest cheerleader at Radio City on the 13th. Do you think it's, are we superstitious that this show is taking place on Friday the 13th is the first time we've acknowledged it? I think it's nothing but good. New York City on Friday the 13th, please. It'll be spooky good.

Spooky good. Talk to you later, Alyssa. Bye. When we come back, we'll be joined by Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley. She is the representative of Massachusetts' 7th Congressional District. Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley, welcome to Pod Save America. It's good to be here. I've been wanting to do this for a long while, so I'm glad it's working out.

And it feels like a bit of a reunion as well, given the various Cary connections here. So yeah, I understand that you have an association with Jon Favreau, who was an intern, Alyssa Mastromonaco, who was a staff assistant. Any notes you have for them? Any ways that they could improve? any ways that they could improve? They're pretty awesome. But I do want to say that, you know, as an only child, I think one of the reasons why I took to the work of movement building and coalition building and public service is the chosen family that you create and you find along the way. And, you know, certainly John and Alyssa and, you know, along the way. And, you know, certainly John and Alyssa and, you know, David Wade and Heather Higginbottom. I mean, you know, those are my fam. And Secretary Kerry also and I are still in touch with one another. And so since my seven month tenure in Congress, it's been really surreal the times that our paths have crossed. So.

Seems like you were surrounded by good people. Absolutely. You know, I have to tell you one funny story, though, about NPR. He texted me and he said, I just heard you on NPR. You know, great job, kid, he said, but, you know, you went a little long. And I was like, well, pot, meat, kettle, where do you think I got that from? So anyway, it's been good. Did you did you say that to him? Or did you think that? No, I said that. It's been good.

Did you say that to him or did you think that? No, I said that. So let's talk about another work family, the squad. You know, Donald Trump has been saying for some time now that he wants the squad to be the face of the Democratic Party when he's up for reelection next year. If he's going to give you and your colleagues all this attention, how are you planning to use it? Well, you know, I think he's a little fixated and obsessed on us. And it's not about the four of us. It's about what we represent. And that disruption in the power of the voices that we have engaged and brought to the process is threatening. How have we used, how have I aimed to use this platform, having this sort of bigger spotlight, if you will, to use it to legislate, to use it to inform and elevate consciousness on

issues that are often overlooked, to continue to fight for those that are ignored, left out and left behind. And, you know, I am very grateful for the solidarity of concern and support that myself and my colleagues received in the wake of sort of the height of the vitriol from the occupant of this White House. You know, but I have to concede that even in that moment, I felt that I was operating from a place of privilege, that we were garnering this level of attention and support on the same day that Eric Garner's family was denied justice from the DOJ. And so I'm just, you know, centered on the people that are experiencing injustice every day. And then I think it's also important to note

that I don't think that the occupant of this White House is, you know, again, just threatened by four members of Congress. He's threatened by who we've brought along. He's threatened by the fact that the squad is more than four people. The squad is anyone doing the work of building a more equitable and just world, period. So, you know, I want to move off of this, but there was one aspect of it that I think came up again. You know, Trump from the G7 decided to call the chairman of the Federal Reserve an enemy, comparing him to the to the leader of China. And, you know, these these sort of broadsides from Trump, they're vicious and they're unprecedented and they tend to be they tend to be put in a political lens. You know, did he go too far? Is he facing backlash? Why is he attacking four women of color?

But I think sometimes we move off of the actual danger it poses to people when the president targets an individual. You know, he does this repeatedly. How did it feel when you woke up and you saw that the President of the United States was telling you, an American citizen, that you should go back to where you came from because you're a person of color? What does it feel like to face that kind of a personal threat from a person who's supposed to represent the entire country? Coming from him, certainly not surprising. This is, you know, I can't really offer

inflated outrage or feigned surprise. The occupant of this White House and his administration reach new lows every day. And I don't want to give short shrift to hateful rhetoric. It is hurtful. And I think it does endanger people's lives. I do believe it contributed to and is at the root of what happened in El Paso. But at the end of the day, I think he does this to offer a distraction from the chaos of his administration, the callousness of his administration, the corruption that is rampant in his administration. administration, the corruption that is rampant in his administration. And I just work really hard to not take the bait. You know, I can't, you know, the media has always asked me about the latest thing that he's tweeted. I, you know, I don't follow him. I'm not trying to keep up with his tweets. I'm trying to keep up with his policies. These hateful, racist, xenophobic policies, these draconian, oppressive, life-threatening, family-separating policies that are being rolled out by the hour. And so, you know, I don't allow myself to be fearful or self-pitying or distracted.

I mean, again, my God, what people are dealing with in community every single day because of the hardships and the inequities that are being exacerbated under this administration. I was listening to an analyst earlier today who said that, you know, usually presidents operate with the presidents that have been the most transformational operate from a place of empathy. And the occupant of this White House is void of that. He is spiritually and morally bankrupt and operating from a deficit of empathy. And we see that in the policies that are rolled out across the board, but especially when it comes to this coordinated and unrelenting attack against our immigrant neighbors. for gun control, policies that address the long-term impacts of gun violence on communities. What will the House be doing to address gun violence when it comes back into session?

And what are you and other members going to do or going to have to do to press the Senate to take up gun control? Well, the first thing I want to say is that when I ran for Congress, I made it very clear that I could not single handedly stand in effective, sustainable affront to what was coming out of this White House every day, that that was not something that I could do alone, that I'm prepared to do it. you know, broad shoulders and a strong back. And I want to stand on the front lines and lead in that way. But I want to be in coalition. Beating this administration and ultimately evicting the occupant of this White House is all about movement building. So it's not just, and it's about organizing and mobilizing. There's so much analysis about, and rightfully so, the unprecedented nature of this 116th Congress, unprecedented in size, unprecedented in representation and diversity, unprecedented in that it's the first Democratic majority Congress, unprecedented in that it's the first freshman class on boarded or congressional class in the midst of a federal government shutdown.

I think these times also demand unprecedented activism and unprecedented legislating. And that's not work we do alone. We have already reported out of the House a universal background check bill. We need to also move on a federal assault weapons ban. ban. We need to pass red flag legislation, which would, you know, keep guns out of the hands of those that are dangerous to themselves and to others. But that's not enough. You know, I know we talk about the fact that we're doing the work in this Democratic majority Congress on these issues of care and concern and consequence to the American people. And these issues continue to sit.

The bills that we're reporting out are sitting at the door of the Senate. But that does not mean that we shouldn't continue to lead and to legislate on those issues. And when the Senate, when our democracy is working again on behalf of the American people, when our democracy is working again on behalf of the American people, and that happens from the pressure on the outside that activists and agitators, you know, continue to exert, we will have established a new floor, you know, on these issues. The other issue that I've been working on, you know, other than gun violence prevention is just the issue of trauma. You know, for every life that we are robbed of due to gun violence, a minimum of 20 people are impacted. And so in communities that are disproportionately impacted by community-based violence, and it's important

that we're holding to narratives. I think if there's any urgency felt, it is often about the most dominant narrative in our public square, and that is mass shootings. And they are tragic. And domestic terrorism and the lives that we are robbed of in our faith houses, our churches, our mosques, our synagogues, at schools, at concerts is important, as is the community-based violence that is happening on our city blocks and in community every day. And we have to address the residual trauma that gun violence is leaving in its wake. I'm so proud that I was able to convene the first hearing in the history of Congress in the Oversight and Reform Committee on the issue of childhood trauma. I'm really focused on the federal government making an investment to support those survivors of gun violence in not just in treating their trauma. We need to have an equity when it comes to community based gun violence and mass shootings. We need to have an equity in outrage and equity in justice and an equity in healing. So in May, I want to talk about housing, because in May, you know, your questioning of Secretary of Housing and Urban Development,

Ben Carson, went viral in the clip. Carson tried to reclaim his time, seemingly unaware that that was not something he was allowed to do. It was great to watch you grill him on this issue. And you've made housing policy an important focus of your work. What does the housing crisis look like in your district? And what do you think that HUD needs to do that we need to do in as a country to in Congress to address the issue? Well, Secretary Carson said that he will not be participating in a second Trump administration. You know, that's his departure is not soon enough, not only for me, but for the various people, the millions of people for whom he is charged with the most critical infrastructure in this country.

And that is our housing. Housing is a human right. It is a critical determinant of health. It has everything to do with social and economic mobility. One of the examples I lift up a lot is, you know, because I've done so much work in the space of decarceration and prison reform and reentry is, you know, 30% of those in my district that have been released from correctional facilities or private prisons are being released to shelters. And we're saying, you know, make a positive contribution, legitimately get back on the grid, and they're being released to shelter. And so if you know that the primary driver of recidiv. And so if you know that the primary driver of recidivism is unemployment, you know, are you really serious? It seems disingenuous.

And then we have housing policies that deny returning citizens, formerly incarcerated men and women often, from reuniting with their families within public housing. So how I've been getting at the issue of housing, which is the number one constituent concern, call, grievance, that was true when I was a city councilor, and it continues to be true now that I'm in Congress. It's the only other issue that rivals it in terms of calls would be immigration cases, is that I've been convening since well before I took an oath of office or was even elected, these equity agenda roundtable discussions where we engage community. And they're not they're not the traditional town hall. We have breakout sessions. It's a two way dialogue. You know, I've always maintained that people closest to the pain should be closest to the power, driving and informing the policymaking. And so I take my cues from community.

And I'm so proud that, you know, out of the 20 pieces of legislation in the housing space specifically that I've introduced or co-sponsored, they were all directly informed by what I was learning from the people I represent in the Massachusetts 7th who I'm cooperatively governing with. You know, some of the things that I've been supporting legislatively are, you know, within the mass 7, 60 percent of my constituents are renters and they need rent relief. taking less than $100,000, which is true for most, and paying more than 30% of their income towards rent and utility that they get a tax break. I'm also, you know, considering and ruminating on introducing legislation that would allow for rent for those who pay their rent on time for that reporting on their paying their rent on time to count towards their building up their credit. Because within the Massachusetts 7th, we have deep income inequality and a racial wealth gap. The Aryan wealth for a black family in the Massachusetts 7th is $8.

And for a white family is $247,000. family is $247,000. Within the Massachusetts Seventh and a three-mile radius from Cambridge to Roxbury, median household income drops by $50,000 and life expectancy by 30 years. So there are great inequities and systemic embedded and entrenched disparities in the Massachusetts Seventh, one of the most diverse and unequal districts, you know, in our country. And another way that I'm looking to get at this is having co-sponsored Senator Warren's housing and economic mobility legislation, which is specifically targeted on federal investment in those communities that have been impacted by redlining and also provides financial support for low-income families for a down payment for a mortgage. So those are just some of the things that I'm looking at. I'm developing federal legislation around tenant

protections and preventing eviction, again, which is also growing. Ultimately, I see housing as a human right and as a critical determinant of health. And so this is a public health crisis. And the last thing that I would share is in the Financial Services Committee, which I serve, housing is under that. And the first full committee hearing that we held was on the issue of homelessness. And we were able to report out of that committee the End Homelessness Act bill, which includes, you know, more Section 8 and project based vouchers, support CDBG funding, a host of things to end homelessness by prioritizing housing first. That bill is $13 billion to end homelessness. And that is the equivalency of the cost of one military aircraft carrier. So ultimately, this is just about what do we really value? And it's about, you know, political courage and will.

We also spent a trillion dollars on a tax cut for corporations. So you voted against a border bill in June that would have provided aid for detained families and give additional funding to ICE. How do we balance the need to aid people being detained by an inhumane administration with the need to rein in CBP and ICE if the two continue to come up in the same pieces of legislation? Well, I voted no, because one, I didn't buy for a second that the humanitarian crisis at the border had anything to do with the deficit of funding. When I went to the border to bear witness to this humanitarian crisis, we saw plenty of, you know, toothbrushes and toothpaste and the like. So again, the cruelty is the point. It's simply about how you choose to dedicate and allocate those funds. And within days of that bill passing, that package passing, this so-called humanitarian aid bill, I think something like three new ICE facilities were opened and then they were putting into play ice raids throughout the country. And that is why, you know, throughout my campaign, I called for the defunding and the abolishing of

ice. And let's be clear, you know, I was an aide on the federal level 16 years, a city council for eight years. I am not cavalier about the abolishing of any agency. There are plenty of agencies that I think are in dire need of reform. And I do that work with my team every day to hold them accountable. But an agency that is using what throughout history has been proven as one of the most effective tools of oppression, which is to separate families. You know, we're all shocked by what we see. But we've been here before on on reservations with indigenous and native people at the auction block during slavery. And so I will not further fund and embolden a racist and rogue agency. And before I took that vote, as I do with all things,

I confer with those closest to the pain, you know, activists, advocates, families. And I also spoke with leadership in the district, mayors, our district attorney, our attorney general, and they supported my decision. We talk about what's happening at border communities, but the Massachusetts 7th is 40% immigrant. So I had seen up close and personal the abuses of ICE. And so, you know, where do we need to go? For me, it's we're going to continue to hold them accountable using the checks and balances and the reach of the Oversight and Reform Committee. We're going to continue to go to the border, continue to bear witness to the trauma there and to tell people about it. continue to bear witness to the trauma there and to tell people about it.

And as I said at the border, we will lift up these stories in the hopes that people will have an epiphany in some level of enlightenment and humanity. And if they don't, we will bring the fire. That's it. But, you know, we have got to get to a place where we are prioritizing the preservation of family, allowing asylum seekers, which is a legal human right to settle in community while awaiting review of their cases. I mean, you talk about Ben Carson. I mean, here's someone who is a neurosurgeon, for God's sakes, and I can't even get him to affirm. I know that that video went viral, but I didn't do that for something to go viral. I wasn't browbeating the secretary. But I didn't do that for something to go viral. I wasn't browbeating the secretary. I wanted him to just acknowledge that this is a critical determinant of health and that no one that being poor is not a character flaw. And simply because you can't afford more doesn't mean you don't deserve better. And people living in homes with raw sewage rampant with rodents and mold. And when I asked him, would you let your grandmother live there? He couldn't even answer that. And then they roll out this mixed immigration status rule. Every immigrant family I know is mixed immigration status. They have TPS holders, DACA recipients, asylum seekers. And to say that

they cannot remain in public housing. And now we are deporting people with term children with terminal illnesses. The cruelty is the point void of empathy. And so we have to continue to organize and mobilize. And I know that people are fatigued. They are weary. I am asked every day if I have if I am growing cynical or apathetic about what is possible, given this inflection point we find ourselves at, given this crossroads, given the gravity of everything, given this fire hose we're drinking from, and my response is always the same.

I don't have the luxury. We don't have the luxury to be weary. We have got to stand in the gap for the millions of families that are living in fear. I was speaking earlier about the census. Thanks to the good work of the Oversight and Reform Committee that I serve on, where it's our charge to maintain the integrity of the census, and our questioning of Secretary Ross to say he testified would be generous. He was there. And the advocates that we worked with in community, we were able to beat back that immigration status question off of the census. But the residual fear and trauma is still out there.

My district is one of the hardest to count in the country. And I'm worried we're going to continue to be under-resourced. the country. And I'm worried we're going to continue to be under-resourced. So, you know, these questions about how to fight back and not being exhausted and, you know, when to compromise versus, you know, when to hold the line, you know, these are playing out in the Democratic primary for president. They're playing out in Congress in this fight over impeachment. They're also beginning to play out in Massachusetts. You know, you won your seat by primarying a Democratic incumbent. When you look at the situation that's developing now with Joe Kennedy contemplating a run against Senator Ed Markey, what do you see in that potential fight? Well, I'm awaiting developments just like everyone else. You know, I don't know

that there is a fight. You know, what I would say is that when I think about 2020 and I think about our party right now, I have some concerns. In 2016, we had these, you know, sobering defeats. And we did a lot of analysis about why this happened, this postmortem analysis. And in 2018, I'm very fortunate to be walking into a Democratic majority Congress, but I'm not sure that we've done the audit and the inventory, you know, of the practices and the strategies that ensured that we could walk into that Democratic majority Congress in our race didn't accept corporate PAC money. We raised and spent one point six million dollars. My opponent, the incumbent, raised and spent six point six million dollars.

Seventy percent of his money was D.C. corporate PAC based money. And 27 percent of our primary voters, it was the first time they ever voted in a primary. And 27% of our primary voters, it was the first time they ever voted in a primary. We did not use mainstream media. Now, Massachusetts media market is very expensive, even if I had the money, you know. However, but even if I had the money, I would not have done that. We decided to invest in ethnic and specialty media. And the Latino community in the Mass 7th is about 7%. So, you know, I had consultants at the table that said, hey, we'll walk away.

This is going to be the death knell of your campaign. You're going to go on Telemundo and Univision in a primary? And that's what we did, and we grew the Latino vote by 71%. We grew the student vote by 400%. 250 incarcerated men behind the wall of MCI Norfolk, who I'll be going back to visit in a couple of days, held a debate-watching party, endorsed our campaign, and organized a minimum of three family members on the outside to go to the polls. We have got to stop making assumptions about who desires and

deserves a seat at the table of democracy. And we've got to engage in a politics of transformation and not transaction. Before we ask for a vote, we got to understand what people's lived experiences are, what their struggles are. And I'm concerned we have not taken stock of those lessons to apply them heading into 2020. But also right now, as we seek to legislate our actualized values in the face of this draconian administration, Think of the ACA. You know, that wasn't preserved because of the conviction or the courage of lawmakers. It was saved because of the courage and convictions of everyday people who stood in the gap, who laid their bodies on the line,

who demanded that lawmakers, you know, see that quite literally lives would be hanging in the balance. You know, one person, four members of Congress cannot beat back the hate coming out of this. White House, only a movement can. And if there's one silver lining in this, it's that I see our silos breaking down and we're being intentional and inclusive in our organizing and our coalition building with the understanding that our destinies and our freedoms are tied. And on that note, I want to just also say from a messaging standpoint, my fellow beloved Democrats,

stop presenting these false binary choices in our messaging. This is a bunch of bunk. This is not about if we're the party of working class white folks and everybody else. By the way, working class folks are not just white folks. And I will not choose between whether or not we're the party of working class anybody and criminal justice reform. These issues are conflated and our destinies and our freedoms are tied. Several months ago, I had the honor of introducing our former governor, Deval Patrick, at a Democratic retreat. And he said, what do you do when Democrats start to believe Republican talking points about who we are? And that is where we find ourselves. So we haven't taken stock.

And it will cost us if we don't do it quickly, because we weren't successful in 2018 because we just had some photogenic candidates who could string a sentence together and had some compelling stories. We were successful because they led with their values. They stood in their convictions and because they engaged innovative strategies. that we will take stock of those lessons learned in 2018 because we can't afford, forget four more years, we can't afford four more minutes, which is why I did support Representative Green and Tlaib's resolution to initiate impeachment proceedings and was an early co-sponsor because the occupant of this White House lost immoral authority and ground a long time ago. But the Mueller report also proves obstruction of justice.

And then every day again, they hit an all time low. So when people say we can wait or try to couch this in political expediency, I think what the American people want to see us doing is leading. And sometimes that means the fight. doing is leading. And sometimes that means the fight and that the victory is in the fight, even if you won't be successful, that they want to know that you recognize the fear that they are experiencing, the hurt that they are experiencing every day. And that's what I'm led by. You know, the best advice I've received as a new member is to not forget the plot and the plot is the people. And that's what I intend on doing. The plot is the people. Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley, thank you for joining us. Thank you.

Alyssa, it's always good to talk to you. You too. Love it. That's it. That's the end of our that's that's what we got for each other after all this. No, I didn't know there was an outro. You caught me off guard. I didn't either. I caught myself off guard. I caught myself off guard. I'm doing a lot of pods this week, all right? John and Tommy are both in Europe on a bicycle built for two, and I'm just here...

You think I don't know this? I'm recording everything. Yeah, I know. I drove an hour. I drove an hour to be here with you, okay, on the Thursday before Labor Day. My love for you is real. Wow. Thank you for doing

that. Obviously. And yet no parade. No parade. Bye, Liza. Bye. Pod Save America is a product of Crooked Media. The show is produced by Michael Martinez. It's mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick. Kyle Seglin is our sound engineer. Thanks to Caroline Reston, Tanya Somanator, and Katie Long for production support and to our digital team, Elijah Cohn, Nar Melkonian, and Milo Kim,

who film and upload these bad boys every week.