Pod Save America - Stopping the Steal with Eric Holder

Episode Date: October 25, 2026

Former Attorney General Eric Holder joins Alex Wagner to game out the ways Trump might try to steal the midterms, from weaponizing the Department of Justice, to sending Homeland Security after suspected noncitizen voters, to straight-up misinformation and intimidation. They talk about how Democrats are preparing to fight back, what Holder has learned running election war games with Hillary Clinton, and why listeners need to lock in their voting plan. Then, Holder, chairman of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, explains why GOP gerrymandering efforts ahead of the midterms have—hopefully—fallen flat, and why the battle against partisan maps will continue into 2028 and beyond.Hate listening to ads? Become a Friends of the Pod subscriber for ad-free episodes of Pod Save America, Pod Save the World, Lovett or Leave It, Runaway Country, Offline with Jon Favreau, and more—plus exclusive content, including bonus episodes of Pod Save America. Subscribe now at crooked.com/friends, on Apple Podcasts, or through the Pod Save America YouTube channel.You can request a transcript by emailing [e-mail]. Include the podcast name, episode title, and air date. Please allow 48 hours for delivery.

Welcome to Potsave America. I'm Alex Wagner. Today, I'm joined by Eric Holder, former Attorney General under President Obama and chairman of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee. We sat down to talk about something that is on a lot of our minds right now, namely how Trump and his allies might try to delegitimize the results of the midterms or, you know, just go ahead and steal them. AG Holder has been keeping close tabs on all of this. He's even hosted war games at his law offices where ex-execimates. experts work through ways to push back against election interference. We broke down the many ways Trump is trying to screw with the midterms by weaponizing the Department of Justice and sowing doubt and confusion wherever he can. Plus, we talked about holders work on the front lines, fighting against the GOP's gerrymandering

efforts. It was a great conversation. There were plenty of four-letter words, and we're going to get to all of that in a minute. But before we do, guys, I am going live on election night. You can come join me and all of your favorite hosts, all of them, on the Pod Save America and Runaway Country YouTube channels. We're going to be live 9 p.m. Eastern, 6 p.m. Pacific on election night. Do not scroll through election results alone.

Come join us. And before those midterms arrive, you should also check out Long Play, Crooked's latest limited series hosted by my friends Jen Palmieri and Aaron Haynes. And they are covering what Democrats are doing to become competitive. in the South once again. Okay, on to the show. Attorney General Eric Holder, welcome to Pod Save America. It's a great pleasure to have you on the program, and I know I am speaking to you while you are on the road in Michigan, so let's just first start there. How are the vibes are good, I think, on the ground. I think the attacks against Abdul El-Sayyad have fallen on deaf ears. My sense, as I've gone around

the place here in Detroit and other parts of Michigan is that people, are really kind of focused on core issues. You know, they're concerned about the fact that gas prices are too high. People are concerned about, you know, the war in Iran. But interestingly, I think something that's broken through is corruption. Yeah. People have really kind of focused on corruption and are tying it, tying corruption to their own economic plight. And it's interesting because that's what happened in Hungary.

Yep. And so I was on the ground. I was there. And it's that economic malaise or, you know, economic uncertainty and anger. coupled with a government that is clearly completely unconcerned with the welfare of its citizens and mostly focused on self-enrichment. Yeah, and I think that's as an issue broken through. And to a certain extent, not as much here in Michigan as in other places.

People are concerned about the state of art democracy. Michigan's interesting because we were successful here in unwinding a really bad gerrymander. And so at least at the state and local level, they're not as concerned as, for instance, in Ohio. people are still concerned about a pretty vicious gerrymandered that they're dealing with, dealing with there. Well, we're going to get into all of that because I'm eager to hear sort of how you're thinking about this election, the safety of, you know, the sanctity of the voting process, and the extraordinary measures that the Trump administration is doing is taking to undermine confidence.

So just like, let me start with a clip that I think sent a chill down many people's minds. It certainly freaked me out. the Attorney General, Todd Blanche, speaking yesterday, I guess on his way somewhere. But let's just play, let's play the sound first, and I'll get your thoughts on the other side. Any action from the Justice Department in terms of certification process of states? Is there any scenario in which DOJ would weigh in on that certification process or trying to block states and certifying? I mean, is there any scenario? Yes, of course, there's scenarios that we could all come up with. hypothetically, you know, some doomsday scenario, for example, right? So I don't think it's proper

to to make any kind of conclusory statements about what's going to happen in the future, because I have no idea what's capital future. It is not DOJ's intention to, and it's never our intention to improperly interfere with elections or the state confirmation process or certification process, but, you know, to say that there's no circumstances that we would ever do that. Of course, I'm not going to say that. But by planning my days around the election to be somewhere to not certify? Of course not. No, not at all. Attorney General Holder, you've been the Attorney General. You've run the Justice Department. What's the right way to answer that question? Well, you know, it's an interesting thing.

I mean, in some ways, that answer could be viewed as a fairly benign one if the person making that statement had not already done things to indicate that the Justice Department does want interfere with the electoral process. And so I don't take Todd Blanche at his word there. Yeah, he may not be, I don't know, he says something about I'm not, and may not be spending all my waking hours thinking about this. But my concern is that they might be thinking about this during some other part of the day. You know, it's, they don't come into this as we say in the law with clean hands. Yeah. You know, they've done a variety of things that are not. directly electorally related, but all kind of designed to make people be concerned about whether

or not the system is going to be fair, high profile indictments brought in a time period when the Justice Department does not normally do overt things in terms of either investigations or indictments, just throwing a whole bunch of things out there. And we also know that, you know, Donald Trump thinks that every election that he loses whether he loses or his party loses is filled with fraud. So we know we're going to hear that. And that could be the basis for some kind of justice department action. So it's something that I think we have to be concerned about,

but is also something I want to assure people, reassure and assure people that we've been anticipating and we're going to be ready to handle whatever it is that they throw at us. What keeps you up at night when you think about the DOJ and it being run by Todd Blanche and Todd Blanche saying openly that it's really an administrative tool for this president, vis-a-vis the election. Well, the fact that the Justice Department is simply an arm of the White House, simply an arm of the political component of the White House gives me a great deal of concern. I mean, the Justice Department has huge amounts of power, both in, you know, dealing with the electoral system, dealing with people involved in the electoral system, jailing people, threatening people, inditing people.

And, you know, up until this administration and certainly post-Watergate, you know, we always had the view that the Justice Department acted independently of the White House, did not act in a political way. And this is under Republican, as well as Democrat. you know, administrations. And I'm concerned that this Justice Department is simply an arm of the RNC and of the White House. I mean, I guess like it's so hugely powerful and it has been so perverted under this administration. And that perversion shows no sign of stopping. I know that you have been running war games slash tabletop exercises focused on protecting election integrity. And I know you can't get into the specifics of that stuff, nor would I want you to. Don't give up the strategy here on how to combat election interference. But broadly, can you

give me a sense of what kinds of threats you guys are focused on? Like, is there, you know, how do you think about what's potentially on the horizon? Well, we've tried to imagine, you know, a whole variety of things. You know, rejections of ballots that are, you know, legitimate. cast seizure of ballots that might have already been cast and are in the system. You know, ways in which the military might be deployed, you know, or statements given that ICE might be, you know, in certain neighborhoods. You know, try to anticipate all those kinds of things to make sure that we're in a position to, you know, respond to it. I mean, questions of certification. I mean, what I will say, like, with regard to certification, we already have, you know,

court filings that have been prepared. And you just got to fill in, you know, what's the district? Where is, where is this thing going to go? So that we can get the courts involved. Yeah, get the courts involved as quickly as as possible. You know, we've done tabletop. I've done tabletop exercises, you know, on the hill with senators on the hill. I've been in touch with Joe Morelli, a congressman from New York, who's kind of been designated by leader Jeffries to take the lead on these issues. Hillary Clinton and I did a tabletop exercise at my law firm's office with a whole bunch of activist groups and people in civil society, complete with people playing television anchors up on screens that we had.

I'm available if you ever need someone to roleplay that. I'm happy to do it. That would have made it more realistic, you know. We tried to do. We tried to make it realistic. You know, while we were in the process of doing something, something would come up on the screen is that we have unconfirmed reports that, you know, fill in the blank.

And then the question was, well, how do we respond? How do we respond to that? I mean, the one thing that I think people need to take from, I hope, our interaction is that, yeah, they're going to try things. We're prepared to meet what it is they're going to do. But in some ways, the best antidote to anything that they do is to have huge numbers of people come out and vote. Because that can actually crush any efforts that they have to subvert the system. I got to ask you, you know, when I hear you say I was doing tabletop exercises at my law firm with Hillary Clinton.

And it's like, if you told Eric, I mean, first of all, how does that feel? And like, if you were, if you could talk to the Eric Holder of 2015 and say, there's going to be a time when you and Hillary Clinton are going to have to run tabletop exercises to prepare a strategy to respond to the Trump administration, the federal government, weaponizing agencies to meddle in an American election. I mean, I'm not saying this to scare people, but it is just worth a beat to just. How, like, can you believe this is the place we're in now? No, that's a very legitimate question. I mean, you know, if you had told me that you're going to be doing tabletop exercise and exercises and the subject matter is going to be, you know, somebody fooling around with our electoral system, I said, well, yeah, I can see that.

And so I say, all right, we're dealing with what the Iranians might be doing, what the Chinese might be doing, what the Russians might be doing. But what we will focus on is what the United States government might be doing. And if you had told me that a few years ago, I said, well, it's time for a drug test. I mean, you know, that's, we don't do things like that in the United States. But nevertheless, that's where we are, which doesn't mean that the Russians, Chinese, and Iranians, especially the Iranians now, aren't going to try to do things. But you have to add to that list, you know, unfortunately, sadly, maddeningly, you know, it makes me angry to have to say this, that we have to deal

with what the possibilities are from the government of the United States of America. I mean, you know, we're 250 years old, and we have never faced anything like this before. And this is, it's a sad, it's a sad thing. It's just unbelievable. I believe the actual clinical term is unfucking believable that this is what we're, that we are our own greatest threat, right? I did not be, I was not the first one to drop an F bomb here. So, you know.

We always knew it was going to be me, though, didn't we? First. we're looking forward to whenever you choose to drop the F-bomb, and I'm going to give you plenty of opportunities to do so, beginning with, like I just as like the person who is the foremost lawyer in the country and understands well the constitution and the legal system of this country, I got to get your thoughts on some of the stuff that's happened just in the last week on that front vis-a-vis election integrity and election meddling.

So Trump has sent Department of Homeland Security officials on the hunt to find phantom non-citizen voters. Again, this is not a phenomenon that happens. It is largely cooked up by the Trump administration as an excuse to in meddle with the elections. It is all part of something they're calling the unlawful voter initiative. Now, last Wednesday, a federal judge significantly limited what DHS agents can do as part of this initiative, basically calling what they're doing voter intimidation. But the judge didn't end the effort entirely. How concerned are you? How concerned are you, about the way in which DHS is weaponizing itself and its agents to go out there and scare people ahead of the vote? Well, I'm worried about it, not because they're going to find anything that's substantive in nature,

but just the fact that they are, it's announced that they're out there and that they're doing things. And even if a judge slaps them down and tells them not to do it, they've put it into the ether, that, you know, DHS is out there. And in certain communities, the notion that DHS is out doing things in one regard puts people at risk in other ways. People who live in, you know, mixed households with people who are documented and people who are undocumented, you know, makes you a little reluctant. If you do have the right as a citizen to cast a ballot to maybe walk out and, you know, go to a polling place, if you know that, you know, the DHS is out there and out there and about or some component of DHS is out there. So that's something that gives me concern. And there's also a reason why people, I think, really, in this, in this environment, need to, we've said this a lot. And it's funny because I've been getting it

back from voters as we've been, as I've been going, as I've been going around the country, as I've been telling people, you know, make a plan. And I've heard from people unprompted say, well, I made a plan and I'm going to be voting in this way. I'm going to be, I'm going to fill out my ballot. I'm going to drop it off ahead of time, which I think makes a great deal of sense. We've seen interesting statistics that show that there's been a kind of a drop-off in the number of mail ballots that have been cast, but an increase in the number of people who have voted in person but early. And I think that is a pretty good sign.

Do you have a piece of advice on a strategy on that? I mean, I know Rick Hosson from UCLA is saying that, you know, his advice is for people who can't send in their ballot to you. use or who, yeah, who can't send in their ballot early to use either a government drop box if it's available or to drop off the ballot at an official polling location rather than putting it in the mail via USPS. I mean, first of all, again, like I can't believe we now have to strategize around mail and balloting and that Trump has stoked this much fear and anxiety about the process. But like, what would you advise people? No, I would agree with, you know, with a professor. I think that's the appropriate thing to do. You know, I think, I think,

the U.S. mails themselves are going to be fine. But if you look at what's happening in North Carolina, where they impose these new strict rules for mail-in ballots, you know, you have to put your ballot in an envelope, seal it and then put it in another envelope that actually gets mailed, and that has to be sealed. And they are rejecting ballots because that internal envelope has not been sealed. You know, and it's kind of like, what's the point of, okay, you know,

that's a minor technicality, but it's not an indication that the ballot has been in some ways, you know, tampered with. And so a way to avoid that is to, as the professor said, you know, fill out your ballot ahead of time, look at, you know, the early voting days that are available, find your polling place, and then march it down to an official place that will accept a ballot that can be handed in and do it and do it that way. This podcast is sponsored by Squarespace. Squarespace is the all-in-one website platform designed to elevate your online presence and drive your success.

Squarespace provides all the tools you need to promote and get paid for your services in one platform. Whether you offer consultations, events, or other experiences, Squarespace can help you grow your business. Squarespace offers a complete library of professionally designed and award-winning website templates with options for every use and category. No matter where you start, your website is flexible to what you need with intuitive drag-and-drop editing, beautiful styling options,

unrivaled visual design effects, and more ways to list what you offer. No experience required. Every dream needs a domain. Find the perfect domain for your business at one fair, all-inclusive price with no hidden fees or add-ons. Every Squarespace domain comes with advanced privacy and security tools included to ensure your domain remains online and protected. Bring your vision to life with integrated website building, professional email, and more. don't wait to claim your name, invest in your dream domain today.

Head to Squarespace.com for a free trial, and when you're ready to launch, go to Squarespace.com slash cricket to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain. That's Squarespace.com slash crooked. Pod Save America is brought to you by the NPR Politics Podcast. The midterms are coming up fast and keeping track of everything happening in Washington can get overwhelming. If you love Pod Save America, think of the NPR Politics podcast as your daily briefing. Every weekday morning, they break down the biggest story. or reshaping the political landscape in 15 minutes or less.

Right now, NPR politics has its eye on the issues that actually affect your life, the high cost of housing, health care, ICE, and immigration. They talk about America's role in the world, our growing debt, plus how all of it might impact the coming elections. There's no doom scrolling, just a clear focus summary for you to declutter the chaos. It's a team that have experienced political journalists who talk like your smart friends, giving you calm, straight talk instead of hyperbole. They offer clarity without judgment, offering a better understanding of how,

how the balance of power might shift without stressing you out. I'm a big fan of the NPR Politics Podcast. I've been listening for many, many years now. It is part of my daily consumption of news, which we're all just inhaling these days. Highly recommended, listen now to the NPR Politics Podcast in the NPR app or wherever you get your podcasts. It just makes me angry, you know,

that we now have to, we have been made to feel like the process is rigged against tomorrow. and that is so poisonous and so nefarious for the long term. I mean, give me your thoughts on this effort on the part of the feds to involve themselves in California, well, the state run, state-run elections, right? The incredibly by using, once again, an incredibly flawed and sloppy process, maybe even illegal, the Department of Homeland Security identified 20,000 likely non-citizen voters in California and a further 17,000 voting records that are potentially. potentially tied to non-citizens. And the DOJ is demanding that these 20,000 ballots, once cast,

be segregated away from the other ballots once the counting begins. Now, we know that California's Attorney General Rob Bonda is fighting this in court. But like, is there any legal precedent for the federal government to involve itself in the state process to count votes? No. I mean, they're just, you know, they're just making this shit up. I mean, that's just the reality, you know. And so, One of our responses to this has to be that we're going to fight back, you know, legally and in every other way that we possibly can to understand that they're trying to undermine the greatest democracy that has ever existed, you know, on this planet. And be mad about that, be angry about that.

And, you know, Rob Bond is a good attorney general. I'm sure he will, you know, do things effectively there. And what they're trying to do here is consistent with what they try to do in, I guess, Nevada when they tried to come up with a, I think it was 17,000 number. Yeah, I was, I think it was like 19,805. And then that number got whittled down to 185. And then ultimately it was zero. All the people were citizens that they had flagged. Once you look under the hood, there's nothing there. You start off at 19,800, whatever. I was going to give them, just say 17,000. All right, 19,000, but by the time you whittle it down, you get a goose egg, zero. And I suspect that's what's going to happen,

you know, in California as well. And even to the extent that you find problematic things, you're talking about numbers that are so small that they're inconsequential and certainly not election changing. But again, again, it's all about casting doubt out there about the legitimacy of the system and trying to discourage people, put fear in people not to participate or discourage people by making them think that the system itself simply is not on the up and up that the system is rig. And I guarantee you this, it's going to be a good day for for Democrats on November the 3rd and when the counting is done. And I guarantee you that we're going to hear Donald Trump and his minions talking about all the fraud that went in and how Martians were voting.

You know, they'll, you know, extra planetary people will be part of, you know, of the voting thing. and certainly in a more realistic way, they'll be, well, realistic in what they say, but not in fact, they'll be talking about, as they term them, illegal aliens who have cast ballots. And there's going to be no proof of that.

I mean, they still think nest thermostats were involved in the 2020 election. So, like, truly, sky's the limit in terms of the conspiracy theories that are sure to hatch on November 4th. And, again, it's an infinite testimony small number of people who are here, And, you know, maybe you want work permits or whatever.

And, you know, they've been legal permanent residents, but they're not citizens and who cast ballots. And people sometimes registered at the same time that they got a driver's license. Exactly. And they didn't even know that they registered. So that's one. And another one, another, you talked to a lot of people and kind of like, again, relatively, huge, very small number of people said, well, I thought I could.

They made a mistake. It wasn't like I was here to try to defa this. But again, the numbers are so small. that it doesn't warrant the kind of attention that this administration is giving. I mean, Brennan Center is that famous thing where they say, you know, you're more likely to be hit by lightning than to cast an in-person fraudulent ballot. That's kind of what we're talking about. Right.

And the likelihood of a Martian casting a fraudulent ballot is even smaller. I digress. Are you worried about the Supreme Court about the stuff landing on Don Roberts' doorstep? Like, you know, the lower courts have been pretty unanimous. Like they're just, they're saying what you're saying. You guys are making their shit off. Like, good luck on that. The Constitution does not allow for this.

But I don't place a little. I mean, I'm very skeptical about the Roberts Court because, you know, every now and again, they'll remember how to read and look at the 14th Amendment, for example, and understand that birthright citizenship is right there in black and white. But like, a lot of times they freestyle. I mean, do you worry about this ending up with a court that's been really perverted by partisan interests? I have kind of a mixed answer to that. I'm not worried about what ultimately comes out of the court because I think you find five votes for the court to do the right thing.

But the court will find five, six votes, whatever it is. On matters that are really nine zips, you know, yeah, they did the right thing on birthright citizenship. I mean, that was a slam dunk, easy case that probably they shouldn't have taken and it should have ended up with nine at a nine zero vote. And I guess it was six three or something or six three, maybe five, four, how you interpret, you know, Kavanaugh's vote, which is kind of a frightening thing. I think your statement, though, is right, that in terms of those courts where we'll go first, United States district courts, United States appellate courts, we've not had any problems and done quite well in state courts as well. And that's another thing that people need to understand that, you know, when we're talking about

elections, those are things that are uniquely designed by our Constitution to be run state by state. And so the state courts play an important role. One of the reasons why the campaigning I'm doing here is for state Supreme Court justices in Michigan, Ohio, as well as in North Carolina. And we've done well in state courts. But, you know, there's another thing about the practice of this Supreme Court, the use of the shadow docket. Yeah. Something that I would decry. But in this instance, allows for the court to make some relatively rapid determinations about a lot of

fallacious stuff that will be put into the system or set about the system by the Trump administration. And so it could allow for some rapid decisions in that regard. And that's one of the things that we try to focus on when we look at the litigation component of this. How can we do things as quickly as we can? We can't be held up, you know, for months. Like the presidential immunity case, which took conveniently a really long time. Exactly. Or for weeks. I mean, there are deadlines that have to be met. And so things have to be filed right away, considered on an expedited basis, moved up the court system to the extent that that is necessary, you know, as quickly as possible. And so we've taken all that into consideration about, you know, how we're going to compose our litigation strategy. That is really heartening. That's actually incredibly great, I think. I didn't realize that you got, I mean, obviously you are because you're the experts, but it's very heartening to hear that you're taking into consideration the speed with which the court has.

has moved and needs to move in something like, you know, election interference. This is the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Jim Himes, laying out the landscape as he sees it. I would divide the risk into three parts. There's Election Day itself where, you know, the president might try to stop, actually, voters from going to vote in states that are very sensitive, you know, where there might be close races. Then there's after Election Day when he's certainly going to say that the results are corrupt. But, you know, at least at that point, the ballots will be secure. and not in some warehouse of the Department of Homeland Security. And then we're going to watch that period of time between November and January.

And we've seen this movie before, right? Last time it was Giuliani standing in front of Four Seasons landscaping and ridiculous lawsuits, all of which were thrown out of court. And then, yes, there is that moment where I work in the House of Representatives. There is that moment when we convene. And the clerk of the House of Representatives calls us to order and there's a quorum call. And in all three of those moments, there's no reason to believe that the president isn't going to try to suggest that it's corrupt and that Mike Pence should do that. It won't be Mike Pence this time, but that, you know, Speaker Johnson should do the right thing or whatever it'll be.

Okay. So he's talking about the before, during and after the elections, right? What is the right way? Is this the strategy Democrats and people who care about democracy should use, like telegraphing ahead and dismissing the inevitable, you know, conspiracy theories? what is the best way to talk about these threats in a way that doesn't stoke fear among the public and make them feel like their votes won't count, but also preemptively neutralizes any ridiculous arguments Trump and his allies will make about why ballots need to be seized or the vote was fraudulent? Yeah, we do have to find that sweet spot so that we are putting out there that which we are concerned about so that people get, I guess, desensitized to the impact that, you know, things that, you know, Trump or his minions might say in terms of, you know, what some foreign country has done or just

things about fraud more generally, but not be alarmist and say things in such a way that people get either freaked out and decide, again, not to participate or concerned about what their, their individual safety might be if they're going to be approaching, you know, a ballot area where they think something negative could happen to them. And so I think, you know, it's incumbent upon us to be responsible, to share facts with people and say, you know, this is what you're likely to hear. We got this.

We got it. And so, and really emphasize, again, to people that the great likelihood is that, you know, you're going to be able to just cast your ballot, make that plan, cast your ballot. your ballot is going to be, you know, counted appropriately and that if we have a huge number of people turn out, that, and, you know, and the margins of victories for Democrats is really, really large. There's not an awful lot that they're going to be able to do. I can talk about a lot of stuff, but, you know, we just kind of dismiss 90% of what it is they say anyway. They can

talk about it, but there's not much they're going to be able to do. I mean, when it comes to things like certification, I mean, a lot of that stuff is just kind of by rote. You know, if you have, if you're a candidate and you think that something has happened, well, yeah, you go, there are methods by which you can, you know, raise concerns. But when you get to the certification stage, that is really just a question of, you know, a group of people kind of almost like checking boxes. And, you know, history shows that when it comes to certification, you know, most of the time, either through courts or people who are trying to fool around the certification process, getting outvoted by other people who are on the board or the person who is pushing some kind of,

you know, certification problem, you know, simply gives up that the history around certification is really not a problem when it comes to the house and whether or not, you know, the clerk in the house will, the clerk in the house has a huge amount of power, huge amount of power. Well, yeah, I do want to talk about that because we all, we're all, old enough to remember January 6th. And the certification process, I don't want to interrupt, I want you to go back to that point because that's where I think we have a lot of PTSD. It's not the same certification process, right?

And the clerk of the house, it's not Speaker Johnson that's involved in this. It's the clerk of the house. Kevin McCumber, I believe is his name. He's the one that basically dots the eyes and crosses the T's as far as certifying the election, right? Right. And by all accounts in talking to Democrats, you know, Democratic congressmen have great faith in the current clerk of the House. And so I think if he is in place, I think we're going to be just fine. A tell would be if for some reason Johnson tries to replace the clerk of the House sometime, you know, after the election, between the election and the swearing and of new members, that would be of concern. concern to me. But in terms of where we stand right now, I think we're okay. But again, that's another one of those things, and I won't talk about this one too much, but that's another one of those things that we have talked about, all right? You have. Do you have like Kevin McCumber,

a nation turns its lonely eyes to you, T-shirts that we should all be wearing ahead of January 3rd? Well, there's not only that, but we've also thought, well, suppose the clerk who we have faith in, and I'm not sure that's the guy's name, but I'll defer to you on. It is. It is. It If the guy who we have faith in is replaced, then what happens. And we've already kind of gained that out. And also thought about what happens in the Senate if they try to do things there as well. Can I ask a question, like, legally speaking, is there anything to be done if Speaker Johnson tries to appoint a different clerk?

Like, is there an answer to that, like, that you can share? I mean, I'm not asking you for your strategy, but just is that legal for him to do that? Let's just say we got this. Okay. This is like, you know what? This is like, I think what I'm hearing for you is like, we should think about like Trump's election meddling strategies the way we think about preparing for a long car ride with a toddler.

It's like the toddler's going to throw shit. The toddler may poop in his pants. The toddler may scream the entire time, but you're going to get there. You're going to make it. Yeah. And I think that's, I think, I hope that's the message that people get. You know, they are, I'd say creatively evil. And, you know, everything that we have thought about,

You know, there may be some things that we have not actually contemplated and come up with, you know, a plan for. But I think we're also, we have in place, you know, a real bunch of nimble folks who are prepared adequately resourced and nationwide, you know, in scope. We're prepared to deal with anything that they throw at us. And at the end of the day, they may end up doing nothing more than uttering threats. and we'll see that all the plans that we have made were not unnecessary, but that may go unused. And I hope that that, in fact, is the case. But I hope that people will also understand if we're on the other side of this and everything went just fine, that people won't say, well, look, Democrats would just making stuff up.

There was nothing to worry about. Because even on the basis. There's always 2028. Even on the basis of what they've done so far, we can see that they're trying to fool around with this system. Pots of America is brought you by Helix. It's cozy season, which means everyone is staying in bed just a little longer these days. They are.

Are the longer nights and occasional sick days making you realize your mattress could use an upgrade? If so, go with Helix. The best. Love Helix mattresses. I sleep on one every night. Multiple helix mattresses over the years we've been reading for them. And no complaints yet, in fact, love them. The best.

They're super comfy. And Helix will custom build your mattress based on your sleep needs. You just have to take the two-minute Helix sleep quiz to determine your best fit. They deliver your mattress right to your door with free shipping in the U.S. And you can rest easy with seamless returns and exchanges and a 365 night sleep trial. Part of their happy with Helix guarantee. The only way left they can help me get a better night's sleep is that they come and take the phone out of my fucking hand, you know? Try that, Helix.

Just an idea. What mattress does that? Helix is the most awarded mattress brand for. a reason, tested and reviewed by experts like Forbes and Wired. Go to helixleep.com slash cricket for 20% offsitewide. That's helixleaksleep.com slash crooked for 20% offsite wide. Helixleap.com slash crooked. Long play, our docu series exploring the people and forces shaping the South is back.

News slash, the South is the new political epicenter of the country. Democrats are way on their heels in this region, but Republicans are going through their own reckoning in the South, too. We're in the final stretch of the midterms, and the political map has only gotten more competitive with new states and districts emerging as potential flips. So we thought it was time to get back out on the road and take a closer look at what's actually happening on the ground. I'm Aaron Haynes, journalist and expert on all things southern politics. And I'm Jennifer Palmary, former White House Communications Director. Tune in on Mondays to Longplay Series on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.

This is FBI director Cash Mattel speaking to Senator Peter Welch at a hearing last month. I want to get your thoughts and then I want to play it and then we'll get your thoughts on the other side. We have an election crimes community coordinator in all 56 field office. So you bet we're going to have them there and manning the post for election interference matters. Wait, I thought you weren't going to be sending people to the polls. When did you hear that? It's just another lie. When you answered Mr. Blumenthal?

Nope. So you are sending, you are sending. We have election. Do you pledge that you will not in any way interfere in the will of the American people when they go to the polls in November? I pledge unequivocally that I will not participate in your charade of lies. Okay. Attorney General Holder, what does the law say about having armed federal officers from agencies

like the FBI or DHS at polling places? Can't do it. I mean, you know, no, FBI agent should be at a polling place unless there is some predicate. And I can't even imagine what the predicate would be, some kind of predicate for that person to be there. The notion that you have armed agents, you know, people from the military near polling places prohibited by law, federal law, state law, and this notion that somehow or other Patel is going to, let's make this clear, the most unqualified FBI director of all time, you know, joining Pete Hegseth and, you know,

Robert Kennedy, I mean, you know, as most unqualified in their positions as well. And we don't have enough time for me to go through all the ones who are the most unqualified of all time. It's hard to pick a number one. They're all such clowns. But anyway. So there's no basis for, no legal basis for, in fact, it violates the law for the FBI to, I guess, willy-nilly have armed FBI agents outside of polling places. You simply, you know, you simply can't do that. And that's one of those things. All right, let's get straight into court, you know,

get the necessary testimony from people who are at polling place A and state, you know, state B, and get that information to a court and have the court say, FBI agent, get your ass away from the polling places. Get your ass away from the polling places. Get your ass away from the polling places. is something we should all just practice saying that in the mirror. That's a legal term, actually. Good to know. This is why you were the Attorney General and I wasn't. I want to get back to sort of post-election chicanery,

but just a couple more things about election day proper. In a complete perversion of the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division, the DOJ is sending over 1,000 election monitors to all 50 states, which is, I think three times a number. it's three times a number of watchers it sent out during the last midterms. Just to be clear here, in normal times, what does an election monitor do? Election monitors have routinely been sent out by the Justice Department. Simply to go to those places where you are concerned, there might be some problems,

some attempts to disenfranchise people, have a negative impact on people's ability to cast a ballot. and they just go and observe. You know, so they're talking about, I guess, three, as you said, three times as many. And I don't think they're going out there with that benign intent that I described before. And it has been used by Republican as well as Democratic Justice Departments or Democratic and Republican attorneys general. But you also have to keep in mind, and this is one of those things, you're a thousand people. Oh, well, this is a nation of 330 million people. It's true.

you know, 50 states out of this, I saw some statistics. There's hundreds of thousands of polling places. So a thousand people, even with, you know, negative intent, don't really have an awful lot of ability to sway elections. But nevertheless, that is something that we have planned for. What is what are these folks going to be doing? are they doing that which the federal law, the Boating Rights Act allows them to do, and other federal laws allows them to, or are they exceeding, you know, what that legal mandate is? And if they do, then what is our, you know, what should our response be? Right. The intent is nefarious. The execution is ham-handed, as usual with the Trump administration, which doesn't mean we excuse it away or look the other way, but don't let it, don't let it scare the shit out of you, which is the point. Yeah, exactly. We've got to take them, you know, extremely seriously. I mean, they could bungle their way into something that is potentially effective. You know, I don't think all the great planning that they do will necessarily take them there.

But the possibility exists that they could come up with something that, in an unplanned way, proves to help what it is they're trying to ultimately do. Are you worried about him invoking the Insurrection Act or, you know, otherwise declaring like a national emergency? I mean, how far do you think he can go with that sort of scenario on voting? day. I mean, that really is kind of the outer reaches of the kinds of things that I think we have to be concerned about because that really is, you're using powers there that have never been used before in peacetime and with regard to an electoral setting. But again, kinds of things that we have thought about and prepared to, you know, litigate and figure out ways in which we can push back

on, but that would be a real indication that they're going all out. Well, and it would be like a real confirmation that he's totally demented. I mean, we have these, like, discrete confirmations every day, but that would just be, that that would suggest, I mean, it's just another, it takes us into Tura incognito as far as this president and this administration. Well, yeah, but we've had people around him, you know, who publicly said, The president should have or should, you know, declare, invoke the Insurrection Act, deploy troops. And, you know, that has not happened. Trump has not indicated that that's something he's going to do.

But, again, if that is something that we have to confront, you know, we're ready to deal with it. I know we talked about the sort of House certification of the election. But what about, like, in terms of the post-term. election-day scenarios that could be problematic. What about if a state or local official just refuses to certify votes they don't like, refuses to certify results they don't like? What happens then? Well, again, history shows that that's not an effective thing. And then one thing I will have people understand is this thing called a writ of mandamus, which means you go to a court and you tell the, you argue with, make your arguments before a court and have

the court order the state official to do that which he or she is sworn to do, simply do their jobs. And so I'm not, this is not revealing any kind of huge, you know, tactical thing that we're considering. But, you know, Ritz of Mandamus are things that in that scenario would be one of the tools that we would try to use to make sure that that person is doing his job, his or her job. But the other thing is that people need to understand something, that the American people, play a role in that as well. You know, the office of that person who is not certifying an election, there's a building someplace where those people are. And so, you know, if people go to that building, raise their voices, and I mean, I want people to gather peacefully and not do anything that is

violent in nature, but, you know, have placards, posters and yelling, certify that election. Certify that election. And we've got thousands of people doing that, that is. That is, is a legitimate First Amendment activity on the part of those protesters. And I think it's a righteous thing. It's a righteous thing to do. So, yeah, while we're in court, having people out there protesting in that way, hopefully getting covered by the media, just adds more pressure on that person to do what they are sworn to do. That's a really great piece of advice, because I think there's a sense of not helplessness, but that so much of the post-election landscape unfolds behind closed doors and that people's voices really very much matter in

these moments. And I think we need to gather lessons from what we've been doing at the National Democratic Redistricting Committee in dismantling those gerrymanders. You know, Trump's plan to add, you know, five seats in Texas and try to, you know, get all these gerrymandered new members of the House of Representatives, that didn't, that thing didn't fail. It was dismantled because of things that we did in court. But importantly, because people, if you look at states like Georgia and South Carolina, protested outside of their state legislatures. And those legislatures which were prepared to do gerrymandering, as Trump asked them to do,

they backed off of it. Doesn't mean that they're not going to come back and try to do it next year, but at least in this attempt, because the people expressed themselves and the people who are at the politicians understood that there could be a political consequence for them doing something inconsistent with what the people wanted to do. You know, they backed off. So the American people, you know, we are slow to rouse. But boy, when we get focused on something, we can be a mighty force. And this is time, you know, everything's got to be, is going to be compressed here.

So we can't be slow to rouse. We've got to get quick to rouse and then really focus all the power that the American people have on anybody who tries to fool around with the electoral system. Well, that's a case and point. I mean, just go look and find out where your local elections office is, know who's running the elections at your state and local level.

Be aware and know that you have lovers, right? Anybody who's listening to this has power. And so you may be called upon to use it if you care about democracy. Pod Save America is brought you by SimplySafe. The aftermath of a break-in isn't just about what was stolen. It's about the loss of a sense of safety in your own home.

Simply Safe prevents that before. it happens the moment someone sets foot on your property, a live U.S.-based agent steps in, smart AI cameras monitor for potential threats and notify simply saves live agents. The agent intervenes in under 30 seconds speaking through the camera to stop an intruder in their tracks and calls for urgent 911 dispatch

when it's needed most. Those agents won't be asleep like the dog. You can potentially hear snoring during this advertisement. Here are some of our CEO's favorite features. The app is easy to use, allowing her to arm or disarm the system directly on her phone from anywhere. If she's ever unsure, if she locked her door, She can check in the app and lock it from there, giving her peace of mind that her home is always secure.

She can even monitor the cameras from the app to check in with family or friends as they arrive. Join the more than 6 million people who entrust SimplySafe with their home security. Right now save 60% off with professional monitoring when you visit Simplysafe.com slash crooked. That's simplysape.com slash crooked. And when you order, please write in Pod Save America in the checkout survey. It lets them know we sent you and really helps to support the show. Simply safe ahead of crime in real time. Long play, our docu series exploring the people and forces shaping the South is back.

Newsflash, the South is the new political epicenter of the country. Democrats are way on their heels in this region, but Republicans are going through their own reckoning in the South too. We're in the final stretch of the midterms, and the political map has only gotten more competitive with new states and districts emerging as potential flips. So we thought it was time to get back out on the road and take a closer look at what's actually happening on the ground. I'm Aaron Haynes, journalist and expert on all things Southern politics. And I'm Jennifer Palmary, former White House Communications Director. Tune in on Mondays to Longplay Series on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. We talked about Cash Patel.

We talked about Todd Blanche. But I kind of wonder what you sort of see as the greatest peril in terms of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Because we know that former ODNI chief Tulsi Gabbard was part of the raid on the full. Bolton County offices in Georgia where the FBI seized the 2020 ballots because Donald Trump cannot let a thing go. Her office seized voting machines in Puerto Rico as well. Jay Clayton, the man who was confirmed to the position after Gabbard, after a short stint from Bill Pulte, but Jay Clayton now holds that office. He's the man that could not say in his confirmation hearings that Joe Biden won the election. He said that he had been certified the winner but

wouldn't say he actually won the election. He's now in that office. How cool, like, how are you thinking about the officer, the director of national intelligence as a cudgel that Trump may use in post-election shenanigans? Well, that is, I got to give him some credit there. That is kind of the height of creativity. I mean, the notion that OD and I would somehow be involved in the seizure of ballots cast by Americans in the United States of America.

It's kind of like, what the hell are you all doing here? I mean, you know, Tulsi, you look good in a flack jacket or whatever she had on, I suppose. And I guess Clayton would look good and want. I mean, I'm generous. I don't know. Well, all right. I'm trying to be generous and funny, but maybe she didn't look good at it. Funny, yes, generous.

We don't need to be generous, but go ahead. I mean, what's OD and I doing here? You know. Nobody knows. Exactly. And so, you know, Clayton, you know, has maybe has had had a fairly good reputation. Yeah. Until I think recently, although you start to probe a little bit and I talk to people in the Southern District of New York and they, he has always been political. You know, there's some cracks in that, I think, reputation of his. But I would hope that there's this, some. degree of sanity, decency in him such that if he were ordered to do something using the powers that he has, as a relatively small number of people. But the intelligence community or the leader of the intelligence community being involved in that, which is a strictly domestic issue, would be of great concern. Now, to try to say that, well, ODI and I is involved in this because

the Iranians and the Chinese and the Russians have somehow done something, you know, there is, I guess, some greater degree of legitimacy to ODI and I being involved. But the notion that ODI and I is going and seizing ballots in Fulton County in Georgia is kind of like, wait a minute, what for an election that was five, six years ago, that makes, That makes no sense. But again, something that we have, you know, looked at and tried to figure out a way to, you know, to counteract. But I will say that is kind of on the periphery of the list of possible things we think we have to worry about. But it's there.

It's there. It's there because DeHalzi Galbard put it there. Let's hope it was just like trying to make Daddy happy by like resurrecting 2020 conspiracy theories. And, you know, he loves nothing then to feast on that. not in between watching himself on Fox News. But, you know, the strategy that he's tried to exploit before, which has worked insofar as it really made people question the integrity of the 2020 election, was exploit the time between when the votes are cast and when the results are announced. And I'm thinking this year of the state of Alaska, right, where there is a key Senate race between

Mary Paltolla and Dan Sullivan. Alaska takes a while to get its results. because ballots literally have to come in from the wilderness. I think dog sleds are used in parts of the state, and there's ranked choice voting, which sort of slows down the counting process as well. It seems like a prime opportunity for conspiracists to cry foul. The, like, balance of power in the Senate could come down to a single seat. I mean, how are you thinking?

I mean, we've, we talk, I think most people who understand how ballot counting works realize that, like, sometimes it takes a couple days. Trump really, really tries to bastardize that interregnum period, that liminal space to his own advantage. Like, how should we be talking about that? How should we be thinking about what is almost sure to be a strategy in the coming midterms? Yeah, I mean, that's something, again, that we have to be talking about before the election. You know, it's going to take some time to count ballots in Alaska. Traditionally, it takes some time to cast ballots, to count ballots in.

in California, you know, and the fact that, you know, you have a vote that indicates one thing in Atlanta at 11, 11 p.m., but might be different at 4 a.m. because you're counting votes that come from various counties, you know, within, around Atlanta. I mean, these are all the kinds of things that we have to talk about ahead of time. Yeah. So that people understand that gaps in time between the casting of a ballot and getting a result are expected. And it's not an indication of fraud. It's simply the way in which the system operates. You know, like you said, in Alaska, we're talking about the largest state in the country and having to get, you know, ballots from a whole variety of places that are really, really far away from where the ultimate counting is

done or where the ballots have to be ultimately placed. California is a huge, state. Cities, urban centers have huge numbers of ballots to count as opposed to rural areas. And so therefore, you know, you think about that. Well, it's going to got a huge number of ballots. Rural areas, we have fewer numbers of ballots. Well, it might take longer than in the place we've got a greater number of ballots. We got to, you know, we've got to put some, some logic out there for people to understand, sensitize them to what has happened in the past and how it has taken time in some places to count ballots, but it's not an indication of fraud. And we should not be in a place where we're responding to that which Trump says,

although we got to do that. We should be talking about this ahead of time to try to, in some ways, make the arguments that he will ultimately make, you know, weaker. That's like a note to all media, like prepare audiences for slow return. in states like Alaska. Speaking of Alaska, we have some breaking news as we're recording this on Friday afternoon. The AP is reporting that the Trump administration has now filed a lawsuit to block certification of the Senate race in Alaska if Republican Senator Dan Sullivan loses the contest while another candidate with the same name, Dan Sullivan, is on the ballot for people who haven't been

following this. Dan J. Sullivan, who goes by the name Dan Sullivan, was among the top four finishers after the August 18th primary. And on Tuesday, he moved into the November matchup, which is ranked choice, as we talked about. Sullivan, this Dan Sullivan is not the same as the senator, Dan Sullivan. They have the same name. This Sullivan is a retired teacher from the island community of Petersburg in Alaska, and he sued for a spot on the ballot and succeeded in that lawsuit. after a judge invalidated a decision by the top state elections official who said he had filed his candidacy with an intent to confuse voters and basically siphon away votes from Republican Senator Dan Sullivan. So now the Trump administration is saying, well, if Republican Senator Dan Sullivan loses this critical Senate race while imposter Dan Sullivan is on the ballot, then we are not going to certify the election results. This is setting up a real showdown here.

I know this is all happening in real time. So first of all, what's your reaction to that? Well, I mean, you know, the fact that, for lack of a better term, imposter Dan Sullivan is on the ballot, that was something that the Alaska courts made a determination that his name should be on the ballot. Now, personally, I mean, this is just me, Eric Holder speaking. I'd rather that it was simply the real Dan Sullivan against the Democratic candidate, who I think was a wonderful candidate, Mary Peltola. I'd rather just have that battle.

But imposter Dan Sullivan is on the ballot and legitimately there, as decided by the Alaska courts. And so the notion that I'm not sure what the basis therefore you'd have for not certifying the election. If somehow you say, well, Senator Dan Sullivan would have won but for the presence of the other. Dan Sullivan's name being on the ballot. I mean, I don't, you know, okay, what's the, you're not happy with that. I don't think it's necessarily best practices. On the other hand, you know, the guy we're calling imposter, Dan Sullivan, I mean, if he's done all the things that he had to do in order to get on the ballot, got the requisite number of signatures, you know, paid the filing fees or whatever it does you have to do to get on the ballot. I mean, who am I to say that, you know,

he shouldn't be there. Dan J. Sullivan. We'll call him Dan J. Sullivan. Okay, Dan J. instead of imposter. D. Dan J. Because it's his name to you, right? It's my fault. I put it into the water supply. But I mean, like... Yeah, let's be clear about that. Dan J. I only

used imposter because that's what... That's what I said. Just as a point of clarification. We want to give you more respect, bro. Yes. We want to give you more respect, Dan J. Sullivan. Although, I mean, I worry that... I mean, it's all pretense, right? It's just pretense for the administration to say, well, see, we told you, they're just up to own good tricks. Like, we can't, we need to have another election. We need to have a special

election. I mean, like, the federal, like, the federal government, can they issue a preemptive lawsuit to block certification? Like, that, how does that work? I don't see how you can. There's nothing to certify, you know? I mean, they're looking for some kind of, what we call a declaratory judgment, which is where you ask the court to rule on something before it actually occurs for a variety of reasons. Those things are hard to get. You're going to try to, I just don't understand how this would work, how you would get a court to say we're not going to certify an election because of the mere existence of

Dan Jay or do they wait until after the election, try to figure out what the margin of victory is for the Democratic candidate, you know, substitute to Dan Jay's numbers, do all the math. And even there, again, Dan Jay is on the ballot legitimately as determined by the Alaska courts. So I don't see how that, I just don't see how that works. Okay. To be continued on that front.

We haven't talked about the sort of like elephant in the room, both in terms of the work that you do on a daily basis and one of the most sort of determinative decisions this administration made to order state. Republican states to redraw congressional districts, gerrymandar congressional districts in off years, not after census, which has taken every 10 years. We're looking at, and I sit here, you know, not trying to count chickens before they hatch, but it really looks like the Democrats are going to win the House based on the catastrophic mismanagement of this administration and the Republican Party in Congress. Do you think, like sitting in

where we are today, that the Republican strategy shepherded through by Donald Trump to pervert congressional maps was a failure? It was a failure, but it didn't fall of its own weight. It failed because we dismantled it, because we beat them. You know, at one point, Steve Bannon was saying, yeah, we're going to do this and we're going to get as many as 21 seats. Our best guess now is that their maximum number is five. The more likely number is between zero and two. So yeah, it certainly has, it certainly has failed. And it was because Democrats said, and this is something I think we need to keep, this attitude is something we need to keep in mind as we look towards the electoral process. You know, Trump goes out there and says, get me five seats and then goes to other places.

You know, Democrats could have clutched their pearls. I could have written an op-ed or something. I could come on MS now and say, you know, oh, this is terrible, it's awful. But we decided that, you know, A, we were pissed off and that we were going to use that righteous anger of ours to take action and be as tough, but in a righteous way as Republicans were tough in an almost evil way. And so we fought back and filed lawsuits that were successful in Missouri and in Utah. was on, you know, talking to Governor Newsom about what California might do in response to what Texas did. And I certainly agreed with what he proposed, especially given the fact that the people in California had the ability to vote on whether or not. It was a voter approved redistricting. Right. Whether or not they wanted to, you know, adjust their maps and do so on a temporary basis only until after the next census.

And so, you know, we used our mapping tools to kind of analyze. what it is that they were doing and realized that in a fundamental way, even at the beginning, we thought, they're not looking at Texas. They based that on the 2024 turnout, you know. Mistakes were made. Right. And you can tell right away, they weren't going to get five seats in Texas. And given, you know, the failures that they've had in policy and with a war in Iran,

the rise in gas and diesel prices, and they're even in a worse. The ICE death squads killing people in five. fathers in, you know, Houston, Texas and shooting people in Austin, Texas. It's really not been a great strategy to keep Latino men in your corner. But I agree. It can't be forgotten that this move by them was the ultimate indication of weakness. They knew that in a fair fight, they simply couldn't win. And so, you know, because of, you know, tax cuts that went to people who didn't need them,

cuts in Medicare and Medicaid, rises in gas prices, the corruption, that just infests this administration, they had to come up with ways in which they could put their finger on the scale. But, you know, we at the NDRC, along with a whole bunch of people, you know, our allies and people acting independently of us, we just whipped their asses. That's exactly what happened. That's the clinical legal term for it. I'm sorry. That's another legal term, right? Yeah, it's good that I'm fluent in that kind of legalese. Let me ask you, though, because they, have lost this battle, but it doesn't feel like the war is over, right? Like, so are we stuck in

an inevitable cycle of partisan gerrymandering for the foreseeable future? Because it's hard to imagine that Democrats look at what California did and don't try and duplicate that ahead of 2028 or another cycle and say, we will go to the people with this. We will try and do this in an above board fashion in so far as that's even possible. But like, we're not going to sit idly by as Republicans continue to pervert democracy, we're going to try and rebalance it on the left. Yeah, we've got to stop this race to the bottom. And as I said in, I guess, the statement or op-ed that I wrote, I guess when California was talking about doing what they did, I said, you know, we have to, you know, we have to preserve our democracy now in order to save it ultimately.

And so we've got to, in the short term, respond to whatever Republicans do. And you're right, it's not going to be over. I mean, in Lane Duck sessions, they will try to do things. I'd look at Georgia and Texas, especially next year in 2027. They'll try to go back to Indiana, is my guess, Mississippi. You know, there'll be other states, South Carolina where they'll try to do things in 2027. And I think Democrats will have to respond there. But at the end of the day, I'm hoping that we will have a Democratic trifecta after the 2028 election, the Democratic president, Democratic House, Democratic Senate. And at that point, we have to simply use that power to pass a bill that bans partisan gerrymandering, that bans mid-cycle redistricting. I think this is a piece of legislation. Maybe you ought to just

stand alone. If it means, you know, adjusting the filibuster, I think we need to do that. American people were appalled by what they have seen since Trump took that, you know, that walk to the helicopter and talked about those five seats in Texas. I mean, you know, I've been at NDRC since 2017 trying to raise people's consciousness about the pernicious impact of, of gerrymandering on our democracy. And Trump did more for that cause. Totally. He ordered in Texas and then in other other states. I mean, people get it now in a way that they did not, they did not before. And so I think that, you know, I'd actually think that if Democrats take the House this year, put up a bill that bans partisan gerrymandering, that bans mid-cycle redistricting,

not likely that's something that Trump would sign, but let's put people on the record. Let's put people on the record. Do you stand for that which happened in 2026? Are you for allowing politicians to pick their voters as opposed to citizens of this country, choosing where their representatives ought to be? Make people go on the record. And then ultimately, as I said, with a trifecta to just put that into law. I want to close out on something that you just said, because I think it's a really important point, is as much as democracy and the integrity of our elections

feels like it's under assault, Trump has done more to educate the American public on, even the term gerrymandering was not something that was part of common conversation, even like five years ago, right? State Supreme Courts, you're out there stumping for state Supreme Court nominees. People now understand the essential role

these courts play in a host of democratic functions. There is more fluency around the court system and the legal system, the certification process. I mean, the Trump years have been dark, but they've also been an incredible lesson in civics. And if anything, we can hopefully come out of this chapter with a greater understanding of the importance of democracy, not just in presidential election years, but in terms of citizen engagement, in terms of local and state representation, in terms of just understanding the basic, you know, how a bill becomes a law and the basic mechanics of democracy. And that's amazing, right? Like, in some ways, I don't mean to sound like polyanish about it, but that's like power is returned once you are, have the knowledge.

And this has been, wow, an incredible education at the very least, right? See, I don't think you're being polyanish at all. In fact, I think that's a really good assessment of what this whole thing is going to boil down to. I mean, I think the American people are more aware of the way in which the system works. I think they're going to come to understand in a really dramatic way, the power that we have and our ability to shape how our system is used is more acute now than it was before. You know, I always say this. You know, every generation of Americans is ultimately called upon to defend democracy.

You know, we had to end the sin of slavery. And that enhanced our democracy. Women fought for the right to vote. That enhanced our democracy. As Roosevelt said, we sent the pride of our nation across seas to fight fascism. And that, in essence, was to preserve and enhance our democracy. Black kids and white kids, you know, went south to join a civil rights movement that existed in the south. And that was all about a variety of things. But chiefly, and people tend to forget this, chiefly about the right to vote. And that was about enhancing our our democracy. Well, now this is our generation's time. This is our time to stand up and to defend our democracy. And I think the American people and educated American people are up to that challenge. And I think it's going to be a bumpy two years. These last two Trump years are going to be bumpy. And they're going to be outrageous that we're going to have to deal with. But I think it's going to be less outrageous and less damaging as a result of the fact that the American people are

engaged in this battle in ways that they were not, let's say at the beginning of even this, even this year. And once they see the results of their involvement, as I think you're going to, with the results of the 2026 midterms at both the state and federal levels, they'll understand in a really stark way the impact of that power, of their knowledge and of their involvement. And I don't think I'm being polyanius here as well. I think this is really just a good assessment of where this country stands. And again, I think about things we did at NDRC in trying to use our grassroots component. We have a multi-component thing. We use that grassroots component in our arsenal and the ability to get people to demonstrations, again, peacefully,

non-violently, but exercising their First Amendment rights, it was easy to get people engage once they understood, you know, kind of what was at stake. And it had an impact. And it had an impact. And I think that's the, that's the America that is, I think America really at its best. You know what? I didn't know if we were going to end on a high note with all the four-letter words, cursing and ass whippings that we doled out today. I did not drop the F-bomb just for the record, just for the record. You still have time. We have like one more minute. But anyway, I won't put the pressure on you. You've already done so much for the country. Attorney General Eric Holder, it's really a privilege to have you on Pod Save America.

We're so thankful for not just your time, but the extraordinary efforts you're making. We all benefit from them. So thanks for your time. Thanks for being you. Thanks for joining me today. All right. Thanks for having me and you American people. I've talked a lot of good stuff about you to get out there, vote, get involved,

make sure that we use the power that we have. We can do this. We can fucking do this. She said it. Thanks again to four. former Attorney General Eric Holder. If you love today's episode, do check out my show, Runaway Country. This week, I dove deep into the main Senate race with a local journalist covering that story from the ground up. And I broke down the latest polling with Nate Silver,

a host of still counting right here on the Crooked Network and, of course, the Silver Bulletin on Substack. Tommy, love it. John, we'll be back with you on Tuesday. Pod Save America is a Crooked Media production. Our show is produced by Austin Fisher, Saul Rubin, McKenna Roberts, and Michael Goldsmith, with Reed Ech Erlin, Elijah Cohn, and Adrian Hill. Our team includes Matt DeGroat, Ben Hethkoat, Jordan Cantor, Charlotte Landis, Kenny Moffat, Adam Lippert, Joseph Dutra, Desmond Taylor, Dan Farrow. David Tolls, Mia Kelman, Ryan Young, and Naomi Single.

Our staff is proudly unionized with the Writers Guild of America East. Long play, our docu-series exploring the people and forces shaping the South is back. Newsflash, the South is the new political epicenter of the country. Democrats are way on their heels in this region, but Republicans are going through their own reckoning in the South, too. We're in the final stretch of the midterms, and the political map has only gotten more competitive with new states and districts emerging as potential flips. So we thought it was time to get back out on the road and take a closer look at what's actually happening on the ground.

I'm Erin Haynes, journalist and expert on all things Southern politics. And I'm Jennifer Palmieri, former White House Communications Director. Tune in on Mondays to Longplay Series on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.