Pod Save America - “Taliban sleepovers and midnight cat videos.”

Episode Date: September 9, 2019

The President cancels secret negotiations with the Taliban in between tweeting cat videos, the House investigates whether the Defense Department has been propping up Trump’s businesses, and Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, and Bernie Sanders start to pull away from the pack. Then Ady Barkan talks to Jon F. about his new video series on health care and his new memoir, Eyes to the Wind, which you can get at beaherofund.com.

Welcome to Pod Save America. I'm Jon Favreau. I'm Jon Lovett. I'm Tommy Vitor. Later in the pod, my interview with our friend Adi Barkin, who just launched a video series on healthcare featuring interviews with Democratic presidential candidates, and whose new book, Eyes to the Wind, comes out Tuesday. But first, we've got a lot of news to cover, from all of Trump's latest corruption to his canceled Taliban get-together, to new 2020 polling that shows the top three Democratic candidates pulling away from the pack ahead of this week's debate. Also, we have a new Crooked Minis for the month of September, and it's called State of Conspiracy.

Hosted by Professor Catherine Olmsted, an expert in conspiracy theories, this series will look at the rising popularity of political and anti-government conspiracies and how the Trump administration has contributed to their rise. Check it out. Finally, our schedule this week is a little different with the big debate on Thursday night. So our regular Thursday pod will move to Friday for a post-debate super pod with me and Tommy and Dan.

On Wednesday, we'll be doing a Q&A live stream on our YouTube channel. And on Thursday night, we'll be doing another live group thread, all of us, that you can catch on our YouTube channel. And on Thursday night, we'll be doing another live group thread, all of us, that you can catch on our YouTube channel. Make sure you're subscribed there at youtube.com slash cricket media. You can get the livestream. You can get the group thread, all kinds of good stuff there. I didn't agree to do any of this. Tommy did not agree to any of this.

We're still in negotiations with Tommy. Calling off the meeting at Camp David. And, Lovett, you're joining us today from New York. You're not even here. No, I'm in New York City. What's happening there? Why are you there? You have a show or something?

We have Radio City on Friday night. There are a precious few tickets left at this point. We have Stacey Abrams, Desus and Miro, a bunch of really great guests. Alyssa Mastromonaco, Wyatt Cenac, Dulce Sloan. Jam-packed. Jam-packed. Can't wait.

Cool. Okay. So there's a lot of important news we're going to get to, but before we do, we need to point out that the President of the United States has now spent more than a full week has now spent more than a full week complaining that the media correctly reported that he spread false information when he said that the state of Alabama might be hit, quote, much harder than anticipated by Hurricane Dorian. In response, Trump attacked multiple media outlets and journalists by name, including a bizarre video he posted on Twitter just after midnight on Saturday that involved the weather map he doctored with a Sharpie, a cat, a laser pointer, and the CNN logo. So Dan and I almost forgot to mention this stupid story on Thursday's pod.

But when I saw the Washington Post story about how the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA, which is the parent agency of the National Weather Service, warned their staff, put out a statement, warned their staff not to contradict the president's false information and publicly disavowed the completely accurate information released by their own Birmingham office. I started thinking that maybe this story does matter. Tommy, what do you think? I think it matters when a government agency is browbeaten by the president of the United States and his political hacks not to put out information about a potential natural disaster that may or may not impact their life and safety and health. Yeah, that's kind of the nightmare scenario where George Orwell, 1984, we have a president of the United States whose ego is so fragile that he can't be corrected when he tweets the wrong thing. It's insane. And like, it's kind of funny that this is all coming on the heels of his rage about the whole lost summer narrative. I mean, he just pissed away another week talking about whether or not

a storm would hit Alabama. He just can't let it go. Yeah. Love it. What do you think? Yeah. I mean, I think with moments like this, you're reminded that with Trump, you're either honest or you're implicated. You know, when the president says something false, demonstrably, obviously false, and then you are asked, did the president say something false? Or if you're called by worried citizens in Alabama about whether the president said something false, you have to decide what's more important, telling the truth or staying out of the fray. There's no way to choose between the two. You're either complicit or you're honest.

And we've seen countless politicians choose to not pick that fight because it's easier. And now we're seeing NOAA do the same. And it's this constant threat. It's this constant reality with Trump that things are both silly and very dangerous, you know, and we struggle because both of those things can be true. It's he can kind of, it's like authoritarian improv. You know, he kind of accidentally stirs up these incredibly dangerous forces, this idea of

anything I say is true. And if you go against me, you're not telling the truth. You're part of the problem. You're the enemy. And the scariest thing we have learned over the last few years is how easy it was for someone who is disorganized and undisciplined and ultimately venal and craven and not out for any particular ideological purpose can cow so many people by sheer force of his personality, by sheer force of his willingness to pick every single fight, to not let any pitch go by. Yeah, I mean, people reported, well, the Washington Post reported that, you know, Trump was the one who doctored the map himself.

Big surprise. He was the one who um doctored the map himself big surprise uh he was the one he he was the one who held the sharpie uh and you know a lot of people have noted that that's illegal that it's illegal to falsify a weather map and the reason the reason it's illegal the reason there's that law in the first place is because it can put people's lives at risk right like we this actually matters to people. Like, we have to be able to trust the information that our government provides, especially in times of crisis, especially in the midst of a natural disaster. And now we can't trust that information because we are at the whims of a narcissistic sociopath who not only lies to us himself, but now tries to

pressure and force and bend the rest of the government to his will. I mean, like these, the, the, the forecasters in the Birmingham office, they said, there's just a story out today. Because the net, the head of the national weather service said that the Birmingham forecasters who basically put out a tweet that said Trump is wrong were absolutely correct in doing so and the reason that they put out a tweet they actually didn't mention trump in the tweet they just said oh by the way there's no forecast that's going to hit alabama at all because all these worried people in alabama are calling are calling up the weather service there and they're all worried and tommy you and i were talking about this but like there's like local weather forecasters in Birmingham quoted as being like I had to stand up here and say that this was wrong I mean this

is to your point love it like you're making like local weathermen in Birmingham choose sides he's literally asking us to concede that the sky is not blue and that it is in fact filled with storm clouds and hurricane winds right I mean it it is it it's insane i mean well there's also the fact that he canceled his visit to europe to commemorate world war ii because he had to stay behind to monitor the storm right and what we know he did instead was play golf so maybe he tweeted uh factually inaccurate information or at least dated information that suggested alabama might get hit with high winds because he just forgot the updated information he learned or maybe it was because he was dicking around on the high winds because he just forgot the updated information he learned.

Or maybe it was because he was dicking around on the golf course and he just tweets with reckless abandon and put out something that was wrong. Either way, like the fact that he is now engaged the media and Washington and the weather service in a six day debate over this issue is infuriating. And there's there's an element this that is, it's so small and it's so petty that it's like, you can't believe we're still talking about it. But there is a far more fundamental principle at stake here, which is that we can't trust literally anything that comes out of his mouth. And God forbid there is a terrorist attack or something truly, truly awful that happens. No one will believe what he says. And meanwhile meanwhile he's utterly distracted from the actual effort to help people who were just hammered by this storm uh in the bahamas and you know the things coming up the the eastern seaboard so like it's it's it's just it's so frustrating yeah it's uh it's funny you know he was staying he stayed home from europe to work on the hurricane which he

didn't do because he has no work ethic. He has no discipline, no attention span. But if you introduce a personal grievance, like a little slight or an insult, he is – That gets him going. That gets him going. That gets him going. He is dedicated. He is like a dog – he is a dog who latches onto this.

He runs this. I mean he is the – like for a guy that cares about nothing, he is the Mother Teresa of nursing his ego. He is bedside 24 hours a day. He's got cold compresses. He's bringing soup. Like he is so attentive to his own psychological needs,

but has no aptitude for anything else. And his team treats it all like a joke, right? They're now selling Sharpies from the campaign because they think it's funny that our president's a pathological liar. You know, this all flows from the people who were on the 2016 campaign, say the Day of the Access Hollywood video

was this big inflection point. You were either with Trump and the lies and all the awful things he did, or you weren't. And it's clear that like, they just pledged absolute fealty him. And that's all that matters. And again, the danger is here. It's not just that, like, you know, I saw Tom Perez over the weekend was telling, you know, DNC delegates and people like that, like they don't, the Democrats don't want to just focus on Trump's awfulness. They want to focus on how he's done a bad job and how his

awfulness has actually affected people. And I think that's smart. And in this instance, we can all laugh about how it's fucking like day eight and we're still talking about Sharpie gate. But like the president's undiagnosed personality disorder here, like has a real impact. States extracted one of its top spies from Russia in 2017 because they were worried that Trump would expose the identity to Putin, right? Like he is putting all kinds of people in danger every time he pulls one of these. He has one of these episodes. He lies like this. He tries to cover up. He goes down the road of being a narcissistic sociopath. Like it is a danger to the country. It is not just him being a goofy asshole that we should all laugh at you know i think it's time for a conservative weather channel i just think i'm sick of the it's where we're headed i mean it's not that's not crazy weather he also like just as i'm like working on this outline last night we're all

researching this for today like he goes on a tear late last night east coast time because he watched msnbc and saw like john legend talking about criminal justice reform and john legend didn't sufficiently praise donald trump so not only did he attack john legend he attacked chrissy tegan calling her foul mouth she didn't even have anything to do with the special she wasn't involved so he just basically had a series of tweets where he was attacking black celebrities and journalists for not praising him enough for criminal justice reform. I mean, love it. You joke about a conservative weather channel, but there was a clip going around the internet from OANN, which is the news organization that's to the right of Fox News. It's even worse.

And there was a clip where someone was referring to NOAA as a notorious liberal agency, I suppose, because they monitor the fact that the climate is changing. So, yeah, that's absolutely where we're going. That is terrifying. All right. So let's talk about a brand new scandal from the Trump administration that offers yet another example of the president using his public office as a way to get richer, all at the

expense of us, people who pay taxes. On Friday, Politico broke the story that the House Government Oversight and Reform Committee has launched an investigation into whether the Department of Defense is helping Trump's struggling Scottish golf resort stay afloat by having crews stay there when Air Force planes refuel at a nearby airport, even though it's more expensive. On Sunday night, the Air Force announced it will be conducting an internal investigation into the matter after reporters uncovered additional instances of military personnel staying at Trump properties. Politico reports that at least one service member was frustrated that the food and drink at the Trump resort was over his government allowance.

And this morning, of course, Trump tweeted that none of this has anything to do with him and that the Air Force merely has good taste. Tommy, how unusual is what the Air Force did here and how big of a deal should this be? It's so hard to tell. Like I will never, I'll never pretend to understand things like the way the military procures fuel or how they have people, you know, spend time different places. It does seem pretty weird that they spent $11 million, the military at Prestwick Airport, which is the closest airport to Trump Turnberry. I would assume that there are cheaper places to buy fuel for these planes based on our military's ability

to procure like billions of dollars of it at a time, but who knows? There's also reports that the military members are getting discounted rates and free golf at the club. So, you know, a nice little sweetener. I'm sure they have plenty of time to do. But the club lost $4.5 million in 2017, but revenue went up $3 million in 2018. So, you know, it seems like things are on the up and up. But, like, the key point, I think, is this is a great example of the fact that Trump is making millions of dollars every single week steering visitors to his D.C. hotel or to rent out spaces for events. I mean, Trump, apparently, according to The New York Times, they track this. He's visited a Trump property on

293 days of his presidency. So basically a third of his presidency, he has spent time at one of his resorts. And when he goes and spends time in Mar-a-Lago or Bedford, that means the Secret Service is renting dozens of rooms and golf carts and just pouring money into his pocket. There's all kinds of reporting about the Saudis spending half a million dollars to rent out half of the hotel in DC or various grifters going in there. So it's a constant ongoing grift. And there are members of Congress who have this little process called impeachment that they could use to really dig deep. And they'd just been sitting on their hands for weeks and weeks and weeks. And, you know, there was a great interview with David Farenthold, who's a reporter at The Washington Post. He was on Fresh Air and it aired over the weekend.

And he talked about, you know, all the things he's been doing to uncover this grift. And it's just like, thank God for people like that, because Congress isn't doing shit to figure this out. Love it. What do you think of the story? Oh, I think it's really good. Great story story for the administration put that one up on the refrigerator i think it's great two two thoughts one love it loves golfing love scotland this is a good one two thoughts one trump has never behaved like he has cash yeah every He is constantly behaving like he's about to run out of money. That was true when he was like, even back in 2016, when he was debating whether to loan rather than give his campaign, I think it was $10 million at the time. You never get the sense that this is a man sitting on a lot of reserves. So it seems as though every time he makes his decision to go golfing it is because

they are going to view they view the presidency as a way to make money and and what I've said you know I've said this before but I still think it's true we will know that Donald Trump believes he is no longer going to be president soon when he starts admitting to the fact that he made money on the deal that he will at some point start to say what I was president for four years now never supposed to happen and look how much money I made on this uh yeah so that is coming that is coming i mean yeah in what i think a new york times story about the trump hotel that ran over the weekend um they said that in private trump uh pumps up his properties to people a lot more than he does in public surprise surprise and raises it all the time and has concerns about it yeah i mean but like okay think about in 2016 what we were talking about both in the primary and the general election hillary clinton after she left

public office giving speeches and like not releasing the transcript of the speeches even though she was giving speeches on wall street and making money as a private citizen outside of politics and we still all talked about the optics and there are legitimate concerns around that right but donald trump is in office and the way he's making money while in office while in public office is not just a bunch of private citizens giving him money it's the united states government it's our tax dollars are making him richer like if democrats can't make a fucking issue out of this like let's go home and here's here's an avenue john uh the uh the International Hotel, they leased the old post office building in Washington, and that's the Trump Hotel.

The House Transportation Infrastructure Committee has oversight over that property. So Peter DeFazio, a congressman out of Oregon, could request a whole bunch of documents. For some reason, he has not. People seem to think it's because he thinks there might be some big infrastructure deal that gets cut with trump down the road what are we doing yeah no infrastructure week's right around the corner as soon as he's talking about the fucking weather week's a national joke get the documents defazio um well so the good news get the documents defazio you son of a bitch you get those fucking documents well so i'm sure he's a great congressman. What are we doing?

I mean, the good news on the House Democratic front is the New York Times reported over the weekend that the House Democrats are widening their impeachment inquiry to include accusations of corruption against Trump. Just in the nick of time. And they'll be voting on formalized procedures to guide the impeachment inquiry this week, which is good. formalized procedures to guide the impeachment inquiry this week which is good um you know congressman jamie raskin uh said the focus needs to be on corruption quote the central sin the original sin of the trump administration is the decision to convert the presidency into a money-making operation for the president and his business and his family yes correct that is the message listen to jamie raskin that's great lean into that

yeah i mean i think although so i'm reading this story as i'm sure you guys did about how like house democrats are widening the inquiry to include corruption i was like yes this is what we've been talking about great wonderful and then the last paragraph of the story says this with the republican controlled senate highly likely to acquit mr trump even if the house's case were put to trial some democrats have begun raising another possibility that the judiciary committee could draft articles of impeachment vote them out of the panel but never bring them to the floor of the house offering the public an election year indictment of sorts without ever bringing the president to trial i think it's great

i think it's a really cool strategy i would say one other thing that I would suggest is actually like print it really, really small so that like you need like a magnifying glass to see it. Or maybe you could like release it as an audio book, but only at a whisper, just at a whisper. the path you're going to go down like way to way to get all of the political risk for impeachment because everyone will say the democrats impeached donald trump but none of the upside which is months of hearings where you tell the american public why he's a fucking criminal yeah you know it's funny people say this unbelievable people say this all the time right they say imagine what republicans would do if obama did something like this we're mad this. We're going to talk about it when we talk about Trump inviting the Taliban for a jamboree at Camp David. But I think it's worth stopping for a second and thinking, what does it mean when people say that? Imagine what Republicans can do. And sometimes it means, imagine if Democrats use the same kind of reckless, intellectually dishonest,

scorched earth politics of Republicans. And I don't think that's a good idea. But sometimes it just means, imagine if Democrats fought as hard for what they believe in as we often see Republicans fighting, as we often see how hard Republicans fight for what they believe in. And to me, this is an example of that. There's just this, you just feel this lack of fire in the belly, which is what I think so many Democrats have been sort of hungering for. And that's why they knocked on doors in 2018.

And then you see an argument like that and it's like, it's really dispiriting. Yeah. And this, look, this is the corruption part of this, right? Like I get how tough it is to like, you know, walk people through the whole Mueller report and why Trump is a criminal, what obstruction of justice means, why it matters to your life, all this kind of stuff. I get all that. This corruption angle, like, put up a big fucking calculator on a website and say, like, how much is Donald Trump costing you? How many of your tax dollars did he spend on this?

Add up all the money he's made in the Trump organizations. Like, this is not a hard thing to do, right? Like, journalists, good media outlets are doing this all over the place. They have all kinds of charts about this. They're adding this up. Like, fucking, you know, House Democrats, do something. Be creative about this. We've learned so much about Donald Trump and his finances,

despite all efforts he's made to prevent that kind of disclosure over the last couple of years. And if you think back to, say, the Benghazi hearings, because Republicans were relentlessly focused on a non-scandal and doing everything they can to get documents and subpoena witnesses, they figured out that Hillary had this private email address. And if not for that dogged, unfair, unethical at times effort, they never would have had their number one campaign issue. So why don't we get caught trying? Maybe I'm back to being opposed to impeachment. We obviously don't have our shit together to do literally anything.

Anything. This was always my opposition to impeachment, which was at like 5%, was always rooted in that. But I do want it, and I want to see it happen, but you can't fuck it you can't fuck it up just now it's going to be worse than worse than if you never did it in the first place okay let's talk about uh the uh the biggest news of the weekend which was the canceled taliban slumber party at Camp David. The president announced via Twitter in between cat videos that he was calling off peace negotiations

with the Taliban, whose leaders he had secretly invited to Camp David along with the president of Afghanistan the same week as 9-11. The New York Times reported that the cancellation came after a long-running dispute within the administration

about negotiating with the Taliban to end the two-decade war in Afghanistan and disagreement over the deal that was emerging from those negotiations. Tommy, I want to get your reaction to this story, but first, can you give us a primer on what we know about these negotiations, what the goals have been, and what kind of issues need to be resolved? Sure. So we currently have about 14,000 troops in Afghanistan. Remember that Trump actually had promised in the campaign to end the war in Afghanistan, but actually sent more guys there. So that's important context, I think. It sounds like there was a deal in principle that had been made between

Zalmay Khalilzad and the Taliban, negotiated over the course of maybe 10 months or longer, that agreed to pull out 5,400 U.S. troops in close five bases over the course of, say, five months after the deal was agreed to. The goal then was to get the rest of our guys out over the course of a year, maybe a year and a half. But, you know, it's notable that this whole timeline is built around Trump's reelect. The deal was basically we pull out troops. The Taliban cuts ties with al-Qaeda. You help us deal with ISIS and maybe long, long, long term. It leads some power sharing agreement with the Taliban over the future of Afghanistan.

It's important to note that there was no requirement for the Taliban to stop attacking Afghan civilians or the government or their troops during that period. In the deal. In any of the deals. None of this. So it's weird for the Trump to act like that's what blew up the talks. Because that latter question, that latter issue of negotiating with the Afghans themselves is the hard part. It's very easy for the US to make a deal with the Taliban. It's hard for the Afghan government because the Taliban, they don't recognize that they exist. They won't engage them. So that's part of why this Camp David business is

so screwed up. Trump is essentially forcing Ashraf Ghani, the president of Afghanistan, to show up at this made-for-TV spectacle at Camp David so that Trump can triumphantly pretend that he just glued this peace deal together. Meanwhile, Ghani has an election coming up on the 28th of this month, and the Taliban is blowing up the Capitol, killing civilians, and Ghani's getting briefed on this deal. He's not at all happy with it, but his choice is skip this event and be called anti-peace and risk 400 Trump tweets at you or don't go. So, you know, here we are. Like, it doesn't make any sense to me that Trump actually believes that this suicide attack

is what led him to call off negotiations. Everyone knows that the Taliban, they increase their level of attacks while they're negotiating to create leverage. By the way, so do we. Pompeo was on the Sunday shows bragging that we'd killed a thousand Taliban in 10 days. So like, unfortunately, that's the way the war is. But I'll pause there. But like, none of this speaks to the need to have a conversation at Camp David. Well, so yeah, I was say, like, I can only imagine how difficult these issues are to negotiate with the Taliban, the Afghan government, the U.S. government. We've been probably doing it, trying to do it for years now. But it does seem like the deal emerging, which was we pull all of our troops out and we get a sort of vague promise from the Taliban not to, you know, allow Al Qaeda to attack us. Yeah, it doesn't seem like the best like, I don't know, just does that

was that an okay deal if they were able to strike that deal? Because it seems like the killing in Afghanistan continue. I mean, it depends on who you are, right? If you're the US government, and your concern is an ISIS or Al Qaeda safe haven in Afghanistan, maybe that's the best you're going to get. If you're an Afghan citizen who doesn't want to live under Taliban rule in some parts of the country, it's a horrible deal. But for Trump, he wants the press he got from the Singapore summit. And that diplomacy is a total disaster, by the way, with North Korea, we should talk about some other time. But like, I think we all should be happy that he likes the press he got out of diplomatic, you know, events more than like, say, blowing up Syria. But, you know, like this was this made no sense.

I mean, the the Taliban, as of I think a couple of weeks ago, put out a video saying they still supported the 9-11 attacks. You know, like there's no need for them to come and like be at this amazing, you know, piece of the crown jewel of like where the president actually ends up living. And by the way, like we can negotiate with the Taliban in a million places. We've been negotiating with them in Qatar with some of the individuals who were swapped as part of the Bo Bergdahl prisoner swap. Remember when McCain and Graham told us that was the worst thing that's going to ever happen. So like, I support peace talks. The Afghanistan war has gone on longer than World War One, World War Two and the Korean War combined. But having these guys come to Camp David for a made for TV event for Trump for his reelect is craven bullshit. Love it. What did you think of the the uh, the wisdom of the stagecraft of having a camp David meeting with the Taliban

the week of nine 11? I thought it was a politically risky at best, John. Uh, yeah. So two, two quick points about this because, you know,

Tommy, he's got it covered is, uh, one, it's a reminder. It's how often Trump just says something. This was a case where we learned something via Trump tweet that was fascinating and important and new and concerning

and didn't make sense. And then you have to spend the next week trying to figure out what the actual truth is because everything he says is fabricated in some way or self-aggrandizing in some way or just flat out wrong. That's the first thing. And the second thing is, this is what's happened with North Korea. This was what he's seeking to do with the Taliban. He doesn't care about exposing the presidency or lowering the presidency to meeting with someone like Kim Jong-un without having done

the kind of preliminary work or by inviting the Taliban to Camp David because he doesn't value these institutions. He has no respect for them. He doesn't care about them. He doesn't view the presidency as anything other than a kind of toy for him to play with. So of course, he's going to just want to grab onto something and bring people to the United States, even though that sends a terrible message, even though that elevates people, even though that it's something you have to, that there should be, you know, diplomatic work and other work that happens long before anything like that takes place, because he just doesn't care about these institutions. It doesn't occur to him to value or protect him. It doesn't occur

to him to value or protect anything other than his own personal stake. Yeah, I mean, like we hosted the G7 at Camp David. This is These are a bunch of fucking Taliban goons. They're not foreign heads of state. They're a terrorist group. They were killing U.S. service members this week. And now Trump has blown up this process. Who knows when we'll get back into it. And the Afghans are scared shitless that this is going to lead to a huge surge in violence,

especially with the election coming up on the 28th. You can say, what if this was Obama to so many different things? This is like one of the ultimate what if this was Obama. Of course, Trump attacked Obama in 2012 for having talks with the Taliban. So there's always a tweet. But like Pfeiffer was texting us this over the weekend. He was like, if Barack Obama brought the Taliban to Camp David, Fox would need to start immediately another Fox News station just to contain all of the attacks on Barack Obama.

Why not the Lincoln bedroom? Why not have him at the fucking White House? Why go halfway? So the New York Times did a really great TikTok on what you were saying, Lovett, trying to backtrack from his tweet on everything that actually happened. And they updated it, you pointed out, Tommy, late last night with the paragraph that really says it all because they were saying a fundamental dividing point that was contributing to the collapse of the talks was this mr trump did not want the camp david meeting to be a celebration of the deal after staying out of the details of what has been a delicate effort in a complicated region trump wanted to be the deal maker who would

put the final parts together himself or at least perceived to be. So one of the things that collapsed this whole fucking deal was the fact that Trump wasn't going to didn't think he was going to get enough credit for it, even though he didn't deserve the credit for it. He he doesn't he it's he wants to lick the spoon with the batter on it and then say he made a cake. it and then say he made a cake i mean he he wanted to be jimmy carter like sitting between sadat and and begin and like bringing these you know the sides together it's just i i'm i'm blown away by how crazy this is never in a million years did i think donald trump would want to bring the taliban to camp david but he is a you know he's a uh reality fucking tv star and the whole thing is just the whole thing is a show the whole now the uh the next person uh who hates him he's trying to get to camp david is melania trump everybody

but seriously but, he's terrible. There you go. I don't know. That's the kind of analysis we crave. Tip your servers. You can see more of this at Radio City. Radio City Music Hall. Can you believe it?

All right. Let's talk about 2020. As 10 candidates get ready to meet in Houston for a third round of debates on Thursday evening, CBS released a set of early state polls, which we cannot say enough are a lot more useful than national polls, that show three frontrunners and everyone else, you know, a little far behind. In Iowa, it's Joe Biden at 29%, Bernie Sanders at 26%, and Elizabeth Warren at 17%. New Hampshire is Warren 27, Biden 26, Sanders 25. South Carolina is Biden 43, Sanders 18, Warren 14. And in Nevada, it's Sanders 29, Biden 27, Warren 18. No one else polled in double digits in any of the four states. So guys, the

lead of the CBS story about these numbers is, quote, this poll tells a story about Elizabeth Warren rising, but not Joe Biden falling. Tommy, do you agree with that? And what is what does a race look like where those two things are happening? It's a good question. I mean, I do think it speaks to something I heard over and over again in Iowa when I was there for a few days was just how hard it is to break through if you're not a top tier candidate. You're not seen as part of the national conversation about electability and beating Trump and everything else. And I think it also speaks to the fact that Elizabeth Warren is running a good campaign. The conversation about Elizabeth Warren is how she has plans and she's running a good campaign. And that's helping her over time. Other people are just not getting a look. I mean, these debates might be, you know, their last chances, potentially, to really do something exciting and break through. Ultimately, I do think the results in Iowa will be the biggest springboard for whomever does the best to get that last media bounce and do well in New Hampshire and start racking up delegates.

But I think it ultimately speaks to a relatively stable race, except for this rise of Warren. Yeah. Lovett, what did you what did you take from it? Yeah, I think that's true. I think it's worth remembering, too, that we've we've have seen candidates break this kind of hold that Biden, Warren, Sanders have in the field. Kamala Harris did it at the last debate. There are still opportunities for candidates to do that. To me, I mean, I think one of the stories of what's happened is Kamala surged and then wasn't able to maintain that lead. And I think it's worth asking why. And I think it has a lot to do with the fact that many stories about Kamala Harris's campaign tend to be about what Kamala Harris's campaign is doing to fix Kamala Harris's campaign.

And that's been sort of a trap that her campaign has been in for a long time, in part because I think she struggled to find an argument, a message that stands out from the three being offered, which are pretty cogent at this point from Biden, Warren and Sanders. I also think it says something about Elizabeth Warren's challenge going forward. So there's been a lot of, there's a lot of talk about lanes in the primary and a lot of people, when they talk about lanes, they think of ideological lanes. And so they think there's a progressive lane and a moderate lane, but the truth is Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders, um, draw their support disproportionately from non-college educated white voters um younger

uh non-college educated white voters and also um non-college educated uh black voters and latino voters and and in joe biden's case black voters in total and it does seem at times like when you look into digging into some of these numbers eliz Warren and Kamala Harris and Pete Buttigieg and even Cory Booker and Beto O'Rourke and some of the other candidates are all fighting over a lot of college-educated white progressives. And these polls sort of show that Elizabeth Warren is winning that fight. A lot of these polls show that people who were supporting Harris before have moved to Warren. She's getting support from some of the other lower tier candidates who are losing support. They're all going to Warren now. So she's consolidating break into she's got to start doing better with non-college educated white voters and black voters and latino voters better than she's doing and the question there is are these voters just not into her yet or are they not closely engaged in the race yet because we know that the most engaged voters right now are these college educated white liberals and so that's the

question that we can't answer yet. I also thought like, do you guys look at these polls and think that maybe people have been underestimating Bernie Sanders strength as he's hanging in there and all these polls first or second in most of these states? It's a good question. I mean, to me, Bernie's sort of ability to stick it out probably speaks a lot to name identification and comfort level with him. I mean, Biden, for all the criticisms you see of him and policies and previously held positions and gaffes and all this crap that sort of swirls on Twitter every day, most people just know that he's a popular vice president for a popular two-term president who they've seen on the national

stage for eight years and think like, oh, that guy looks like a president because they saw him in the White House for eight years. Bernie Sanders is someone that was pretty well introduced to the country in 2016. I think unless you are a hardcore Hillary Clinton supporter, you probably have a relatively favorable impression of Bernie Sanders. I think that he needs to do more to make inroads with the folks who were ride or die for Hillary. And I'm not sure that they have achieved that quite yet. But, you know, Bernie comes off as likable and charming and consistent. So, you know, I think that's probably what people know of him. Yeah. And there also there is a progressive.

I mean, I just said that there was a sort of a lane of college educated versus non-college educated voters. There's also he's fighting Elizabeth Warren for progressive voters. You know, they both are fighting each other for that, for the most progressive voters. Lovett, what did you think? Yeah, I mean, the thing I would add is, you know, Bernie, in part, you know, Bernie was captured a larger share of the electorate when he was facing just Hillary Clinton. So one question I'd have is, where are the people who supported Bernie before? Where did they go? And I would imagine many of them went to Elizabeth Warren and some to other candidates. But there's a kind of, yeah, an ideological alignment between Warren and Bernie that I think is a challenge for both

of those campaigns. Yeah. I also think it shows that, like, none of the candidates have really figured out how to peel away some of Joe Biden's support. That the focus on, and it's not really just a candidate focus because it's really sort of a media focus and sort of some of the surrogates and the campaign staff and all that kind of stuff. But a lot of focus on his gaffes, a lot of focus on is he losing a step, a lot of focus on, you know, is he sufficiently progressive enough? And I think at some point it's time for some of these candidates to realize that those lines of attack on Biden are not really having an effect. And that if you want to start peeling away Biden's support, you're going to have to find another argument. Yeah, I mean, certainly it was true that Kamala Harris was able to, I think, do a number on Biden at that first debate. I think that some of the attacks on Biden at the second debate backfired and that it might have. I mean, I heard this anecdotally,

but that a lot of the criticism people heard came off as nitpicking or too negative or unfair in some way. I'm not saying I agree with those descriptions, but those are just some of the things I heard from various people. So, yeah, I mean, I do think they're going to need a more effective way to go after him. Maybe as folks pay attention more closely in the fall, like people will just think harder about what they want of the next president, who they think can win. I still think this electability question is all consuming for most voters in early states. Yeah. And I think that the other candidates have to make a case for their own electability, and I think that they can.

I think each one of them has a good argument about why they're the most electable candidate, and some of them are different. I also think, like, you know, this debate that's coming up this week, like Kamala Harris and Pete Buttigieg and some of the others do sort of have to figure out a way to differentiate themselves from these three front runners. Buttigieg sort of gave a hint of that over the weekend in New Hampshire. He said, we need ideas big enough to meet this moment, but it's not enough to think up good policy. We've got to unify Americans around these solutions or nothing will actually get done.

It's why I'm not making some of the promises that some of the candidates to my left are. I share the goals and believe that we can do it in a way that will bring Americans together. What do you guys think of that? That's interesting because that's not Pete Buttigieg thinking I need to take down Biden. That's him thinking I need to differentiate myself from Sanders and Warren. Yeah, it's interesting. It's saying we need an alternative to Biden, right, which I think has actually been motivating a number of candidates. saying we need an alternative to Biden, right? Which I think has actually been motivating a number of candidates. I think it's actually why a number of candidates have been staying in the race

from Michael Bennett to Buttigieg and others. There's a kind of, you know, under an unspoken aspect to all of this, which is we don't really know if Biden is the Trump of this race, the person who may not have a majority, but will have a strong plurality that carries them to the nomination. And because everyone else is kind of divided, no one becomes an alternative and Biden gets the nomination. Or is he more like a Jeb, who is someone who has garnered a lot of establishment support and some money and some talent, but ultimately doesn't have what it takes to win the nomination. And I think there are a bunch of candidates who are looking at Joe Biden and saying, I'm going to bet on this candidacy being softer than it looks. And that 30% at some point becomes 25, becomes 20, becomes 15. And all of a sudden, people are deciding between Warren and an

alternative, whoever that may be. Yeah, it was a subtle contrast. And it was interesting departure from a purely generational contrast, although that was probably infused in the speech. And frankly, just seeing Pete on stage with some of these candidates makes the generational contrast more than anything he could actually say. The thing to watch with Pete is he's got money. Yeah. And he's investing it in early states. And when I saw him at the state fair, he had a big-ass crowd on a Tuesday and how he's opened like a dozen more offices and he's up on TV early. And so, look, anything can happen in these races.

I mean, we all remember 2004 when Howard Dean was going to be the nominee and it was a runaway effort. when Howard Dean was going to be the nominee and it was a runaway effort. And then there was essentially this just negative, you know, murder-suicide between him and Dick Gephardt in the closing days before Iowa. And then John Kerry and John Edwards emerged. So, like, there's a million different ways it could play out. But I would feel pretty good if I were Pete and I had resources. I wouldn't feel great about the fact that the surge the surge i'd seen in the polls relative surge has dipped a little bit yeah and i think for him if you're going to make this case that it's it's fair to make it but you gotta go all the way you don't have to like whack everyone else on stage

yeah but you gotta get into the details you could spell it out really what he's talking about is you know he's for medicare for all who want it as opposed to Medicare for all. So that is a real difference that he has with Warren and Sanders that he could talk about a lot at this debate. On some of the other issues, it's not as clear. You know, he's pretty much taken a lot of the progressive positions. He has sort of talked about how he cares more about the deficit than some other Democrats, too. So maybe he makes that case. But I think the last two debates he had, he's had some pretty good debates and he's been pretty solid, but he has been reluctant to draw differences between him and the other candidates on stage. And he probably has to do that on

Thursday and still do it in a way that is respectful and true to himself, right? Because that's the kind of campaign he's running. So that should be interesting to watch. And it should be interesting to watch what Kamala Harris does too, because, you know, she? Because that's the kind of campaign he's running. So that should be interesting to watch. And it should be interesting to watch what Kamala Harris does, too. Because, you know, she said her message over the weekend was, you know, there's so much more that unites us than divides us, which is not really a message about differentiating yourself too much from everyone else, but is trying to be the person who says, okay, enough of all this, like, infighting, we should all sort of take on Donald Trump together because more unifies us, which is an interesting message, but also different from how she was with Biden in previous debates. So that's sort of interesting to watch, too. Yeah, it's also like that it's it's like

partially rhetorical. I mean, it's a it's a rhetorical argument, which I don't think actually has much value. And I don't you know, in Pete's ad, he talks about how we need solutions. And again, it's like, I don't know, whenever now, maybe it's because I still carry some emotional baggage from 2008. But whenever someone says like, we need solutions, I just see a whole document that makes me think somebody, they want solutions, they don't want partisanship. And so I'm going to start saying that. But with Kamala, you know, I think that there is this opening, right, which she seems sort

of like half willing to take, which is, all right, so you like Warren and you like Bernie because they're further to the left and they have a big argument for structural change that we need in this country. And you agree with that. But then you look at someone like Joe Biden and you see polls that show that he is doing better against Trump in some key swing states. And you're terrified of losing. You're terrified of what's going to happen to the country if we don't put up the right candidate. And so you're torn because you want big liberal ideas, but you want to win more than anything. And you don't know how to sort through this. Well, here I am, someone who's going to kind of split the difference. And maybe there's a compelling way to make that argument. I don't know. But it just feels like we're still, I don't know, dancing around that specific case.

I just think that the message that's going to resonate in Iowa, especially, is going to be about how you're the person who can beat Donald Trump. And I think- And why? To the extent that folks are making cases where they're sort of obliquely criticizing policy ideas as too big or too small or too destructive. I just kind of think you're missing the boat. Like, of course, people care about policy, like the healthcare debate is fundamental and existential for a lot of people. But all of them are resigned to the fact that it is irrelevant what your plan says if you don't win.

Yeah, I agree with that. Okay, when we come back um my interview with adi barkin on the pod today uh we are very happy to welcome back our good friend adi barkin adi um how are you feeling i know you were uh you you had to go to the hospital a few times over the last week and you're back home now. So how are you feeling? Thank you for having me and for asking. I'm feeling better, but my body is continually declining. I'm going to need a pretty big surgery soon to keep breathing and around the clock here. Heady times in our household. keep breathing, and around the clock care. Heady times in our household.

Well, it's good that you will go get that if that's what's needed, but I know that can't be fun. But we're very glad that you're with us today, and especially this week. Recently, you just launched Uncovered, a video series where you sat down with Democratic candidates for president to talk about health care. There's been a lot of discussion about health care in debates and town halls. There's going to be a lot more. What did you want to highlight in Uncovered that you feel people aren't getting from all the other discussions of health care that we've been having in the primary? Well, there definitely has been discussion of health care that we've been having in the primary? Well, there definitely has been discussion of health care. This is one of the most important issues on the minds of Democrats and Americans generally, which makes sense because it's a life and death issue for the tens of millions without

any insurance in this country and for the people who are cutting their pills in half because the cost of prescription drugs is spiraling out of control. But, let's be honest. The discussion kind of sucks. You've got these massive debates filled with centrist white dudes running vanity campaigns. You've got moderators from the corporate media asking questions fed to them by Republican strategists and insurance lobbyists. questions fed to them by Republican strategists and insurance lobbyists. And the actual top-tier candidates are getting 30 or 60 seconds to answer big hard questions

about rebuilding our nation's health care system? So, I figured we could do better than that, and have some wonky conversations grounded in real human experience. I wanted to ask about their perspectives on health insurance, and also on political strategy and tactics. How were they going to actually effect change? I wanted to push them from the left, which never happens in the televised debates, because it is not like they're letting Amy Goodman moderate. I figured that I would be able to drill down over a 60-minute interview in a way that simply cannot be done on live TV. I also wanted to talk about other elements of the healthcare system.

Funding for basic medical research. Addressing the opioid epidemic and the war on drugs. But, you know John, I'm an egomaniac and total media whore. So the main reason I wanted to do this was for the attention and book promotion. Let's be frank. That is exactly how I've always known you, Adi, as an egomaniac star for attention. Well, so you interviewed several candidates

who do not support Bernie's Medicare for All bill. Did you find any of their arguments persuasive? And what sense did you get of why they're resistant to Medicare for All? Do you think it's a genuine concern for pragmatism? Do you think it's politics that they're worried about? Do you think it's policy? Where do you think it comes from? Kamala was more persuasive than I expected, honestly.

That episode drops tomorrow. But that was partially because I'm fucking paralyzed and it takes me forever to write responses, so I sometimes had trouble drilling down on how her plan will actually work. But she is obviously a brilliant politician and is right that people like being told they have options. But let me tell you a story about the absurdity of this debate. My wife Rachel is 7 months pregnant with our second baby, due in mid-November. A few days ago, she got a letter from our private health insurance company saying that she needs to find

a new OBGYN because hers will be out of network starting November 3rd. You couldn't script it more evil. And people are worried that Medicare for all is going to make us lose our doctors? You will be shocked to hear no one convinced me that Medicare for all is not the right approach. The thing I kept hearing from those who disagreed with me was that the American people wouldn't be okay with Medicare for All in one fell swoop, because it's too much of a radical departure from the status quo, without the intermediate step of a public option. That some people actually do like their health insurance policies. That does not ring true to me, because I believe people like their doctors, not Aetna

or Blue Cross, and I have yet to hear a convincing argument to dissuade me. I really hope they expand their sense of what's possible, because Americans have embraced big changes to the status quo before, like the creation of Social Security and Medicare. Regardless, I will say this, John, I really appreciated that so many candidates had the courage to agree to sit down with me, even when they knew we disagree about the policy. It's disappointing and deeply troubling that Vice President Biden joins hasn't agreed. Especially when we know he has such a powerful personal story to tell about his own family's experience with the health care system? If he can't handle questions from a paralyzed father, how is he going to stand up to the slaps and attacks from Donald Trump? He's going to get his ass hooped and American democracy will go down the drain unless he steps up fast.

Yeah, you and me both, man. We've been trying to get him on the pod too and he won't come talk to us either. But you're right. He does have a powerful personal story to tell about this. He's talked about it in ads. And look, first of all, I also have to say,

because you just slipped it in there, congratulations to you and Rachel that Carl's going to have a sibling. By the way, how does Carl feel about this? Does he understand what's going on? Has he said anything about Rachel being pregnant? He is excited. Wants to name her table.

Was giving some precious belly cuddles yesterday. But I don't think that he has any clue what he is in for. Well, I'm excited for him and excited for you guys. So last question on health care and these interviews and Medicare for All. I mean, obviously there is a, you know, one of the things that advocates for Medicare for All and activists are dealing with is that voters and people that we have to persuade sort of have set opinions about health care, a lot of it based on, you know, some misinformation that's out there, whether it's inaccurate reporting in the media, whether it's Republican talking points,

insurance industry talking points. Like, what do you say to someone who looks at Medicare for All and says, OK, I love the idea that everything is covered, that I don't have to worry about private insurance screwing me over anymore, that my healthcare is finally going to be affordable. I like all that, but I'm sort of worried, you know, what happens when it's the government who I don't trust that much, especially now thatald trump's in charge what if what if there's another republican president crazy like donald trump and the government is the only entity that's deciding what the insurance they offer covers and and

and what it doesn't you know should we have that should we give up that much control to the government especially if it's a government like Trump's that I don't agree with. And then the other thing is, okay, well, I'm going to save all this money, which is wonderful, but are my taxes going to go up? And what if my taxes go up by more than I pay for healthcare? What happens then? So those are the only two concerns that I could imagine, like real people having, not sort of scared politicians, but actual people who are thinking about whether this is the right move for the country that's a good question i think on the first we already see how much damage trump can do to the private system tens of millions impacted by his bullshit but medicare and social security have actually been pretty safe because of their popularity. So the key is

to have a great program that is politically untouchable. I think we can get there. On number two, I think we just need progressive taxation to replace the absurdly regressive cost of our current model. And we need a nominee who can lay that out persuasively. So last question about your Uncovered series. Did anyone or anything surprise you? Did you learn anything new from these interviews? Yeah. I learned that Cory Booker is a world-class politician. So ridiculously smooth and smart, able to shift gears, intonations, registers.

I left that interview feeling like he had run circles around me, furious at my ALS for depriving me of the ability to go toe-to-toe, resigned to pecking out my text letter by letter. In my youth, John, three years ago, I could have been a contender. It was fun to talk sports with Bernie, although homeboy still refuses to open up about his family and illness. It's very weird. Elizabeth Warren has magnificent interpersonal skills. I have witnessed it before when we've met, but she did one of those selfie lines in my living room for all my friends and neighbors. She has Bill Clinton level charm up close close without the penchant for sexual harassment

she's got obama's management chops and intellectual firepower and she has a race class analysis and policy agenda straight out of jesse jackson's 1988 rainbow coalition campaign pretty potent stuff but i'm voting for john delaney in the primary he's the most electable you know i uh i would have thought that you were a steve bullock guy but uh you know delaney delaney works too i i have to say howdy too like you know when when uh warren came here uh early on in the interview it was the same way she was so unbelievably charismatic so much energy bouncing around the office talking to everyone shaking every hand just um i think she probably people underestimate um they you know they talk about her as a policy wonk who can run circles around anyone but i think they underestimate her charisma when you

when you meet her in in uh in person because it person because it's, uh, it's something. Um, okay. So, uh, your memoir eyes to the wind is being released this week, uh, Tuesday, September 10th. Um, I am a enormous fan of this book, read it a couple of months ago, laughed, cried, was incredibly inspired. I want every single person to read it. Um, what, why did you decide to write this book? every single person to read it. Why did you decide to write this book? Thank you. Means a lot coming from you. I wrote it as an ode to collective action and civic engagement and as a call to action. I wanted people to know how much our country needs them to get involved right now and also how much people have to gain personally from getting involved in the struggle for justice.

I wanted to put together a record of my life for friends and family. But mostly, I wanted to leave behind a letter of sorts for Carl and his sister. I really want them to be proud of me. And what lessons do you hope people take away from it? There are times, especially these days, when the state of things in our country seem impossibly bleak. Whether it's the climate crisis or voting rights or police violence or corporate capture of our courts, we have immense structural problems that often feel beyond the pale. But the truth is that despair is not the answer, and we have never needed people to get involved more. Not only because it is the only way out of our current national nightmare, but because I deeply believe people have a lot to gain from becoming politically engaged.

Joining the movement has given me such a strong sense of purpose, and such a community of caring people, that it's even lessened the burden of this terrible disease. such a community of caring people that it's even lessened the burden of this terrible disease. I know a lot of people across the country would come to benefit from activism as they serve the twin purpose of making our nation more fair and just. So, you know, one of the things you've written is that, which I really loved, is that the wisdom to know the difference between what we can and cannot change can only be earned through struggle. Can you talk about how you came to that conclusion? Through a lot of tears, conversations with friends and family, some reading, and late, late nights stoned in my recliner trying to figure out what the hell to do with myself in the face of ALS and Donald

Trump. This is one of the central themes that I explore in the memoir, and I don't want to scoop myself. All you friends of the pod out there, go ahead, press pause, buy the book right now, and get me up that best-selling list. Jon Favreau will personally refund your purchase if you don't love the book. And if you prefer audiobooks, which you probably do, guess who is reading it? Josh fucking Lyman himself. The mellifluous Bradley Whitford.

No joke. I have made that promise. Just let me know. Just send me back the book if you're not happy. And within a few days, I'll turn around the refund. That is a promise that I have made. So, you know, you were just talking about sort of how you came to this wisdom through sort of a lot of conversation with friends through sitting in your recliner. I mean, so much of what you write about in the memoir sort of explores the tension between the acceptance of a terminal illness and the push of

activists to never accept the world as it is. So it is this sort of tension. How have you learned to deal with that tension? And i imagine it's a process that is ongoing definitely ongoing and difficult i have come to understand the difference this way i can do nothing to change the fact of my terminal illness there is no cure for als right now and there is nothing i can do to stop my rapid neurological decay. To flail against it helplessly would only cause me additional grief and suffering, so the only thing I can do is accept it. That isn't true about the healthcare crisis in this country, or systemic racism, or the climate emergency barreling towards our shorelines every day. Resisting those challenges, whether by

marching, or voting, or petitioning, that's the only way to solve the most pressing problems facing our society. And that is why I'm doing everything I can, even as paralysis grips more of my body every day. Struggling for justice is a fruitful endeavor. It even makes my ALS more tolerable. president, maybe they want to help and they're eager, but they're a little worried that maybe they won't be able to make a difference. Maybe this work is too hard. Maybe they're going to face all these setbacks and disappointments. What advice do you have for that person as someone who has been through so much and fought so hard? I think two things. First, we have no idea what the future holds. That's the lesson of Trump, the lesson of my ALS. So don't despair or give up prematurely. We really cannot predict next year, let alone next decade. sarah palin or another feminist icon put it best never misunderstand how much difference a small group of dedicated people can make it really is our congress our democracy our future for the making

adi wise words as always um and i do i do believe that was a direct quote from Sarah Palin. Thank you. Thank you so much, as always, for joining us. Everyone, go watch Uncovered, Adi's video series, which you can get it. You can see it on our site too, cricket.com slash be a hero. And most importantly, please go buy the book, Eyes to the Wind. You can go to beaherofund.com, Adi's website. They're selling it there. You can go to Adi hero fund.com adi's website they're selling it there you can go to adi's twitter at adi barkin there's a link there as well and um adi we love you very much uh give rachel our love and give uh give carl a hug for us too and uh and and take care and we'll talk to you soon thanks for your friendship and your work, John. You're an American patriot. God bless you, God bless America, and God save the pod.

Thanks, buddy. We'll talk to you soon. Take care. Bye-bye. Thanks to Adi for joining us. And we will see you at our post-debate show on Friday. And then, you know, you can see Love It Friday night at Radio City. Damn right you can. And thanks to the DNC for making this thing one night. Watching two of these in a week was annoying.

Well, we'll go back to it in October. We forgot to say that fucking Tom Steyer made the debate in October. Tom, you did it. Two debates. You got yourself a second debate. What a system. Good for you. I'm excited to see it.

Same. Same. All right, everyone. See you later. Pod Save America is a product of Crooked Media. The senior producer is Michael Martinez. Our assistant producer is Jordan Waller. It's mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick.

Kyle Seglin is our sound engineer. Thanks to Carolyn Reston, Tanya Somanator, and Katie Long for production support. And to our digital team, Elijah Cohn, Narmal Konian, Yale Freed, and Milo Kim, who film and upload these episodes as a video every week.