Pod Save America - Trump Always Chickens Out

Episode Date: May 30, 2025

Donald Trump loses his cool when a reporter asks him about a newly popular Wall Street phrase: TACO, aka Trump Always Chickens Out. A federal court unanimously rules that the majority of Trump’s tariffs are illegal — before an appeals court allows them to remain in place (for now). And after 128 days of destruction, Elon Musk's time as a Special Government Employee officially comes to a close. Jon and Dan discuss the future of DOGE after Musk, check in on Trump’s ongoing war with Harvard University, and deliver a new Corrupt-date — this time on Trump’s clemency spree. Then, Jon talks to Liz Oyer, a former DOJ Pardon Attorney, about her MAGA successor’s very political approach to a historically nonpartisan job.For a closed-captioned version of this episode, click here. For a transcript of this episode, please email [e-mail] and include the name of the podcast. 

Today's presenting sponsor is SimpliSafe Home Security. The news cycle never slows down. In some days, it feels like the world is changing by the hour. But while the latest headlines may be uncertain, your home security shouldn't be. SimpliSafe provides 24-7 protection, so no matter what's happening out there,

you always have peace of mind at home. Now who had some peace of mind is John Lovett, who set up a SimpliSafe all by himself. Said he had top-of-the-line sensors. It worked perfectly. You could turn it on and off from your phone. It'll protect you from intruders, from fire, from I don't know what other scary stuff, monsters, bad takes.

I don't know, all kinds of things. I don't know that it protected love at fully from bad takes. But with Simply Safe, millions of Americans enjoy the new standard at home security and greater peace of mind every time they alarm their system, when heading out in the morning or when locking up each night. Traditional security systems only take action after someone has broken in already, and that is too late. Simply Safe's Active Guard outdoor protection can help prevent break-ins before they happen.

If someone's lurking around or acting suspiciously, these agents see and talk to them in real time. They activate spotlights or even contact the police, all before they have the chance to get inside your home. No long-term contracts or cancellation fees. Monitoring plans start affordably at around a dollar a day, 60-day satisfaction guarantee, or your money back. Visit simplysafe.com slash crooked to claim 50% off a new system with a professional monitoring plan and get your first month free. That's simply safe.com slash crooked. There's no safe like Simply Safe.

Right now we are living through some of the most tumultuous political times our country has ever known. I'm David Remnick and each week on the New Yorker Radio Hour, I'll try to make sense of what's happening alongside politicians and thinkers like Cory Booker, Nancy Pelosi, Liz Cheney, Tim Walz, Katanji Brown Jackson, Newt Gingrich, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Charlamagne the God, and so many more. That's all in the New Yorker Radio Hour, wherever you listen to podcasts. Welcome to Pod Save America, I'm Jon Favreau. I'm Dan Pfeiffer.

On today's show, we'll shed some tears over Elon's official White House departure, talk about Trump's push to kick international students out of the United States, and dig into the president's latest pardon spree, which I'll get into more with the Justice Department's former pardon attorney who was fired by Trump for not giving Mel Gibson his guns back, Liz Oyer. It's just a sentence I never thought I would say, like many of the sentences here on this show. But first, bad news for Trump's favorite economic policy good news for everyone who doesn't like higher prices

Most of the president's tariffs were ruled illegal Wednesday night in a unanimous decision by a three-judge panel at the US Court of International Trade Including a Trump appointee not only did the court order an immediate pause on the tariffs, Trump has to refund every American company that's already had to pay tariffs, the Trump administration immediately appealed the ruling, which led to an appeals court deciding that the tariffs can remain in effect while the case is being considered. So slight setback there. The initial ruling came the very same day the president lost his shit when a reporter asked him about a phrase that's become popular on Wall Street to describe his trade policy TACO which stands for Trump always chickens out here's a clip of that

exchange what's your response to that? I kick out? Chicken out. Oh, isn't that nice? Chicken out. I've never heard that. You mean because I reduced China from 145 percent that I set, down to 100, and then down to another number? Six months ago, this country was stone cold dead. We had a dead country.

We had a country people didn't think it was going to survive, and you ask a nasty question like that. It's called negotiation. You set a number, but don't ever say what you said. That's a nasty question. Go ahead. To me, that's the nastiest question. I like that he finally went just full biff

from back to the future. We all said that he immediately thought it meant kick out because that seems to be what he's doing. And then he was, Deport, Trump always deports. And then he's like chicken out, chicken, I've never heard that. Oh yeah, you've never heard chicken out.

Yeah, no, of course. But then, then it dawns on him that he's being made fun of and it hurts. It hurts. Deeply in his soul, you can tell. So it is important to note that this ruling doesn't apply to some tariffs, including those on aluminum and steel,

and that there may be ways, we will not get into them, don't worry, for the administration to get around the ruling by using other laws to implement tariffs. It's a very, it's a complicated matter, Dan. That's not for this podcast. That's not for this podcast. No, we're not going to bore you with that. You can go listen to Lovett talk about that when he talks about salt on some other podcasts. With all that said, what is your reaction to the court ruling, which at the very least

may save Trump from more taco jokes for the time being? Well, if it does nothing else, it's still a win. I've been waiting for this to happen. There's just been, it's always been interesting that the International Emergency Economics Powers Act, which Trump is, whose authority Trump has used for all these terrorists, does not include the word tariff in it. It's not listed as one of the remedies

that a president can undertake here. And that sort of just got lost in all of the tacos we've had since then. And we've sort of waiting for that, because we, a lot of the tacos we've had since then. And been sort of waiting for that, because a lot of the things that Trump does, the immediate thing is he has done something, a court will probably stop him because the thing he wants to do is

stop by the constitution or this explicit law or whatever else. This one was always sort of the subtext of what was going on and it's notable that it's finally happened. This is gonna make its way to the Supreme Court, I assume, and they will render a judgment. But the short version of this now is more chaos, right? There is, like the chaos came from Trump's taco strategy.

I'm so sick of saying there were taco already, but of tariffs on, tariffs off, tariffs on, tariffs off. Now you have the court involved. Like what happens if you have brought products in in the 12 hours between the ruling on Wednesday night and the ruling on Thursday afternoon and not pay tariffs on them because you just like brought a like fuck ton of iPhones over

and got those in for free. So it's just, it's very chaotic. Cause this is a short term stay on the ruling where they figure out what's happening. It will be surprised if they kept the tariffs off as it went its way to the Supreme Court, but it just, it's more uncertainty for businesses, which is bad for the economy.

Yeah, and you know, the markets reacted positively, very positively as one can imagine. I wonder how they'll react tomorrow. This is Thursday that we're recording this. Once they find out that the tariffs can be... Tariffs are back on while the process goes to the Supreme Court. I also, like, I don't know. The Supreme Court, obviously, quite a conservative majority.

I don't know, it feels like there are a lot of free traders. I feel like there are some real traditional conservatives on that Supreme Court that might not like the trade war, but hard to say. There's also people who really like to, who believe very much that the executive has all the power, the president has all the power. Though this goes to the,

it does go to the Alien Enemies Act question too, which is Trump just gets into office, declares everything an emergency when there is no obvious emergency or any emergency, and then tries to take a lot of moves that you're not supposed to take just based on this false pretext that there's an emergency. Yeah, it's interesting,

because it's not really an economic question for the court, it's a question of executive power and whether this use of this authority, which is not granted in law, oversteps his executive authority and it bridges Congresses. And so, I mean, you do have free traders, but you also have people who believe, as you say, who believe in some version or something approximated

the unitary executive theory that would suggest that they would give this to him. So this will be interesting. I tried to go to Twitter to find some good legal analysis and I discovered that they'd all moved to blue sky. Like all our favorite lawyers are on blue sky now. Did you go there? I did go there, yes.

And there are mixed opinions about where this is going. Caroline Levitt in the briefing today sort of previewed I think what their legal argument is gonna be because someone asked, I think Peter Doocy asked, like, like, well, Trump has a Republican Congress that usually does what he says, like why not just go have them pass the law

if it's up to Congress to do it? And she basically said, well, they tried to pass something through the Senate to pause the tariffs and couldn't get enough votes. So that's that. Congress declined to do anything and the courts have no role here. That's their position.

That's not, look, I'm not, like I said, I'm not a legal expert on blue sky or elsewhere, but that's not really how the constitution works. No, it's not. Absence of action from one body means the person can do whatever they want. If the vote fails, that's all you need. That's all you need.

Of course, Stephen Miller's out there calling it judicial tyranny. They're using it as the whole. So, you know, I'm also wondering if they're gonna take this as far as they can and then try to figure out a way to just go around the law as they have been around on immigration things. Trump's approval, let's talk about the politics on this.

Trump's approval was at its lowest over the last few months after he announced the retaliatory tariffs on liberation day, but the approval rating has been climbing in the last few weeks as he keeps going back to the taco bar. I'm sorry. Keep going, keep going, get them all in. Do you think this ruling could end up being

good politics for Trump? Did this court save Trump from himself? I don't think having your signature policy pieces struck down by the court is ever great politics. It makes you look weak and ineffective over the course of time. If the courts were to rule that Trump did not have the authority to do these tariffs,

that would probably help them politically in the same, it's sort of the legal equivalent of putting a cone around a dog's neck, right? It keeps him, it prevents him from doing damage to himself by hurting the economy further with tariffs. I do think the fundamental political, like, as you look at 2026, we are in a tariff sparked recession and prices are incredibly high because of Trump's tariffs. That would be incredibly bad for him. As you look at 2026, if we are in a tariff sparked recession and prices are incredibly high because of Trump's tariffs, that would be incredibly bad for him.

But even having said that, what has happened over the first 140 or so days here is the way Trump has done the tariffs has undermined the central premise of his presidency. This idea that he was a, even no matter what else you thought of him, that he was an able manager of the economy, you have seen that come down significantly. Even if his approval ratings

has gone up a little bit, it's reaching just like still historically bad for a president at this point in their term. It's not getting hot anywhere near where you would expect it to be in a typical honeymoon period. But I think that, I think there has been real damage done by the tariffs. So that, that will, that. So that damage will linger no matter what else the court does between now and then. Right, and crucially, tariffs are no tariffs. Prices have not come down. Inflation has come down, but prices haven't really come down.

And it's not like he's been getting excellent economic news anyway. So yes, chances of recession, if these tariffs stay off, certainly go down, but people's feelings about the economy, which going into Trump's term were already, there were a lot of concerns about prices and costs, those don't go away, nor does his only signature piece of legislation that he's trying to pass through Congress

do anything about that. In fact, it makes it worse for a lot of people. Yeah, for the people who need the most help, it raises their prices. Yeah. In other good news, the White House's biggest doge bag has finally left the building. Elon Musk, my good friend and mentor, announced on his platform that his time as a special government employee has officially come to a close after 128 days where he destroyed vital government services and his reputation while saving taxpayers just under 8% of the $2 trillion in spending he originally promised to cut. But don't worry, the Trump White House's own Cato Kaelin is gonna be coming back

and popping into meetings once in a while, so he's not gone for good. And he has also said that, quote, the Doge mission will only strengthen as it becomes a way of life throughout the government. Where did the Cato Kaelin reference come from here? He's like been, he's been sleeping at the White House. No, I know what it means. It's like a very, it's like a 1994-

Well, in my mind, I'm thinking of like, there just has those stories that he was like sleeping in the EEOB. Like he's got like a sleeping bag on the floor and he won't leave. And out of the cabinets, like this guy, we've had enough of him, but he still won't leave. That's like the house guest.

When you say house guest who won't leave, and you grew up when we grew up, you think Katie will- Okay, all right, all right, I buy it. It is correct. I was surprised to read it today. And I have to insert a reference in every pod that the 35 or under set doesn't really understand.

So that's important. I mean, this one is for like the 40 and under, which is pretty close. Anyway, what do you think? Will Doge become a way of life? Has Doge become a way of life? Has Doge become a way of life? I mean, isn't it already? I mean, don't you wake up every day and pray to the Doge God?

You're wearing your Doge gear. Yeah, no, I'm not sure. Doge will not be a way of life for me. I don't know about you. What do you think is next for Doge? Do you think this is just gonna be something we forget about? I know there's a Doge package of cuts

that's apparently heading to Congress. Yeah, I think Doge, they're gonna theoretically and reportedly send up some cuts for Congress to enact and put into law. They're doing that somewhat reluctantly. They've basically been bullied by the Doge bros online into doing this, but Doge as we know it, I think it's toast. It's just this effort.

It just lives on in our hearts. Yeah, we won't forget it. Like we will always know where we were the day the Doge started and the day Doge ended. We will think fondly of our time with Doge. But it, just Elon Musk had the ability, he did it in the most, least effective, most chaotic way possible,

but because he was someone with real political capital, a massive media platform in the ear of the president, he was able to end run the cabinet secretaries and make some of these cuts, that most of them got upended by the courts, but he was able to do things that are not gonna be possible with some, you know, flunky in charge of the program now. Right, so I just don't see it having any sort

of the same impact that it had in the first hundred or so days. The guy originally said he was gonna be able to cut $2 trillion, then he revised that down to $1 trillion. $2 trillion, then he revised that down to $1 trillion. Now he says that he cut about around $165, $175 billion. That number is what Elon Musk says. You know, reporters have dug into that as much as they can and found that some of that money is counted twice.

Some of its contracts that had already been canceled when Elon got there. So it's probably less than $165 billion. They are sending a package of Doge cuts to Congress for Congress to codify, to pass so that they're there for good, that is only $9 billion. So now we're down to $9 billion. The package that they are trying to pass,

the one big beautiful bill, is gonna add about $4 trillion to the deficit. So $9 billion, it's about, that's a lot less, Dan. I see you trying to do that math in your head right there. It's about 0.25%, I believe. Yeah. Of $4 trillion. Did you do that, just write that in there?

I did, I did. Okay, well we'll check that later. Well, let's see, I don't know. We'll see. I'm not the math major host on Plastic Man. No, no, no, not there am I. Not there am I. Even it is true that he cut a lot less than he said,

but actually the cuts he did are probably gonna end up costing the government money because he may think so much more inefficient and he cut the IRS, which is going to now collect less in taxes and allow more people to he cut the IRS, which is going to now collect less in taxes and allow more people to cheat on their taxes, which is good. So in the end, all of the excitement, the chainsaws,

the weird hats, the weird press conferences, the attention, Elon Musk ended up costing the government more. He increased the deficit through his own ineffective distance stupidity. Yeah, a couple of other items he's gonna be able to put on his resume that are under the Doge section. He closed a bunch of social security offices

around the country. He tried to change how you call social security office for help and basically screwed a bunch of seniors who were trying to make calls and they couldn't get through anymore because he had to walk that back, all the changes to social security. So he fucked that one up.

There were a bunch of layoffs at afterschool programs that he tried to cut. We're still dealing with a bunch of FEMA cuts as we head into hurricane season. So that's something he can be proud of. This is from Reuters from just a few weeks ago, food rations that could supply 3.5 million people for a month are rotting in warehouses around the world because of USAID cuts.

These food rations could feed over a million people for three months. So that's just a great example of government efficiency there because U.S. taxpayers have already paid for the food, but then they fed USAID into a woodchipper, which he was quite proud of, and now the food is rotting places all around the country that could, all around the world, that could feed millions of people. So that's another thing he did. 1.6 million people could die within a year because we cut HIV prevention and treatment. Nick Kristof, the New York Times, he actually traveled to Africa

because Elon was going around saying, no, what do you mean people have died? No one's died, that's a liberal exaggeration, it's hysterical, blah, blah, blah. And sure enough, you know, Kristof went to a bunch of different places in Africa and found that people are dying right now because they've lost the funding from USAID.

Kids are dying of hunger, tuberculosis, polio. Those are all threats now that people have to worry about again. This was from The Guardian yesterday. A 43-year-old woman and mother of two with advanced cancer is experiencing life or death delays in treatment because of NIH cuts. So here at home, if you don't care about people dying all over the world for absolutely no reason because we could keep them alive on pennies a day, we have a bunch of people here who are counting on cancer treatments and other medical treatments who are not be able

to get them now because we have cut medical research in some of the world's best medical research institutions here in the United States. So that's what Elon can be proud of. That's what, that's his legacy. That's great work all the way around. How do you think the Elon rehabilitation tour is going to go? You think he's going to be able to rehab his image? I do not, Sean. I think no amount of rehabilitation is going to help his image.

I think he has done permanent damage to his image? I do not, Sean. I think no amount of rehabilitation is gonna help his image. I think he has done permanent damage to his image. He might be able to recoup some of the shareholder value of Tesla's other companies by being less public and cutting less cancel research and maybe showing up to work every once in a while. But in the end, the damage to Musk himself and to Tesla and the other companies, I think is pretty close to permanent.

I mean, it is just a notable thing when your customer base feels a need to put a bumper sticker that says, fuck Elon on the back of the car from the company you own. And also, what in his recent history has shown he would have the self-discipline to stay quiet and help his image. But he's going to be going through withdrawal here

very quickly. He was the center of the universe for over a year, right? Heading back in the 2024 campaign, he's out on the campaign trail, he's got his black mega hats on, he's in the Oval Office the whole time, he's doing press conferences, he is in the center of attention.

He loves attention. His tweets are driving their, he was killing legislation with his tweets and appointments with his tweets. And now he's just gonna be tweeting about the latest features in a Tesla car or the latest SpaceX launch. I just find that hard to believe.

He leaves me to stay away from the controversy of politics. I'll be looking forward to the first profile that's done in like a month or two about how Elon's feeling and how he's been a little depressed since he's been out of Washington and all that and what his next moves are. Cause I agree with you that it seems hard to believe that he's just gonna stay out of the spotlight after this.

Yeah, I mean he was so thirsty for attention. He spent $45 billion to buy Twitter. He sure did, he sure did. And boy, was that a worthwhile purchase. One important legacy from Elon is the work he did to help keep a liberal majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court by making his polarizing self central

to that Supreme Court race in Wisconsin. Do you think Democrats will miss having Elon around as a punching bag? Yeah, probably. I mean, Elon Musk, a punching bag? Yeah, probably. I mean, Elon Musk, the world's richest man being in charge of an effort to cut food assistance to poor people, cancer research, firing federal employees was like the perfect metaphor for the plutocratic cruelty

that is Donald Trump's Republican party. He was like, it was perfect. And it was used to great efficacy in Wisconsin. And you could see that happening everywhere. It's a very mobilizing thing for Democrats when the world's richest man is trying to buy elections as he tried to do in 2024. And he really tried to do it in Wisconsin.

I mean, it was like a great gift to Democrats that Trump appointed one of the world's most famous people, someone with an amazing ability to get attention to implement a series of really, really, really unpopular policies. Yeah. Like normally if you want to do things like, you know, cut food assistance or cancer research or food safety inspectors or the cut edge of public education, you want to do that under the radar. Putting someone who gets attention from every single thing they do was a huge gift.

It's sort of like, if you wanna rob a bank, you probably don't wanna hire Kim Kardashian as your getaway driver, right? It's like, and so like that was a gift to Democrats. We're not gonna have that going forward, but the underlying arguments that we use in Wisconsin without Elon Musk's name still are very resonant and have potential to be very powerful in 2026.

I also am hoping that less attention on Elon who does consume quite a bit of attention means more attention on all the people who we can defeat in an election, Republicans in Congress, who I feel like haven't been getting the attention they deserve from people, because they have been just rubber stamping every single thing Trump does,

and basically just giving up all of their power to just be extensions of the White House staff. And I do think that maybe, you know, now that we're gonna be debating this bill for the next month or so, it's a good opportunity to make sure people know that it is the Republicans in Congress who have quite a bit of power

that they are using to screw people. Do you think this is, I'm taking this on a diversion here for a second, but do you think as we head into 2026, the more energy should be spent on Trump and what he's doing with this bill or on the individual Republican, the house Republicans who are voting for it.

I don't think, I think it's both. I think you've got to tie them together in a way that we have not tied them together yet. And I don't think, I think individually, I mean, like individual races, obviously they're going to have the person you're running against. But I think Donald Trump and Republicans control Washington, right, together. And they are in lockstep, that no Republicans have broken from them. This is what they're doing. This is the damage they're causing. And Congress has basically,

Congress is an extension of the White House staff. You know, I kind of think that's, I think that's the best way to do it, but I don't know, what do you think? Yeah, I don't know. There's a, the House races are going to rise and fall together. You know, I kind of think that's, I think that's the best way to do it, but I don't know, what do you think? Yeah, I don't know. There's a, the house races are going to rise and fall together, right?

It's like, it's none of these members are so important. They're like, oh, I have such a personal connection to Mike Lawler that it's gonna, I wouldn't vote for him despite my incredible concerns with what's happening in Washington or with Trump. I mean, Trump's a double edged sword. He, like we, the way our electoral coalition works, as we talked about last week, when we were talking about the catalyst data is we want midterm turnout.

We don't want anything above midterm turnout. Right. And Trump, if it's Trump has potential to turn people out. So I don't know, I don't know the answer to it yet, but there's no question that it's can't be just Trump, right? It's gotta be Trump and Republicans. And there is a, we, that's also just playing the long-term game of presuming Trump doesn't upend

the Constitution and engage in a military coup between now and 2028. We're gonna run against a Republican who's not Donald Trump in 2028. And so we need the bad stuff of Trump to infect the rest of the party too. Yes, and I do. Yes, and that's sort of why I brought it up originally because I do think that is a task that we have not focused on as much.

But I think also like just thermostatic public opinion, people, voters who don't play close attention but who do turn out in midterms just think to themselves, oh, Trump's doing a bunch of bad shit, we gotta have a check on Trump right now, it's full Republican control of Washington, we need some balance back in Washington, even the people who bunch of bad shit. We got to have a check on Trump right now. It's full Republican control of Washington. We need some balance back in Washington, even the people who sort of like Trump, right?

So I do think there's that dynamic as well. Pots of America is brought to you by Fast Growing Trees. As we speak, as I sit here, as I speak to all of you, the Fast Growing Tree is being sent to this office where it will sit somewhere and look beautiful and I will water it personally. Probably not, but someone else will and we will keep it alive forever

because Fast Growing Trees have a great product. I'm actually with two people right now who have Fast Growing Trees. One McCroot lime leaf tree, which can be used in cooking learn something new today Also a ficus fig which just looks gorgeous. It's a stunner. It's a knockout There's all kinds of options on fast growing trees And did you know that fast growing trees is the biggest online nursery in the United States with thousands of different plants and over two million Happy customers they have all the plants your yard needs like fruit trees trees, privacy trees, flowering trees, shrubs, and so much more.

Whatever plants you're interested in, Fast Growing Trees has you covered. Find the perfect fit for your climate and space. Fast Growing Trees makes it easy to get your dream yard. Order online and get your plants delivered directly to your door in just a few days without ever leaving home. Their alive and thrive guarantee ensures your plants arrive happy and healthy. Plus, get support from trained plant experts on call to help you plan your landscape, choose the right plants, and learn how to care for

them. Look, it's nice to have a nice couple plants in your house or your yard landscape. It looks beautiful. It can be intimidating. We don't know how to do it. You're like, I'm not good at that. What if I kill the things? That's why fast growing trees has you covered. They walk you through the whole process from beginning to end, make it easy, and it will look great. This spring, they have the best deals for your yard. Up to half off on select plants and other deals, and listeners to our show get 15% off their first purchase when using the code CROCKET at checkout. That's an additional 15% off at fastgrowingtrees.com using the code CROCKET at checkout. Fastgrowingtrees.com slash crooked, fastgrowingtrees.com code crooked. Now is the perfect time to plant.

Use crooked to save today. Offer is valid for a limited time. Terms and conditions may apply. All right. As Trump bids farewell to his favorite foreign born Ivy league graduate, he's trying as hard as he can to make life miserable for over a million others.

The administration has decided to stop issuing all new student and exchange visitor visas while they create a new process to monitor the social media accounts of anyone who wants to go to school in America. National archivist Marco Rubio said the State Department, where he interns, will be, quote, aggressively revoking visas for an unknown number of the 275,000 Chinese students studying in America and said the crackdown would include, but not limited to those students with ties to the Chinese Communist Party

and those studying in quote critical fields. Trump also floated the idea that colleges should just cap foreign enrollment at around 15%. In better news, a federal judge blocked the Trump administration's attempt to bar Harvard University from enrolling foreign students, at least for the time being. This comes as the administration is trying to cancel basically all federal funding to Harvard, most of which is really just the federal government essentially hiring Harvard to do medical and scientific

research that benefits the whole country. Here's Caroline Levitt on Fox News talking about Trump's policies here. Electricians, plumbers, we need more of those in our country and less LGBTQ graduate majors from Harvard University. And that's what this administration's position is. And we also are not going to tolerate the illegal criminal anti-Semitic behavior that we saw take place at Harvard and many other college campuses across the country. LGBTQ graduate majors.

Is that a thing that happened a lot? I'm very confused by that. They're majoring in gay? Yeah, that's what's happening. Are they majoring in gay or are they gay graduate students? Probably both. Either Yeah, that's what's happening. Are they majoring in gay or are they gay graduate students? Probably both. Either way, I'm not sure what the issue is here.

Either way, you do not want them anywhere near our colleges. That's for sure. No. We need more plumbers. We need people going to Harvard so they can be plumbers is what we need. Yeah, I don't know. I don't know if anyone knows that. You could really nauseate yourself with dizziness

by trying to follow the logical thread of that comment. Yeah, no, I'm sure someone's gonna try, like you're gonna get the JD Vances or someone else to intellectualize this argument and be like, you elites, you don't understand that our trade schools are important and that we need people who are gonna make things again and not all these email jobs with all these beta males

and women behind their computers, just producing nothing. We need to build things again in this country. And you're all just a bunch of elitist snobs for thinking otherwise. That's the wrap. That's, I assume Trump's free community college plan is coming out any moment now? Well, he does want to donate some of the federal funding

that's going to Harvard to the trade schools, which I don't even know how that works. He's probably not gonna actually do that. And I don't know what those trade schools would do with the funding, because there is no evidence that they need federal funding, because they are not research universities. So if we expel enough international students from America and

destroy some of the world's best colleges, is that going to lead to more jobs for Americans, Dan? No, John, I don't think it's going to. I think it's going to lead to less jobs. Let's put aside the destruction of American higher education for a second and just focus on just if we reduce or eliminate the number of foreign students coming to American colleges. What happens is the best and the brightest from around the world come to college in the United States because this is the best place to get an education. It is the cultural centerpiece of the world,

the educational centerpiece of the world. Many of those that best and the brightest, they go to college here, they stay here, they work in American companies, and most importantly, they start American companies. Google, eBay, YouTube, NVIDIA, all huge. Tesla. Tesla as one, yes. SpaceX.

SpaceX, all companies that employ huge amounts of Americans have generated tons of wealth, have been some of the most innovative companies in the world, started in America by immigrants who came here to go to college. So now those people are gonna go elsewhere. They're gonna go to college elsewhere. They're gonna start companies elsewhere. And that's gonna be, it's a huge brain drain for the United States. It's one of the most self-defeating things

we could possibly do. It just fundamentally misunderstands what our strength is as a nation. Where we lead the world is in innovation. And we are going to make that we're that's the Trump is basically running an anti innovation agenda. It's not just keeping these, kicking these kids

out of school. It's also cutting the research that you're talking about that, you know, just was reading us for a day about how China is now leading the world in drug trials. They're beating us in that game because we, and we're going to make that easier because of what Donald Trump's doing.

Well, I just wrote a story. We're losing doctors to Canada. Doctors are starting to leave to go to Canada in that game because we, and we're gonna make that easier because of what Donald Trump's doing. I just wrote a story, we're losing doctors to Canada. Doctors are starting to leave to go to Canada because they don't wanna be in the United States anymore because of everything RFK Junior's doing, because of Trump's cuts to NIH, because of everything, and it's just easier to go somewhere else.

Students in the academic year 2023, 2024 academic year, international students contributed $44 billion to the US economy, supported 378,000 jobs. That's just the students before they go off and start companies, just because of all the research they do. International students comprise 5% of higher ed enrollment in this country. And the thing is, they are heavily, heavily concentrated

in graduate programs. So this isn't even a big undergraduate thing. heavily, heavily concentrated in graduate programs. So this isn't even a big undergraduate thing. This is they're in graduate programs and they are especially in graduate programs around subjects like engineering, computer science, research. And we also have a situation in the country where college application rates, not like acceptance rates, application rates, are falling among U.S. students. So if you have those falling, basically what you have is a lot of graduate programs in the STEM areas, in science and math and engineering, all those very important areas,

and U.S. colleges can't really fill those slots. It's not because it's so competitive and, oh, the international student got in and the U.S. student didn't, that's not happening. It is they need international students to fill those slots, and competitive and, oh, the international student got in and the U.S. student did, yeah, that's not happening. It is they need international students to fill those slots. And without them, and by the way, international students also tend to pay full tuition, right? That's another thing that we're getting from international students. And because they pay full tuition, that allows these colleges to help subsidize their operations,

their staff, and financial aid for American students. So if we kick out all the international students who are paying full freight to college, that's going to mean more cuts to colleges. That's probably going to mean higher tuition for other students. And that's going to mean less students being able to go. Yeah, it's so stupid. It's so dumb. It is, there is no purpose to what is happening here.

I was yelling about this, but like JD fucking Vance, you know, he, he posts this long tweet over the weekend and he's like, here's, here's the deal with, you know, the Trump administration's policy towards universities, you know, there is a reproducibility crisis where published papers, uh, from research universities fail to replicate, uh, to replicate and turn into commercial adoption and so basically all this research is being done is not generating enough jobs and businesses and that's a problem with these elite institutions and also all of these professors their voting patterns it's like North Korea

all they do is just vote for liberal vote for Democrats and also there's racial discriminations against whites and Asians. And these are the problems that President Trump is looking to change. And if he would only, if the colleges would only work with Trump to change these policies, instead of just yelling fascism, then we could be all better off

and so could the colleges be better off. And that's what this is really about. It's about, he said, basic democratic accountability. So he gives this long, this long bullshit, intellectual argument for why Trump's doing this. And then the next day Trump gets off the plane and a reporter asked him why he's doing this. And he's like, too many foreign students at Harvard.

Too many. Some of them could be terrorists. Too many. We got to watch them. They could be some bad people. It's like, okay, well, there you go, JD Vance. Yeah, you can do your reproducibility crisis, but Donald Trump just thinks there's too many foreigners

in our colleges, that's it. What a sad existence that JD Vance lives in. So fucking sad. He goes out there, he tries to, he twists himself into a fucking pretzel to try to justify his entirely new set of beliefs that he's just adopted for the purposes of acquiring power and to somehow make Trump seem less like a fucking moron.

And then every day Trump goes out, just acts like a fucking moron and in doing so makes JD Vance look weak and dumb and like a fucking moron. Yep. And it's all the tech bros, the oligarchs, the Elon Musk's, the all in crew and their podcasts. When Trump went on the all in podcast and was like, I'm really for stapling a green card to, uh, the diplomas of

international students who come here for college. And the All In guys are like, see Trump's really much more moderate on immigration. What a great thing. And it was a fucking bullshit the whole time. No one believed that that was Donald Trump's actual position. And now not only is he not stapling a green card to their diploma, he's kicking them all out of the fucking country. And it's not even just like future students

who may come here. There are students who are here, Chinese students. What about Marco Rubio who's gonna fucking revoke visas from Chinese students? We have 275,000 Chinese students in this country. And he's just gonna take their visa away for what? For what? Because they're tied to the Chinese Communist Party,

meaning they're from China. Right party, meaning they're from China. Right. Yeah. From that's yeah, they're from China. As the same, like it's also fucking incoherent that it is like hard to take because we are, we're going to kick out students who might have ties to the Chinese Communist party, but we are

going to bend the law to allow the Chinese Communist party's social video app to exist for as long as humanly possible. You can have an opinion on the TikTok ban, you can have an opinion on it, but your opinions have to at least have some sort of ideological coherence. You can say we're in a giant race to compete with China, and we don't want China to be the way it is,

but we're not gonna allow other students to come here and be culturally acclimated to the United States and go back there. And we're also gonna be in a race with China and we're gonna gut all of our innovation initiatives to allow China to get the head start on things like solar and wind and green energy and all that. It's so stupid.

Well, Dan, JD Vance is very upset that admissions policies are discriminating against Asian students. And so the best way to rectify that is to make sure that the largest group of Asian students in this country who are international Chinese students, actually the largest group of any ethnicity who's in this country is international students, we're gonna kick them all out. So it all works out.

It all works out. I mean, JD Vance grew up the way he grew up, in Appalachia, gets into an Ivy League college, succeeds because of it through, while sacrificing a lot of his dignity and morals and the above, and then burns the fucking bridge behind him. Potts Save America is brought to you by Strawberry.me.

So here's the thing, at some point in your career, you look around and think, wait, is this the job I really want? is brought to you by strawberry.me. So here's the thing. At some point in your career, you look around and think, wait, is this the job I really want? Is this where I want to be five years from now? Or why is everyone from my college group suddenly leadership and I'm still stuck in the same role? And if that hits a little too close to home, it might be time to stop winging it and actually get some help. If you're ready to land your dream job or considering switching careers or are ready to level up in your industry, working with a career coach can make all the difference. That's where today's sponsor, Strawberry.me, comes in.

They match you with a professional career coach who actually helps you figure out what your next move is and build a strategy to get there. It's like therapy for your career. You get insight, structure, and someone who holds you accountable so you stop spinning your wheels and start making real progress. Whether you're striving for a promotion or pivoting to something totally new, your coach is there to help you build your plan, follow through and make it happen.

Take the quiz, get matched with the coach and start moving forward. Head to strawberry.me slash crooked to claim your $50 credit. That's strawberry.me slash crooked. Because if you want real career success, don't leave it to chance. Get the right coach and make it happen with strawberry.

All right, in a moment, I'm gonna talk to Liz Oyer, who's the DOJ's former pardon attorney about Trump's latest pardon spree. But before we do, I thought we would talk a little bit about the political implications of those pardons in another Corrupt Date. Corrupt Date. There you go.

That's asking you shall receive. Yes, you ask a thousand times and one time you will get it. The truth is you have to ask publicly on a podcast. I did, but you know what? Elijah came up with that sting really fast, right away. That's great. So that's what we got. Now we are Trump's toast now. This was the thing.

This is it, this did him in. So this week, Trump and his new pardon flunky, Nazi simp Ed Martin, extended pardons and commutations to at least 25 people among them. Former reality TV stars Todd and Julie Chrisley, who were convicted of tax evasion and defrauding banks out of over $30 million, but are also huge Trump supporters.

Also former Congressman Michael Grimm, who was also convicted of tax fraud. A former Virginia sheriff, who then became a minor MAGA celeb, who was caught on video accepting bags of cash, caught on video. Over $75,000 worth of bribes that he got for making wealthy businessmen,

deputy sheriffs with no training. They paid him money, he gave them a badge, there was no training, they gave him a bag of cash, they caught it on video, but he's MAGA, doesn't like immigrants, so he gets the pardon. But my personal favorite is Paul Walczak, a convicted tax cheat who pleaded guilty to tax evasion and fraud, but received a pardon

after his mom, a major Trump fundraiser, recently attended that $1 million a plate dinner at Mar-a-Lago. The best part, she made sure to include the fact that she's a major Trump donor in the application for clemency, which was of course granted. And guess what?

Now, Walzak doesn't have to pay over $4 million in restitution to the people he screwed. What do you make of this clemency spree? Seems pretty corrupt. The Walzak wine, you're all bad. That's why it's in the corrupt eight section, Dan. That is the aptly. Now everyone will know where it is

because we finally have the sound that proves it. We did the right thing here. I mean, all Trump's doing is just pardoning his political cronies and financial supporters. Like that's what's happening here. And we're all just fine with it. I mean, the Wals Act one is fucking perfect. Just goes to the dinner.

She put the bribe in the application and got the pardon. And look, this is, you know, we've talked about Trump's corruption and how it's out in the open and whether it's an effective political message and whether it's really gonna piss people off. And I would bet that a lot of people aren't necessarily surprised that Trump's going to abuse the pardon power and abuse his office to help

his friends and cronies. But the situation with Balzac is extra infuriating because he ripped off a bunch of people, right? His own employee, people, nurses, he withheld more than $10 million from the paychecks of these people who worked at his facilities, nurses, doctors, et cetera. So he stole money from people who worked for him. He used some of the money to buy a $2 million yacht

and then gave a million dollars through his mom to Donald Trump, got a pardon. And now he doesn't have to pay the money back, which he was going to have to do. So he committed a crime, screwed over a bunch of working class people who were at his facilities and now he gets off and those people get screwed. And if that's not like, if that doesn't make you mad, if you think that's okay and like good for Donald Trump, great, you've got your president, but like that's pretty fucked up.

There is just something about that pardon in particular, they're all bad, I presume one of them are bad. There's something about that pardon in particular that just speaks to the sort of depraved world in which we live, where it's just like, that was a story, New York Times wrote a great story about it, read lots of stories about it. No one cares, nothing happened.

In a different world, we've been doing a lot of 90s reference in this pod, on his way out the door, Bill Clinton pardoned Mark Rich, a financier. Mark Rich's wife, Denise Rich, had donated money to Bill Clinton, had been a fundraiser. Rich himself had been a big fundraiser.

It was a national scandal for weeks. In a normal world, what would happen with his Walsack partners, because it looks like bribery. Can a court prove that it was bribery? I don't know, but by the definition of bribery, like in a dictionary, this is bribery. And the attorney general,

who would be an independent figure, would appoint a dictionary, this is bribery. And the attorney general, who would be an independent figure, would appoint a special counsel to look into it and then determine what communications happen between Walzak's mom and Trump aides to explain, to do the quid pro in the quo in this. And none of that's happening. Just, we're just gonna move on. And it's pure, there is just, we're gonna get to this in the next topic,

but it is pure pay to play in Trump's White House. Then there would be impeachment hearings, most likely. I know there was. There was. And then Trump's approval rating would go up and it would be terrible. So can we just stick with the conviction or we would get convicted that he could be able to run for a third term.

But point being, there should be a fucking investigation somewhere, somehow about some of this stuff. And this is, and you know, I talked with this about Liz Oyer in our interview a bit, but what really gets me about that, this is like the financial corruption around the pardons, but remember, he pardoned all of the January 6th rioters, many of whom were convicted of assaulting police officers,

journalists, like really badly. They're all free now. And by the way, he frees those people. One who was convicted of assaulting a police officer has been convicted again of soliciting a minor online. Another who was convicted of assaulting a police officer was convicted after released by Trump, after this person was released by Trump, of sexually assaulting a police officer, was convicted after released by Trump, after this person was released

by Trump, of sexually assaulting a minor. Another, also convicted of assaulting a police officer, freed by Trump, has been convicted of reckless homicide after drunk driving. So these are people, these are criminals that Donald Trump freed, who should not have been freed because they criminals that Donald Trump freed, who should not have been freed because they violently assaulted police officers and journalists, they were let out of jail and they went and commit crimes and they hurt people. One woman was killed, a child was sexually assaulted, like this and in the broader implication here is if you are a foot soldier for Donald Trump, whether you're a January 6th rioter, whether you're a law enforcementth rider, whether you're a

law enforcement official, if you do his bidding, if you do, if he orders you to hurt someone, to kill someone, to commit crimes, you know that you're going to get a pardon. You know that you're going to get a commutation if you go to jail. And so what message does that send to people who want to commit crimes in Donald Trump's name?

It tells them that it's fucking fine. It's a very, It's a very clear message, go commit crimes on my behalf. I just. And I know that this, like the January 6th thing happened, the pardons happened on January 6th and it didn't really stick with voters and it wasn't like what made voters the angriest about Trump and his approval rating is still where it is. But like, I don't know,

if you're sitting around in your community and there's a bunch of like MAGA crazies who wanna commit violence, I'd be worried. I think that's something that actually affects voters and affects most people in this country that we're gonna have a country full of people who just know that it's okay to commit crimes in the president's name if they're rich

or if they're Trump supporters or if they're rich Trump supporters. This is where a little bit of the media disparity comes into play. And I know that this what about-ism is could be very frustrating, but I think it's important, like these examples are illustrative

to make a larger point about how the media world works and how we're getting outgunned. Imagine a world in which Joe Biden had pardoned some Black Lives Matters protesters who had been convicted, certainly not even convicted of any peaceful protest, right, not convicted, nothing like- Vandalism, right?

Vandalism, right, graffiti, whatever. Yeah, right, whatever. And had pardoned them. And then one of them had assaulted a child or killed someone in a car accident. Can you imagine what the political environment would be like? Every person in America would know this happened. Every single person.

It would be 24-hour coverage on every right-wing media channel and show. And then also then it would move to CNN and everywhere. And all the corporate media and all the legacy media would all cover it. And it would be a big fucking thing. Every Democrat would be asked to whether they disavow Biden's pardons.

They would, there's someone would be forced, you know, something like Gerald Goldin or someone would be forced, like pressured into putting a censor motion into place. The White House press briefing would be an absolute shit show every single day. You know what, like those examples that I just mentioned, those happened weeks and months ago.

That wasn't this week. Those were old examples that I found that I just mentioned, those happened weeks and months ago. That wasn't this week. Those were old examples that I found that I just remembered because we were talking about the most recent pardons that have to do with financial corruption. I mean, and you just, like I was listening to Ezra Klein's podcast with Zeke Fox, the crypto reporter, and they're going through all of the crypto crimes. And it's just, and Ezra makes a point that Trump is,

it's muzzle velocity corruption using Steve Bannon's term. They just, you're doing so much corruption, so many crimes so fast, it's impossible to keep up. That is true, but it's also a failure of the media. And I don't mean just entirely the New York Times or something like that. I just mean the media world, which includes democratic party, democratic influencers,

people with podcasts like us, to have the power to actually drive a conversation that informs people about this. And we don't have that power yet. One last item just to make us mad before I'm so mad about this. Before we move on to the interview. There's news that Paramount, parent company of CBS,

has offered Trump $15 million to settle the lawsuit that he has against 60 Minutes for, you know, choosing the edit on their Kamala Harris interview, choosing which parts of the interview they put on television and which parts they put online because you can see the whole thing either online or on TV. If you want to find it, no one's hiding anything. Still won, still beat her, didn't matter. But anyway, so they offered Trump $15 million

to settle this case, but he said no, because he's demanding more than $25 million plus a public apology. And his lawyers are arguing in court that Donald Trump suffered, quote, mental anguish from CBS News, editing the 60 Minutes interview. What do you think?

Some of you just have to like step back and explain these things to realize just how fucking crazy they are. Paramount has a merger with Skydance before the FTC. There's nothing particularly controversial about this merger. You know, we can talk all we want about media consolidation but this one's pretty pro forma,

certainly with the Republican administration. It would be greenlit under any scenario. Donald Trump sued CBS, as you pointed out, for a completely absurd case that would be tossed out of any court. But the owners of Paramount desperately need this merger to go through it. They were going to make billions of dollars when it goes through. And so the, the Trump administration is holding up the merger to force Paramount

to pay tribute to Trump, to pay Trump personally. This money presumably would go to his library, his foundation, his pocket, like the ABC settlement did of $25 million to get their merger approved. I mean, this is pure oligarch stuff. This is Russia. It is unbelievable. Yeah, I feel like we've like skipped Orban at this point. Yeah, we're past Orban.

We're in Putin territory. Yeah, it is. I mean, it is, I mean, I can't even imagine what it's like to work at 60 minutes or CBS right now as a journalist who's, they're doing, this is not their fault, they're doing their jobs. People at CBS, the president of CBS news has resigned. The head of the executive producer of 60 minutes

has resigned and it is what Paramount is doing is gross. What Trump is doing is gross. And is once again, bribery in the purest definition of the word. They are exchanging money for government approval of a merger. That's it. Wild, wild stuff.

And then you put on top of that all the other stories that are out there about, they're all anonymous sources, but about various media executives telling like the folks at The View to tone down their anti-Trump stuff. You're seeing this at multiple media organizations because these are media companies owned by large corporations with large interests before Trump. And they are afraid of Trump and they don't want

to anger him because they don't want to get in their way. And so this is how you get, this is like, if you read the books about what happened in Hungary to the media, this is exactly what happened. This is exactly what happened, how the government ended up getting functional control over much of the media apparatus to stifle dissent. And that's what's happening here.

Yeah. And look, it is a choice not to fight back. And I don't think in some cases it's necessarily, necessarily even a hard choice between fighting back or capitulating. We are already seeing Trump lose in court. I don't know how many different fucking times on some of these, like all the law firms that he went after, he's losing in court on all those

because they're obviously unconstitutional. A fucking judge just put multiple exclamation points in their ruling on the latest law firm, Wilmer Hale, that Wilmer Hale that just, uh, beat Trump in court because the judge just couldn't believe how unconstitutional it is. Uh, he's racking up losses with Harvard already. And there's, I mean, so you can fight him.

And I realized that for corporate media, it's different because they, you know, have a bottom line and they don't, maybe they don't give a shit. They just care about their money. But like we're able to stop this. If people get off their asses, pay attention, fight back, we show a little courage, we can fight this as opposed to just like letting this happen. And the way you're like, we can't for like,

the folks at CBS can't, they can resign. They can't force Sherry Redstone and the folks at Paramount to not be terrible here. And we can't force that Sherry Redstone to do what we want, we the public. But ultimately the answer here is for people to support independent media. Like that is where this is going at every step of the way.

It's just proof that media companies owned by large corporations with interests before Donald Trump cannot be trusted to do the right thing in these situations. Right, right. And for all the wonderful reporters and journalists working there. Yeah, who are doing a great job. For the most part, doing a great job.

Hopefully there's enough independent media that they can go work there too, you know, because it's not their fault. And of course, one way to support independent media, you know, we're independent media, just saying. You can support lots of independent media, but we'd love if you support us as well. You can sign up to be a friend of the pod. And you could support us as well. You can sign up to be a friend of the pod.

And you could, what's easier than that to sign up to being a friend of the pod is just go to the YouTube channel and just hit subscribe. Very easy. And how do you sign up to be a friend of the pod, John? You go to krikka.com slash friends, and you can sign up and you get access

to exclusive subscriber only shows, like the one you host, Polar Coaster. Also Terminally Online, which is our most hilarious show. And you get ad free episodes of Pod Save America, Pod Save the World, Love It or Leave It, and Offline. So it's great. And you get all kinds of other fun stuff too, and exclusive only goodies from us.

So go sign up for Friend of the Pod and support independent media. All right, when we come back from the break, you're gonna hear my conversation with Liz Oyer, but before we do that, on June 6th, Love It is teaming up with the Bullwerks, Tim Miller and Sarah Longwell for Free Andri, a fundraiser at World Pride hosted by Crooked Media

and the Bullwerks at the Lincoln Theater in Washington, DC. The show will be like a Love It or Leave It slash the Bullwerks podcast crossover live event, which means great conversations and probably some fun insults thrown between Love It and Tim. I've read this housekeeping twice. Poor Sarah doesn't even, like, is she gonna get a word in Edgewise?

This is a Love It and Tim show. I mean... I asked her on tour, it's like... Also, this is a very funny housekeeping, which is, what else did you think it was gonna be, other than a crossover between a Love It or Leave It and a Bulwark podcast? I feel like it's a surprise.

So funny. Surprise, it's an episode of Pride in the Interruption. Like what? Anyway, it's a serious thing too. They're gonna be celebrating Pride, but most importantly, raising money for the Immigrant Defenders Law Center, the group representing makeup artists

and actor, Andres Hernandez Romero, and others who've been disappeared to El Salvador without due process. Before the live show, Vote Save America will join forces with the Human Rights Campaign for a protest outside the U.S. Supreme Court to bring more attention to this important case. It's going to be a big gay DC live show for a great cause, so get your tickets and RSVP

for the protest at Cricut.com slash events. Pots A of America is brought to you by Quince. This Father's Day, you don't want to just grab something and call it a day. If you've got more than one dad in your life to shop for, your dad, your partner's dad, maybe a grandpa, Quince can make it easy to find gifts that actually feel thoughtful without making it stressful. Super simple and super solid. Quince is all the pieces dads actually want to wear, like organic cotton silk polos, European linen beach shorts, and comfortable pants that work for everything, from weekend hangouts to nice dinners. The best part? Everything from Quince is priced

50 to 80% less than what you'd find at similar brands. By working directly with top artisans and cutting out the middlemen, Quince gives you luxury pieces without all the crazy markups. And Quince only works with factories that use safe, ethical, and responsible manufacturing practices and premium fabrics and finishes." I hope I get some Quince stuff. I'm a double dead. My kids probably aren't listening to this. They're one and two. But I would love some more of the excellent Quince workout shirts. They got great socks. And look at the sweaters. I know we're going into summer mode here. There's some really nice sweater options that in other places I feel like would be like hundreds of dollars that are very, very affordable on Quince. What I'm trying to say is they have great stuff. All the purchases I made

off of Quince have been a success. I've never returned anything. It's all just fit great. So give it a shot. For the dad who deserves better than basic Quince as been a success. I've never returned anything. It's all just fit great. So give it a shot. For the data deserves better than basic, Quince has you covered. Go to quince.com slash crooked for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns. That's quince.com slash crooked to get free shipping and 365 day returns, quince.com slash crooked.

Liz Oyer, great to have you on. Thanks for having me, John. You were the pardon attorney at the Justice Department, and there is quite a bit of pardon news right now, none of it good. But before we get to all that, I want to start with your story for people who may not be familiar with it, because it's a wild one that ends with the Trump administration firing you after you argued against restoring Mel Gibson's gun rights. So what happened there? Yeah, that's exactly right. So I was very much hoping to be able to stay on and do some good work in this administration. My role as pardon attorney is intended to be a non-political

role. The idea is to make recommendations to the president about how he can use his clemency power in a way that is fair and free of political influence. So I hoped and expected to be able to continue on into this administration, but that was not meant to be. In March, I was very abruptly fired from my position on a Friday afternoon and walked out of the building by security officers. The events that you referred to leading up to my firing are where it gets pretty weird, and I'm happy to talk about that. Please do. So I was asked to be part of a project involving restoration of gun rights to people who've lost their right to own a firearm because of a criminal conviction. There are millions of people in this country who are in that position. And the idea was that the Department of Justice

wanted to start giving gun rights back to some of these people. I was asked specifically to make a recommendation to the attorney general that she restore the gun rights of a friend of the president, the actor Mel Gibson. Mel Gibson was actually appointed to be some sort of ambassador to Hollywood by President Trump at the start of his administration and he had sent a letter to the Department of Justice explaining that he lost his right to own a gun in 2011 when he was convicted of domestic violence. He was convicted of abusing, assaulting his former girlfriend and as a result of that, he's no longer allowed to own a firearm.

So I was asked to recommend that he get his gun right back. And really, the only reason given to me to make that recommendation was the fact that he has this personal relationship with the president and he's a famous actor. And that wasn't enough to convince me that he's someone that could safely own a firearm. There's a lot of data out there.

Shocker. Yeah. There's a ton of data that suggests that people with domestic violence histories are much more dangerous when they're armed. And so I couldn't make that recommendation. And within hours of communicating to the leadership of the department that I was unable to fulfill that request, I was fired. And from what I understand, Pam Bondi ended up granting him his gun rights back anyway.

He did, yeah, after I left, she did it anyway. So it seems to me like them firing you might be more of an excuse, might've been more of an excuse than direct, like they were just using the Mel Gibson thing as a pretext to fire you if they could have restored it themselves anyway? So they definitely didn't need me to make the recommendation.

And they've never told me why I was fired. No one's ever explained it to me. I got a three sentence memo telling me I was fired under the president's power of Article 2 of the Constitution. But what I will say is that the Department of Justice is using people in career positions like mine to try to give a veneer of legitimacy

to decisions that are really just political favors, trying to wrap them up in some kind of legitimacy by having a non-political appointee like myself make a recommendation when a recommendation isn't even needed. And that was shown here because as you noted, Pam Bondi gave Mel Gibson his guns back anyway. And they not only fired you, but then they tried to silence you shortly after that. Can you talk about that?

Yeah. So I was asked to testify before members of Congress about my firing from the Department of Justice. And that testimony was scheduled to take place on a Monday. On the Friday before that night, I was at a performance. I took my parents to a performance with my husband. And we were leaving the Kennedy Center just after 9 o'clock that night.

And I received a call from someone in the Department of Justice who was calling really just as a favor to give me a heads up that there were armed law enforcement officers on their way to my home to deliver me a letter. And the letter was a warning against testifying before members of Congress on Monday. So I very fortunately was able to talk

with this person about the fact that my teenager was at home alone. It would be very upsetting for these folks to show up at my door at about 10 o'clock in the evening. And this person was able to help me call those officers off. But the intention was to have these armed officers deliver a warning to my home at 10 o'clock on a Friday night. a warning to my home at 10 o'clock on a Friday night. Aside from that being just absolutely thuggish behavior, what basis did the officers have for giving you a letter that said you're not supposed to testify? Well, there's no basis.

The letter was written by a political appointee who works for the deputy attorney general, or at least that's whose name was signed to it. And the leadership of the department is really now just a collection of President Trump's former personal attorneys. So this is a woman who was a junior member of his defense team, who now has oversight of matters of ethics

and professional responsibility within the Department of Justice. And she fired off this letter warning me that I would be violating all sorts of legal obligations if I were to testify in front of members of Congress. I read the letter carefully. There's no basis to any of it. And I went ahead and testified anyway

because I believe that that was the right thing to do to shine a light on, frankly, the corruption that is taking place right now in the Department of Justice. Yeah. It sounds like it was the right thing to do to shine a light on, frankly, the corruption that is taking place right now on the Department of Justice. Yeah, it sounds like it was the right thing to do. And also, you're suing the Trump administration now, I believe. Yeah, I am. I actually have two different pieces of litigation going.

One relates to an appeal of my unlawful firing. My firing from the department plainly violates civil service laws. I mean, laws that have been around for many, many decades to protect career federal workers. And I have another lawsuit that involves the Freedom of Information Act. I have asked the department to produce information about the reasons for my firing, and they have refused to do so to date. So I am now taking that matter to court and hoping that the court will require the department to comply with their legal obligations and give me that information.

Can you talk a little bit about what it was like being the pardon attorney at DOJ back when that process was much different before Trump and like, how was the process supposed to work in the pardon attorney's office? Yeah, it was much different before Trump and like, how was the process supposed to work in the pardon attorney's office? Yeah, it was much different. It was much different before the change in administration. Ordinarily, the way pardons work is there is this office

within the Department of Justice that reviews and vets applications for clemency that come in from people around the country. About 80% of applicants are people who are incarcerated and serving a prison sentence. Those people are generally seeking a commutation of their sentence, which is a reduction of the imprisonment portion of their sentence. Then the rest of the applications are generally from people who are living in the community who've already completed their sentence and they are seeking pardons. Pardons are usually

reserved for people who have completed their sentence sometime in the past, were convicted of a minor crime, and have demonstrated exemplary conduct and rehabilitation in the community in the years since. So all those applications typically come through the Office of the Pardon Attorney. We would review them closely, vet the applicants carefully, and make recommendations to the president about who should receive clemency free from any type of political influence. That's the process in ordinary times.

That is not what's happening now. Yeah, clearly. I mean, you were ultimately replaced by Ed Martin after his nomination for a U.S. attorney for D.C. was withdrawn due to, in part, his praise and support of a Nazi January 6th convicts. He's since been on something of a pardon spree himself with Trump, handing them out to various Trump donors and supporters. What's your take on Ed Martin's tenure at DOJ so far? It's really quite a shock to reflect on the fact that he is my successor.

My position is one that, you know, was non-political and he is just about the most political person in the administration. He recently tweeted, he said, no MAGA left behind, which was a reference to a pardon that was granted to a sheriff, a corrupt sheriff who was a Trump supporter. He seems to be on a mission right now to identify other MAGA loyalists who he believes are deserving of pardons,

which as far as I can tell is everyone. There's been some news recently that he has been working with an attorney who has a relationship with Trump and who is representing a whole bunch of members of the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys who are seeking pardons. He's also considering apparently pardons for the men who plotted to kidnap

the governor of Michigan, Gretchen Whitmer. So he's really out there in terms of what he's looking at. And the criteria that he's applying, to the extent there are any, are completely different from the criteria that the Department of Justice has always applied in recommending pardons. He does not seem to feel bound at all by this document called the Justice Manual, which kind of lays out

all the guidelines and rules that Department of Justice employees are supposed to follow. It's really quite, quite shocking. I thought my successor was bad. I got Stephen Miller, but yours is much worse. Well, we could have an extended debate about where we land. We could have the worst. So your colleagues who are civil servants

who are still in the Justice Department, like is there, they must be going crazy watching Ed Martin sort of go through some of these pardons. Is there anything, I mean I know the pardon power is so absolute for the president, is there anything that can be done to slow these down? Or is there anyone in DOJ who is trying to slow this down,

do you think? Well, the thing that's tricky about the pardon power is that it's in the Constitution, and the Constitution puts no limits on it. So there really are no rules. There have always been norms, and there have always been policies that have applied to pardons, but those have gone out the window

under the current administration. And really, the only way to address it when you have someone in the White House who is abusing the pardon power in this way is through a constitutional amendment, which is really, really difficult to accomplish. We've seen a lot of presidents use pardons in different ways. And you know this as somebody who

worked in the Obama White House. Really, the high point was President Obama's use of clemency. He used it in a way that was very disciplined and principled and fair and that was intended to really show mercy to people who had earned it and people who deserved it. And as a result, those people have gone out in the community and have done really well.

The recidivism rates are low. There are people who are doing extraordinary things, and they earned those second chances and are using them well. But we're already seeing now people from Trump's first term in office who got clemency, who are back in prison, who have committed violent crimes. In just a few short years, the approach of not vetting people, of granting clemency on the basis of political loyalties and affiliations rather than merit is just one that is not consistent with public safety and it's really destructive to our system of justice.

I do feel like the pardons have been sort of an under covered aspect of the Trump administration and I've sort of been wondering why it hasn't broken through more. I started thinking about this with the January 6th protesters and convicted criminals all being pardoned and released by Trump early on. I mean, people like you and I and a lot of people who pay close attention to this are horrified by a lot of these pardons, most of these pardons. What would you say to someone who doesn't follow politics or even the news that closely about why Trump's pardons should worry them, why they should matter to them?

There are a couple of different reasons. One is that there is just no process in place. It's a free for all. It's a marketplace for pardons and people are paying exorbitant amounts of money to get them. It's just a pure corruption of the powers of the presidency. We're hearing about people paying millions of dollars to get access to the president with the hope of their pardon being granted. So that should be alarming to all Americans because most people, even who are Trump supporters, certainly cannot afford that type of access and they can't get those benefits in that

same way. The other thing that's really destructive is that the president is just showing total disregard for verdicts that have been imposed by juries, for prosecutions that are being pursued by his own Department of Justice. It's creating essentially a two-tiered system of justice that gives the rich special and preferential treatment. There was this case recently that was really particularly disturbing, a guy named Paul Walsack,

who was convicted of essentially skimming money off the tops of paychecks of the doctors and nurses that he employed. And he used the money to buy a $2 million yacht, jewelry, clothing, all sorts of lavish items. The judge who sentenced him decided that he needed to spend some time in prison and said at his sentencing, I am sending a message that wealth is not a get out

of jail free card in this country. And then literally days later, Trump swooped in and he granted Walsack a full pardon, which not only totally goes in the opposite direction of what the judge was trying to do. I mean, it sends the exact opposite message. Wealth is a get out of jail free card. But it also had the effect of wiping out the obligation

that Walsack had to pay back the money that he owed. There's this thing called restitution, which is required in cases involving financial crimes. You've got to pay back the money that you owe to your victims if you're convicted of that crime. And the pardon just wipes it all out. So, Walsack's victims will not be repaid. He will not have to spend a day in jail. And the real kicker is we just learned from reporting of the New York Times a few days ago that Walsack's mother spent $1 million to attend

a dinner with Trump just days before he got that pardon. So it's totally corrupt. It's totally destructive to our system of justice. It's really just, it's just awful. And I worry that, I think I worry most that it sends a message to would be criminals that if you have enough money or if you're a Trump supporter, or if you're a rich Trump supporter, you should go commit a crime if you have enough money, or if you're a Trump supporter, or if you're a rich Trump supporter, you should go commit a crime if you want,

because there's always the chance that you can get a pardon. In fact, there's a very good chance that you can get a pardon. And I would tell people who are like, well, what does this matter to me? Like, look, do we want a policy like this that leads to more crime and more criminals? Because if someone wants to harm you, or someone wants to scam you,

they know that the president's got their back or Ed Martin's gonna say no MAGA behind. So I really worry about sort of the potential crime and violence that this could lead to. Well, it almost becomes a business calculation. I think there are people who are probably thinking I can make X millions of dollars if I commit this crime and then I could spend a small percentage of that to

get myself a pardon so it's worth it. And that's the way the calculation is working out for a lot of people. There's another guy named Trevor Milton. Milton launched this company that was supposedly going to build the world's first electric powered semi truck. And Milton defrauded investors to the tune of almost 700 million dollars. Milton made a donation of around 2 million dollars to Trump's campaign. Then he got a full pardon that wiped out his obligation to pay back almost 700 million dollars in debt. So that was actually a really sound business decision. He you know he made 700 million, he paid off 2 million and that's a win. Wow. It's just, just horrifying.

It was obviously difficult and risky for you to speak out and fight back and continue speaking out as you are. What do you say to your former colleagues at DOJ or other civil servants still in the administration who want to do the right thing, who want to speak out, but are understandably scared. Yeah. I think that this is the time to be brave. This is the time to lead with conviction and courage and it's hard.

It's lonely. It's scary, but once you compromise your integrity, you cannot get it back. So I've tried to set that example that, you know, despite the challenges of standing up, it is ultimately the right thing to do. It's very hard in the Department of Justice to do that. The people who are still in the department are very limited in their ability to speak up and folks who have left are very scared because there is this culture of silencing people. But I would really just encourage my fellow civil servants to stand on their principles

and just have confidence that ultimately that will be what prevails. Well, thank you so much for speaking up and thank you for joining the pod. Where can people find you? I know you have a sub stack now. Yeah, I have a sub stack. It's called LawyerOyer. I'm also on Instagram and TikTok as LawyerOyer and I'm doing a lot with pardons. I'm covering pardons, talking about the $1 billion in debt that President Trump has forgiven through pardons. So I encourage everybody to check me out either on suback or Instagram or TikTok.

Thanks, Liz. I really appreciate you joining. Take care. Thanks so much for having me, John. ["The Daily Show"] That's our show for today. Thanks to Liz Oyer for coming on. Love It will be back on Sunday with a special conversation

about what a series of historic labor strikes can teach us about organizing and building political power today. Have a good weekend, everyone. If you want to listen to Pod Save America ad free or get access to our subscriber discord and exclusive podcasts, consider joining our Friends of the Pod community at crooked.com slash friends or subscribe on Apple podcasts directly from the Pod Save America feed. Also, be sure to follow Pod Save America on TikTok, Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube for full episodes, bonus content, and more.

And before you hit that next button, you can help boost this episode by leaving us a review and by sharing it with friends and family. Pod Save America is a Crooked Media production. Our producers are David Toledo and Saul Rubin. Our associate producer is Farah Safari. Reed Cherlin is our executive editor and Adrian Hill is our executive producer. The show is mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick. Jordan Cantor is our sound engineer with audio support from Kyle Seglen and Charlotte Landis. Madeline

Herringer is our head of news and programming. Matt DeGroote is our head of production. Naomi Sengel is our executive assistant. Thanks to our digital team Elijah Cohn, Hayley Jones, Ben Hefcoat, Mia Kelman, Molly Lobel, Kirill Pellaveve, and David Tolles. Our production staff is proudly unionized with the Writers Guild of America East.