Pod Save America - Trump Goes Bananas

Episode Date: August 8, 2025

Reeling from the Epstein crisis, Donald Trump turns even more erratic and destructive—launching a grand jury investigation into the make-believe crimes of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, threatening to seize control of the D.C. police, and sharing some eugenicist theories about who's suited for what kind of work. Jon and Dan share how they're feeling eight months into Trump 2.0, check in on MAGA's efforts to rig the congressional map ahead of the 2026 midterms, and react to DHS reinstating its infamous family separation policy. Dan talks with epidemiologist Michael Osterholm about RFK Jr.'s decision to halt federal research into mRNA vaccines—and then confronts Jon about his ill-advised Twitter fight with Megyn Kelly.

This is an ad by BetterHelp. These days, it feels like there's advice for everything, cold plunges, gratitude journals, screen detoxes. But how do you know what actually works for you? With the internet and information overload about mental health and wellness, it can be a struggle to know what's true and what actions to take these days. Using trusted resources and talking to live therapists can get you personalized recommendations and help you break through the noise.

Therapy's great. You might think you don't need it, but trust me, you will benefit from it. Donald. And you should give it a try. Just give it a try. Donald. Donald. And if you don't want to go to a therapist's office, because that's either too cumbersome

or also you're just like too embarrassed, just do it online. That's what better help is for. Zoom it up. With over 30,000 therapists better helps the world's largest online therapy platform, having served over 5 million people globally, and it works with an average rating of 4.9 out of five for a live session based on over 1.7 million client reviews. It's convenient, too. You can join a session with the therapist at the click of a button,

helping you fit therapy into your busy life. Plus, you can switch therapists at any time. As the largest online therapy provider in the world, BetterHelp can provide access to mental health professionals with a diverse variety of expertise. Talk it out with BetterHelp. Our listeners get 10% off their first month at BetterHelp.com slash PSA. That's BetterHelp, H-E-L-P-L-P-S-A. 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 Walts, Katanji Brown Jackson, Newt Gingrich, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Charlemagne the God, and so many more. That's all in the New Yorker Radio Hour, wherever you listen to podcasts.

Welcome to Potsave America. I'm John Fabro. I'm Dan Feiffer. Dan, I like your new setup. All we did, John, this we just moved the desk back a little bit. We got some new lights. It's a whole new world done here. For those of you who are just listening, you're going to want to check it out on YouTube

because you're going to see Dan in a whole new light. Just literally a whole new light. Several new lights, in fact. All right, Dan, on today's show, we got Epstein. We got redistricting wars. We got deportation news. Quick check-in with the brothers Cuomo. They won't be here.

We're just going to check in on them. It's very important because people were. And we got Dan's interview with Michael Osterholm, a vaccine expert about RFK Jr's decision to cancel funding for MRNA vaccines. But let's start by just stepping back for a second. because we are all well accustomed to having a deranged sociopath running the country, it's easier and probably better for our mental health to avoid freaking out about every crazy thing Donald Trump says and does. But since the economic news has gotten worse, his deportation regime has become unpopular,

and his Epstein scandal has split the MAGA movement. Trump has been on the defensive, and whenever he's cornered, he gets even crazier and more destructive, which has especially been true this week. And I think it's worth paying attention to. We're going to talk about a lot of it on the show. Just a sample. Trump said he's happy to hear that his Justice Department has launched a grand jury investigation into the make-believe crimes of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton and Obama's administration. He is purging the Justice Department and FBI of more senior officials because of January 6th, while we also just found out that one of his current top DOJ advisors turns out to be one of the rioters

who's on video screaming to kill cops. So that's what we got at the DOJ as we're purging the people who prosecuted the rioters. He's slapping huge new tariffs. Liberation Day has come and gone. August 1st is coming on. He's still slapping huge new tariffs on prescription drugs, electronics, anything that comes from India, no rhyme or reason. And here's a few other choice comments from Trump this week. You know, people that live in the inner city are not doing that work. They're just not doing that work. And they've tried, we've tried, everybody tried, they don't do it.

These people do it naturally, naturally. I said, what happens if they get it to a farmer the other day? What happens if they get a bad back? He said, they don't get a bad back, sir, because if they get a bad back, they die. Mr. President, what are you doing up there? Are you considering taking over in the D.C. police? Is that an option on the table? We're considering it, yeah, because the crime is ridiculous. Fallon has no talent. Kimmel has no talent. They're next. They're going to be going. I hear they're going to be going.

BLS overestimated job creation by 1.5 million jobs. That's a, Mr. President, that's a gigantic error. And I don't know if she's, I'm not making it. It might have been an error. That's the bad part. It was an era. It would be one thing. I don't think it's an error. I think they did it purposely. So just because that was a lot, that was Donald Trump on CNBC talking about how undocumented immigrants who work on farms are genetically suited to do so because they don't hurt their backs, because if they hurt their backs, they would die. That was Donald Trump on the roof of the White House walking around, I guess, to check out plans for his new ballroom that he's going to build in the White House. He was talking about having the federal government and perhaps the military take over D.C. This was based on a single carjacking, news of a single carjacking.

And then he finished up there with an event today, Thursday, in the Oval Office, where he brought in quack economist Stephen Moore with a bunch of charts to show that these are the new numbers. These are the new jobs numbers that Donald Trump deems true. Forget about the BLS because he fired the BLS director. So now we're having made up jobs numbers. How are you feeling about all this, Dan? Do you think things seem to be getting worse? Do you think voters think things seem to be getting worse? Are we all just boiling frogs at this point?

I think the frogs are pretty close to boiled here, John. I mean, like, you can watch all of this in like, you can either cry or you can laugh. And sometimes it's for good for your mental health to laugh at the absurdity of Trump. But I think we should be crystal clear that we are seven months into this. We have three and a half years to go. I don't think I am surprised. by how bad Trump is. Like, we knew he'd be terrible.

I don't think I'm surprised that the people around him in this administration are so much worse than the last time. And we kind of knew that was coming. I'm not really surprised that the Republicans in Congress are just kind of going along and cheerleading everything. Like, we knew that would happen. But what I think is perhaps most surprising and alarming is how meek the resistance to what Trump is doing has been.

Like, in this week, we had Tim Cook, the CEO of Apple, in the Oval Office for an announcement of Trump, where he presented. him with a fake 24-carat gold award? It was real gold. The award was fake. The gold was real. That's very important. Gold was real, yeah.

And so Tim Cook's a CEO of Apple. Apple is the most powerful company in the world. If there's any person in America who could resist having to debase themselves in front of Trump, it is Tim Cook. I'm not saying that Tim Cook and Apple should turn, you know, the Tim Cook should turn Apple into the resistance HQ. No, but you can at least avoid. avoid this embarrassing display where you give a fake award to the mad king and you slather him

with praise so that he will give you better tariffs. Like take Harvard, right? Harvard, there's one institution in America that has the power and the war chest with their massive endowment to stand up for the First Amendment and academic freedom. It is Harvard. And what are they doing? Trying to cut a deal. The institutional Democratic Party has failed over the first seven months to make themselves

a credible vehicle for anti-Trump sentiment and resistance in this country. And it, you see this every, you saw this over the weekend with all these fucking dishonest Yahoo's in tech and Wall Street trying to explain the firing of the BLS director is that this was really just a decision that Trump was making because of a disagreement over statistical modeling and not a lunatic who didn't like the job numbers and wants to create his own reality. And it feels to me, and I think this is like a really dividing line in how people are thinking about Trump is it feels to me that the all these people, Tim Cook, the business community, even some Democrats view this as a period to survive.

And if we can just make it through the next three and a half years and whatever we have to do to make it through, right, we'll give him a fake award, we'll pretend like he's not a lunatic, we'll give money to his inauguration. Whatever we can do to make it through the next three and a half years, it was what we have to do and it will be better on the outside of it. there is no evidence that what comes after Trump with this Republican Party is going to be better than Trump. It may be less ridiculous, but it's going to be no less extreme. It'll probably be smarter and more effective. And so the time to fight is not three and a half

years from now. It's right now. So I got so mad watching everyone this week because every time one of these people who could fight back doesn't when they give in to Trump, it strengthens Trump and weakens the opposition to Trump. And that is where we are. And I think it's a very, I think we're in a very, very dangerous place. And people keep making decisions for their own personal short-term interest without seeing the bigger picture of what is to come. Because today, Apple's fine. Tomorrow, Tim Cook, you'd do something to piss off. They could run the wrong show on Apple TV. And Trump, and he could come right after him. So if you give in now, he's just going to take and take and take. And it's put us in a, I think we're in a very, very, very

bad place right now. Yeah, I think your point about, like, short-term self-interested thinking is the right point. It's the central point here. Because to build a country, to have a country that's successful, you need to think about the long-term and future generations and what might happen down the road. And you need to think about not just yourself, but the other people that you share the country with. And it is very clear that many elites in this country are not thinking of either. And guess what? Tim Apple, he got his, he got his exemption from the tariffs, right? Trump has decided to have 100% tariffs on microchips, but Apple is now exempted because Apple has made one of those bullshit promises to invest a lot in the United States, which is like no one's going to be able to check. So you can just say whatever. And he's giving him a gold bar. He'll given him literal gold, goes to the Oval Office, hands Donald Trump some gold donated to the inaugural committee. And Tim Cook's probably like, well, I got a board of directors and I got a bottom line and I got to figure this out. And I got to just get through this, right? And it's like, yeah, maybe you'll get through this. Maybe you got your exemption, but what happens down the road?

What happens to the economy? What happens to like everything in this country that made your success and your company's success possible? What's going to happen there? And the other thing I see is, you know, and I think Democrats can get a lot of shit, by the way. There are some Democrats that are fighting really hard. There's a lot of people who've been out in the streets. There's organizers who've been fighting really hard. Like I do think some of the people who have been as worried about Trump as they have been for the last decade have really.

really been, you know, working hard. What I have noticed, and I don't know what you think, like in my own life is there's a lot of people who don't like Trump and probably didn't vote for Trump, but they see everything that's happening. And they're like, I've just, I've tuned out. I can't, I can't tune in anymore. It's just, it's all crazy. It's like washing over. And some of it's exhaustion. And some of it is like, well, what are we supposed to do? And some of it is, like, for my own mental health, I'm just going to, I'm going to, you know, worry about myself. my family, my friends, and pretend that what's happening in the country and what Trump's doing isn't really happening. And so it's this sort of like willful ignorance or this, this hope that

maybe if you just like close your eyes, then everything will be fine in a couple years. And it's just not going to be that way, right? Like we are, we're going to talk about redistricting and these wars and like the, you know, Trump trying to basically lock in a permanent Republican majority. You know, if you had asked me when Trump first won the second term back in November, if I was really worried about the 2028 elections or the 26 elections, I'd be like, yeah, kind of who knows it's Trump, you know, you never know what he's going to do. But seeing how they are handling, redistricting for the midterms, or sort of any challenge to their authority whatsoever, how they've handled the courts, how they've handled businesses, how they've handled institutions, colleges,

civic society in general. Like, I don't know why they would just sit there in 2028 and be like, well, we lost fair and square. So, you know, I guess J.D. Vance ran a good campaign or Donald Trump, you know, tried to run for a third term. You forget about Trump. J.D. Vance ran a good campaign, but he did lose. And so Donald Trump and J.D. Vance and the whole administration will just be relinquishing

power and walking out of the White House. I like, I don't, maybe they do that, but I don't see. why they would if you looked at the last six months of all of their actions. And then the question is like, what is everyone else doing? What are we all doing? Yeah, it is, like I have the same experiences with people in my life who they're exhausted. They're too, they find it too stressful. They have too much going on in their lives.

But I think there is one, and I understand all those sentiments. I often feel exhausted. I often feel like I have too much going on my life. That's how everyone feels. Often feel like I don't know what to do about all this. Yes, but I think one of the things that has been tremendously successful in the worst possible ways for Trump is he, and as this goes to Tim Cook and Harvard and Democrats not shutting the government down earlier this year is that Trump is convincing people that resistance is futile. Yes. And so because what you need to be, it is so hard to care, so hard to fight, right, to get up and do all the things that so many people are doing, right?

Like, I very specifically used the term institutional Democratic Party, right? Because there are people all across the country, including Democratic politicians who are fighting their asses off. I was speaking more about it's not even though each individual member of the leadership, but it's the fact that the parties as an entity is in the toilet in terms of its poor ratings, right? But is that until we can convince people that there is hope for something better, And that's what fueled, that is what fueled the resistance in 2017 was if we can just win the house, we can do a whole bunch of really good stuff, right? If we win the house, then we can stop his legislative agenda.

We started hold hearings. He got impeached for whatever that was worth. And then it's like if we can win in 2020, then we won in 20, we did all the things and he's still here. And so that is going to require somewhat, right? And it may be a bunch of people who are running for president in 2028 or a bunch of people who are on the ballot individual's days in 2026 to provide hope for something better, right? That there is a way out of this, that there is something on the other side of this that

is not just more Trump. I also think that the way people are getting information about what's happening, I mean, you know, you and I, we've been a broken record on this forever. It's that we started this company, this podcast. But like, it's so broken. It's like even more, it's exponentially more broken than it was, even in 20, 2020 through 2024. Like, you know,

it's just like there's Twitter is garbage, blue sky, no one knows what's going on over there. Sorry, all your blue sky people,

but like, guess what? There are you mentioned some of the sky. Yeah, well, you know what? It's pretty minuscule the membership there.

And, you know, I'm on it too, but like nothing, you're all talking to yourselves there. Cable ratings are like just shockingly bad.

Like, half the ratings of like this, an average podcast, Pod Save America, like in prime time for some of them, like CNN. it's just it's wild how that and network news we were talking the other day we're like who even who who anchors the network news these days it's just like it's like that's all so television stuff is broken papers Washington Post like a mass exodus from the Washington Post New York Times is doing well but it's basically just the New York Times I don't know Politico like it's it's just really hard for so you know I criticize people who are like turning away and not knowing what to do but also it's sort of like hard to get good information about what the fuck is happening right now yeah I mean

I mean, that is a huge part of it, for sure. Like, most people can go out their lives and know none of the details of what we're talking about here, unless you opt into political news. I mean, all the things you just mentioned about the state of the media is something, I've been working on a message box for a couple days about this, which is what I'm going to just give, I will preview it now, which will now force me to finish it, but is that we've been sort of like talking about the changing media for a long time. And it sort of always seemed like sometime on the horizon was the end of.

the old media order. Well, that time is now. We have crossed that threshold. It is everything is collapsing in of itself. There are still profit, like the New York Times and Dal Jones remain profitable media businesses. The right is ascendant with Fox News. But cable is collapsing faster than anyone imagined. Last month was the first month that more people stream TV than watched linear TV. And the thing that should scare people is that's not YouTube TV. They're not streaming news. Well, they're streaming YouTube on their TVs, which is the big thing. And everyone in their understanding of politics, how they conduct political campaigns, how they communicate information, all has to change to reflect that reality because

we're still running the old playbook. And it's one of the reasons why people can't get information because we keep running and telling people who have no reach anymore or no credibility anymore and expect it to filter down to the people who are going to make political decisions in this country or make decide elections in this country. That's why we need everyone to subscribe to the Positive America YouTube channel because when people go to YouTube to learn about politics and news, we want them to see progressive content like we have, not right-wing slop that is currently dominating YouTube. And there are asymmetrical implications to this development for both parties, or at least for

Trump and then everyone who's not Trump, because Trump wants us all to be exhausted and turn away and just feel like, I don't know what's going on. I don't know what's true and what's not. Like that benefits him, and that does not benefit us. Like we actually need people paying attention, informed, and able to, you. use the many platforms we have to coordinate and communicate with each other to try to figure out how to fight this. All right. We just had to talk about our feelings at the beginning there. I feel unburdened slightly. Yeah, it was good.

Positive America is brought to you by Z biotics pre-alcohol. Let's face it, after a night out with drinks, I don't bounce back the next day like I used to. I don't bounce back the next day like I used to. I don't bounce back the day after the next day either like I used to. I have to make a choice. I can either have a great night or a great next day. Sometimes you choose neither. Until I found pre-alcohol. It's called parenting, John.

Zbiotics, pre-alcohol, probiotic drink is the world's first genetically engineered probiotic. It was invented by PhD scientists to tackle rough mornings after drinking. Here's how it works. When you drink, alcohol gets converted into a toxic byproduct in the gut. It's the buildup of this byproduct, not dehydration that's to blame for rough days after drinking. pre-alcohol produces an enzyme to break this byproduct down. Just remember to make pre-alcohol your first drink of the night, drink responsibly, and you'll feel your best tomorrow.

Again, I will not have more than one and a half glasses of alcohol without a Z-biotics pre-biotic. It's just not worth it. I have them all over the house now. I feel exponentially better. Just because you never know where you're going to be somewhere and you forgot your Z-biotic. If you're going on your bachelor party, it's going to be challenging, right? Like, this is, we're not, we're not trying to sell you some sort of snake oil here. There's no miracle cure to, uh, to solve every, uh, rough next day in perpetuity.

But boy, does Zbiotics help me. The final days of summer are here for you to enjoy whether you're heading to the beach, camping in the woods, or squeezing in one last vacation road trip. Don't forget to bring Zbiotics pre-alcohol, probiotic drink. Drink a pre-alcohol before drinking and enjoy every day of summer to the fullest. Go to Zbiotics.com slash cricket to learn more and get 15% off your first order when you use the code crooked at checkout. Zbiotics is backed with a 100% money-back guarantee. So if you're unsatisfied for any reason, they'll refund your money, no questions asked. Remember, head to

Zbiotics.com slash crooked. Use the code crooked at checkout for 15% off. All right, let's talk about the story most responsible for Trump feeling cornered lately, his refusal to release the Epstein files and the subsequent ongoing cover-up. J.D. Vance was supposed to hold a strategy meeting at his residency. about how to deal with the political fallout that included the kind of officials' presidents usually turn to when they have political problems. The Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General,

and the FBI director. But once CNN found out that meeting was happening, Vance, in his fucking annoying, holier-than-thou-way, said, oh, it was completely fake news, and how dare you ask that question, completely fake news, why, you should get better reporters.

Only for CNN to break the story just hours before we started recording that the meeting was real and it did happen just at the White House not at J.D. Vance's resident. So technically he was telling the truth. Well, no, because they also said the meeting was canceled.

And then it turned out it actually just happened. Cancelled at his house. Yes, canceled at his house, yes. Well, he said he's like, it was never supposed to be a meeting at my house. That was never the case without saying the real, the truth.

We also learned this week that in Galane, Maxwell's nine hours of testimony to Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, Trump's former defense lawyer. She reportedly said that Trump never did anything with Epstein in her presence that concerned her. Galane Maxwell convicted child sex trafficker, whose word you can always trust. Perjurer. And surely, those comments had nothing to do with the Trump administration's decision to relocate her from a federal prison in Florida to a minimum security facility in Texas, nicknamed Club Fed, a move that shocked even Bureau of Prisons employees

on Tuesday, Trump finally faced some real journalists and got a question about this from CNN's Caitlin Collins and here's how he answered. Two questions for you. One, were you aware of and did you personally approve the prison transfer for Galane Maxwell that your Justice Department? I didn't know about it at all.

No, I read about it just like you did. Do you believe that she's credible to be listening to? Your Deputy Attorney General sat down with her recently? Well, let me tell you, he's a very talented man. His name is Todd Blanche. She's a very legitimate person, very high. I just have very highly thought of person, respected by everybody. That seemed right to you, Dan?

Didn't really seem to answer the question there, at least the second part of the question. He did say at one point, like, oh, that's normal. That happens. Yeah. That's a thing that happens. No, it's not a thing that happens. You don't move convicted sex offenders to minimum security facilities that are known as club fed. That just doesn't happen.

No. No. No explanation. I mean, when you read through the things that have happened this week, right, the fact that there is some sort of potential assumed quid pro quo between the Trump administration and Clay Maxwell for a testimony that is favorable to Trump, it is that there is a meeting of the people in charge of the investigation to plot political strategy for one of the close associates of the child sex trafficker at the heart of this investigation. investigation. Loretta Lynch said hi to Bill Clinton on a tarmac. Yeah, we had a special counsel out of it who gave us Trump. Great. An entire fucking roadblocked coverage on Fox News.

Straight news, straight news reporters, pundits, the whole thing, the whole, and mainstream outlets, too. It was the biggest scandal of those couple months, Bill Clinton saying hi to Loretta Lynch on a tarmac. I am going to keep screaming into the void about this, but we have lost all capacity. as a society to put what Trump does into like a larger context. Like, I'm just going to use these sentences to describe what is happening here and just take Trump out of it, take the words Jeffrey Epstein out of it, just think about how the political world would react to it. The president of the United States was a longtime friend with America's most notorious child

sex trafficker. It is discovered that the president is mentioned many times in the files that came from the investigation into that child sex trafficker. And now the entire federal government, including the Department of Justice, is working to do everything they possibly can to prevent the public, the media, and Congress from learning about the nature of the president's relationship with America's most notorious child sex trafficker. including, including launching a criminal investigation into the president's predecessor and his administration based on absolutely nothing. Congress had to go home because they couldn't answer questions about it because they were so afraid to take a vote that would force disclosure of files that may once again disclose information on the president's long-term relationship with America's most notorious. child sex trafficker. And now the president's personal defense attorney is potentially granting special favors to the co-conspirator of America's most notorious child sex trafficker in order to generate favorable testimony to protect the president. Who, along with the vice president, who hosted the meeting with the attorney general and the FBI director and everyone else, spent the campaign that they just won voluntarily promising to release the Epstein files.

Right. This is where we fall into the trap is that like people want to make this about hypocrisy and broken campaign promises. It is about child sex trafficking. That's what it is. And this is a scandal and people are going to think this is hyperbolic and nuts. I've said this a couple times now. This is a scandal as big as Watergate and Iran contra. Right. At its outset. Like the fundamental proposition here is a massive government conspiracy tied to covering up information about child sex trafficking. that is what is happening. Seems like a big deal to me. I mean, you know, Trump said he was worried this week about the people who might be mentioned but aren't involved. I'm sure he is. But aren't involved and who could be hurt by something that would be very, very unfortunate, very unfair to a lot of people.

Again, you know, let's take Donald Trump at his word here. And none of those people that he's worried, including himself, about everyone else finding out about in these files broke any loss, right? So the cover-up is just trying not to embarrass a bunch of really rich and famous people, including the president. Yes. And there's a workaround to that. Still a pretty big, still a pretty big scandal. And there's a workaround to that too, which is just released in mentions of Trump's name and redact to other people, if that was really your concern. Also, as a note, according to reporting from ABC News, Todd Blanche asked Maxwell about a hundred different people in the meeting. So I'm pretty sure if they release the transcript, they will not be redacting

those names. So they're not that concerned about it. It's not, it is a speed bump on the way to trying to protect Donald Trump from any sort of political fallout from this relationship. Well, Dan, they don't have to redact all hundred names. They only have to redact the names of the people who are Donald Trump and Donald Trump's closest friends and associates. If you're a Democrat, they don't have to redact your name. I'm sure they won't. Some famous person who, might seem like a Democrat or maybe is a rhino Republican. They don't have to redact your name. It's just it's just Donald Trump's name they have to redact. So our old buddy Norm Eisen has FOIA'd records relating to the transfer decision on Gleine Maxwell through his group

democracy defenders. Any chance we ever learn more about the mechanics of this? I think there's a chance we'll learn more, although I'm not sure it's through FOIA because I just don't trust that the administration that's driving a Mack truck through the first, fourth, and 14th Amendment is going to adhere to the letter of the law when it comes to the Freedom of Information Act. That seems, but there aren't like... That's where that's, there's sticklers there. It does seem that a lot of people had to be involved with this decision and that, and people

seem deeply uncomfortable with it. Like, there are still, like, there are quotes from Bureau of Prisons employees to reporters on off the record or on background, suggesting how strange this is. So I, we, I think we may discover what is, what happened here, hopefully sooner or rather than later. So the House Oversight Committee, you know, they're getting involved too, the James Comer. He's subpoenaed testimony from a bunch of high-profile Democrats and Trump detractors, including Bill and Hillary Clinton, Robert Mueller, Jeff Sessions, Eric Holder. Anyone missing from the list there who might be able to shed some light on maybe past secret deals that Jeffrey Epstein received from government officials? I mean, one person I would just mention, which I'm sure this was an oversight, is Alex Acosta, who,

was Trump's labor secretary, who was the U.S. attorney, who cut the very specific deal that allowed Epstein to leave prison six of the seven days a week because he was on some sort of strange work release program and served almost no time for sex offenses, child sex offenses. Well, he is very busy now on the board of Newsmax, the right-wing television station that has leaned the hardest in the direction of maybe Galane Maxwell. is actually good. But he also said, like, there was reporting around the decision and things he said that really deserved more explanation about how it was said that he was really connected,

had high up friends, which is why this deal, he was told to cut this deal. He claims he made a reference to him being connected to, he is, like, in his comments from Acosta that are the heart of the idea that Epstein was somehow connected to intelligence. like he suggested that at some point. Israeli intelligence. Yes. And so it's worked like, he'd be the first person on the list if you really wanted to get some answers because had he not cut this deal, imagine all the people who would have been spared what EFSI and Maxwell did. Because it was another decade before, more than a decade before he was actually brought to justice or arrested before dying in prison.

So you wrote a message box about all this Epstein stuff Thursday, about sort of why it's important to make sure that Trump doesn't distract us and move on to another, move on to the next scandal or whatever he wants to move on to. How do you think we should go about that, making sure that he doesn't distract us from this? I think it, like, we have like limited, for all the reasons we said in our long, uh, diatri about the broken media ecosystem. But I think we should just have to continue to keep the pressure up. I think when Congress comes back that Democrats have to, at every opportunity, demand to vote, right? Use every platform they have to do it. And I think it really, and it gets back to just focusing on the core proposition

about what is happening here. And it is just make, like, help people understand why this is a big deal. And just keep hammering at it, keep hammering at it. Keep putting pressure on the press to do it. Like you can, like, there is still great reporting happening on this a lot, all the things we mentioned. Oh, yeah. CNN, ABC. But you can kind of feel the. like the investigative press is working, the political press is starting to get their August wandering eye to other stories. Because what is really interesting to the political press, because they're not the ones like digging deep into the department, the Bureau of Prisons to find who signed the transfer order. It was two things. One is Congress, right, with like what's happening in Congress, like, how does this affect this?

They can talk to the members about it. They're out of town. But the other one is tension in the Republican base. And that tension still exists. The polling shows it still matters with voters. but some of the most prominent voices have been brought to heal by Trump. And like, so that takes away from the political press. But I think we need to keep making this political story, keep talking about it,

just keep putting pressure on people as much as we possibly can. Because I really do believe, and maybe I sound crazy, I think this is a massive, important scandal that at least we need to do to pull every thread to get to the bottom of. Like, if we get through this presidency and we never know what the Epstein file said about Trump, that would stink. Yeah, it just, it's like it, it would be. a massive failure of civil society.

I at least want to know before America ends, you know? It's like what's going to, what's going to happen first, the end of the Republic or releasing the Epstein file. It's like when a TV show gets canceled before they could bring the story to close. That's what I'm saying. That's what I'm saying. I want to get to the finale. So there continues to be real world evidence that the Epstein thing actually matters to

real people. Nebraska Congressman Mike Flood made the audacious and for a Republican increasingly rare, decision to hold an actual town hall in his district this week. Here's what it sounded like when the subject of accountability for Epstein came up. Why are you covering up the Epstein files? I am for the release of those records. All right, all right, Mike Flood, we love that. Reporters who were there said that everyone in the room, even the Republicans,

were cheering for more transparency on Epstein. But on basically every other subject, things didn't. go so great for Flood. Let's listen. Next slide, please. Taxable rich! Taxes on overtime. And more than anything, I truly believe, this bill protects Medicaid for the future. I can tell you, we're going to see an influx of money into Nebraska. hospitals. Sounds like a good time. What do you think they were chanting there at the beginning?

Wasn't it tax the rich? Tax the rich. Thank you. Thank you, Austin. Thank you, Dan. I couldn't, I couldn't hear. Getting old. So put in your strategist hat for a second. What were your first thoughts seeing that town hall? I think it does highlight what I believe to be probably the most under-disscussed story of the first seven months of Trump's presidency is that despite like obvious dissatisfaction with the Democratic Party, high disapproar ratings, polls that show that we want new leaders, that despite all of that, the grassroots anti-Trump movement is as fired up as it has been since the beginning of the Trump era in politics. So you saw this with the No Kings rally. We've seen this in other town halls have happened. People are much more fired up.

The resistance was a big story in 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020. The press doesn't cover anymore. It doesn't get attention, but it does exist. It is real, and people are fired up about what is happening. And, you know, just pretty fired up about the Republican budget bill and the cuts to Medicaid and the tax and the tax cuts for the rich. And I think that can drive a lot of good political outcomes in 2026. And to be clear, the people I was talking about earlier who were turning away, it's not the resistance. It's the normies, right? And I think that you're going to need to get, bring in some of the normies into the anti-Trump resistance movement who we didn't have before just because the level of danger right now is so much higher than it ever has been that I think

you're going to need a bigger movement than we've ever had before. But you're absolutely right that I think the energy. And again, we're not hearing about this energy as much. We're not seeing it as much because all of our information channels are broken. But it's it was good to know that it's certainly there because, you know, they're like, oh, it's Democrats that showed up. It's like, great. I don't care who shows up. It's a random guy in Lincoln, Nebraska, random congressman decides to hold a town hall and it gets packed. Like Annie Carney of the New York Times is there. So, like, lines out the door around the building like it was a presidential campaign of people trying to get in. So whether that's, you know, Democratic energy, anti-resistance energy,

anti-Trump energy from, you know, former Republicans, whatever, it's great to see. And, you know, just a reminder, if you want to help out folks that are going to these town halls, if you want to make sure the Democrats take back the House in 2026, then just go to Vote Save America. Our friends at Vote Save America are ready to help you do something about it that can tell you ways to donate your time, donate your energy, donate your money to really make a difference. So very important. Go check out Vote Saveamerica.com. Pots of America is brought to by Strawberry.Me. The clock is ticking.

The days are rolling by, turning into weeks, months, years. We spend nearly a third of our waking hours at work, but the unfortunate truth is that for many of us, that's time languishing away in a job we've outgrown, or one we never wanted in the first place, but we stick with it. And say things like, I've already put years into this place, crooked media. What if the next move is even worse? I went to the Daily Wire.

I can't afford to take a wrong step. Oh, no, I'm co-hosting a show with Benny Jones. Johnson, and isn't everyone kind of miserable at work? Alex Jones seems happy. Don't fool yourself. You'd never be able to coase with Benny. No. There's a difference between reasons for staying and excuses for not leaving.

It's time to get unstuck. And that's exactly what today's sponsor, strawberry.me, can help you do. They match you with a career coach who helps you go from where you are to where you actually want to be. Info Wars. Your coach helps you get clear on your goals, create a plan, build your confidence, and keeps you accountable. along the way. So don't leave your career to chance. Everything's conspiracy, John.

There's still plenty of time to take action, time to own your future with a professional coach in your corner. The reasons to do so totally outweigh the excuses not to. Head to strowberry.m.m.crucid to claim a special offer. That's strawberry.m.m.m.m.m. Stop settling. Start building the career you actually want. John Lovett. He did, and he's not here anymore. Where'd he go? No, sorry. Is it for Tucker?

It's my dream job. So Republicans are responding to angry voters showing up at town halls by trying to pick better voters. Trump and the rest of the MAGA establishment are hard at work trying to lock in a permanent Republican majority by rigging the congressional maps ahead of the 2026 midterms. Trump thinks this is the least we can do for him, as he said on CNBC this week. We have an opportunity in Texas to pick up five seats. We have a really good governor and we have good people in Texas. And I won Texas. I got the highest vote in the history of Texas, as you probably know. And we are entitled to five more seats.

They're just, he's entitled. The entitlement apparently extends way beyond Texas to any state with a Republican majority. Conversations are happening in Missouri, South Carolina, Florida, Ohio, and Indiana, where J.D. Vance visited on Thursday to pressure the state's Republican governor, Mike Braun. Politico reports that Republicans think they can get 10 or more house seats just by redrawing the maps. As we've talked about, Democratic states are threatening to counter with California in the lead, but it's not clear which other states can make it happen or when or how many seats there are left to squeeze out of those maps for Democrats. And in response to Texas, Democratic legislators making the completely legal decision that has precedent to leave the state and deny Republicans a quorum to redraw the maps there,

Texas Senator John Cornyn asked the FBI to hunt them down and drag them back home. And apparently the FBI said, sure, no problem. So that's where we are. Now we're using federal law enforcement to scour the country for Texas Democratic state legislators so that you can forcibly bring them back to the state legislature so that the Republican governor can redraw maps to hand Donald Trump five more seats so that he can keep control of Congress. Sounds very democratic, doesn't it?

Yeah, just it's what the founders had in mind. Just a thriving democracy. see. Everything is completely normal. What do you make of all this insanity? It's quite concerning, I'd say. I mean, look, Republicans know the Democrats are favored in the midterms. Right. The map is harder than I think a lot of Democrats think. But given how Democrats turn out in midterm elections, given Trump's perverating, just given the general thermostatic reaction where the country reacts to a new president and they go the other side, there's always this segment of the electorate, even if they voted for Trump, who wants a check on power. you would imagine that we're favored. So what are they doing about it? And the polls are bearing this out.

Yeah. And not only bearing this out, but the margin, the Democratic margin on the generic ballot in polls has gotten larger over the last couple months. And it's not where it was in 2018, but it's certainly well within a place where you would expect the Democrats to have the majority. So Republicans had some options here, right? They could, Trump could try to do more popular things. Trump could try to stop blowing up the economy. Republicans could distance themselves from the unpopular president. to try to improve their brand, they're going to do none of those things, right?

What they're going to, what they're basically trying to do was to rig the election to take this very extraordinary step of mid-decade redistricting to draw new maps to benefit them. And they've given up all pretense of coming up with even a reason for why they're doing it. Like, it's just that Texas Republic is they're doing it because Trump said to do it and Trump's doing it because Trump thinks they deserve it. Even if it means you fundamentally do not understand math to think that you deserve it because that's not what the election results show in Texas or elsewhere. You know, you get this a lot from people.

Like, every time I write a message box that is like, that is how something could hurt Republicans in the midterms, the response you get from a lot of people on our side is, well, the problems will just cancel the midterms. And it's hard to imagine how they, like, how you actually cancel elections in a country where elections are run by states is, that's like hard to found them. But this, you don't have to do that. You can just pick the voters for the election in a way that helps you maintain power. And that's what they're doing. And it's brazen and aggressive. And it's quite dangerous.

What do you think about the potential for widespread public blowback to these moves? Because, you know, we've process arguments. They're hard to make. They're, you know, process arguments about democracy and elections. You know, we've been down this road before. They're important to make. They're hard to make. They're hard to break through. For people who are not paying as close attention to politics, they're sort of hard to understand. I bet if you polled people, on like, you know, do you think politicians should get to choose their voters? They would say no. But what do you think about, what do you think people know about the extent of what's going on? I think they know very little about the extent of what's going on. I think Democrats can use it as a data point in a larger argument. How about Republicans have become representatives of the broken political system where politicians only care about power for themselves? I think you can use that. The argument, like, I support the Democratic States responding because I think brute force is the only, viable response here, but it is, it does make the message more murky. Because you can say, well, Democrats do it, Republicans do it. This is all just. They're all doing it. No one's going to, no one's going to look into who started it. And I don't like, we'd have a cleaner message if California wasn't doing it, but we'd also have fewer seats. And so we like, you, I would pick the latter. I would pick having the seats rather than the cleaner message. Yeah, I don't think this is a something to campaign on. I think this is like an inside fight that we just have to fight, you know. It doesn't

seem realistic to expect any Republican-controlled state to resist Trump on this? I don't know if you disagree. And what's your current tally on who comes out ahead here? Oh, the Republicans almost certainly come out ahead. It's not even, I don't even think it's close because California has to go through extraordinary measures themselves just to do this. New York, like as you got talked about on Tuesday, Governor Hockel is talking a strong game, but it is very hard just experts do not believe they can get this done before the 26 midterms. Illinois is already a state where it's very hard to get more seats out of without putting more Democrats at risk. Maryland can get one seat, right?

You can get several, you can get a couple seats out of Missouri. You can get five seats out of Texas. Florida is looking at possibly getting five seats. If they push forward in response to California, Indiana can get a seat. So I think Republicans would come out ahead. Yeah, it seems like California can neutralize Texas. But then, you know, that's why J.D. Vance went to Indiana. And that's why Missouri is thinking of moving ahead.

So, I mean, I guess if California neutralizes Texas, it seems most likely that then they come out a few seats ahead. You know, we've talked about this before, but Florida has some challenges in redistricting in time for the midterms and some of the other states. But it seems like the most doable for them are Indiana and Missouri. Yeah. In Ohio. Ohio, right. Yes. Ohio is another one.

So that sucks. But like they currently, what do they have? Currently, what do they have? currently a two-seat majority or whatever. Like, every seat is going to matter in this situation. But as we've said before, and I brought up your point here on Tuesday's pod, even when they, in Texas, if they, you know, gerrymander new seats that they think are, you know, Trump plus 10 or Trump plus 15 from the 2024 results, that's not necessarily the case in 2026 when Latino

voters are already shifting away from Donald Trump by pretty significant margins. Yeah. And I think in Texas, the long term, the medium to long term is even more likely devastating to them than just the short term. Because they had the opportunity, in Texas, they had the opportunity to draw these districts in 2021. They specifically chose not to because they didn't want to dilute the Republican electorate across too many districts. They were like building, they basically didn't come in protection because they saw changing demographics. The changing demographics were not entirely Latina related. They were also suburban, you know, growing suburbs, growing exurbs and those becoming more democratic. but there, I mean, there is risk in this Republicans in the right year.

The wave washes over the dams they build. Yeah. Adding to the chaos, Donald Trump's announcement on Truth Social Thursday morning that he's ordering the Commerce Department to conduct a new census and that, quote, people who are in our country illegally will not be counted. If this sounds familiar, it's because Trump tried to include a citizenship question on the 2020 census and a 5-4 Supreme Court majority said no. So, blatant violation of the Constitution to do this, which says that all person should be counted. Supreme Court ruled against him six years ago on this. What's he doing here? He's going to try again and try.

He's got a slightly different court this time. So, you know, will that matter? Oh, I guess because it was Roberts and the four liberal. I guess because it was Ruth Bader Ginsburg. So could he get a six three out of this or five four in the other direction? Maybe. I will say if he, if they, if he somehow gets away with not counting. you know, violating the Constitution and not counting undocumented immigrants in the census, you know, places like Texas, Florida, probably lose seats as well.

Yeah. Is California or New York or whatever is targeted? So it's not, isn't it clear that not counting undocumented immigrants absolutely benefits Trump? It does completely, by the way, fuck up social services and state budget all across the country. There's been some studies of this would show that it would have over the course of time a very limited change in how, House seats and electoral votes are allocated. But the bigger thing is, is it would just radically screw over people, those scrover states and communities who have high undocumented populations.

Yes. And not, by the way, not just the undocumented population. No, no, the schools. Like your school funding is based on the population in your community. If you cut out a bunch of citizens on Medicaid. Yes. Yeah. Yeah.

It's bad. It's bad. It's bad for everyone. but particularly American citizens in states and communities that happen to have a decent number of undocumented people in that community. One last thing on district maps. The Supreme Court is considering a challenge to Louisiana's congressional maps and asked for a briefing on so-called majority minority districts, a longstanding practice under the Voting Rights Act.

Can you explain for people what's at issue here and what the consequences would be? This is a five alarm fire because Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act says you cannot deny someone or dilute political power based on race. In its most a fairest way, in the past, they would draw the districts in a way to dilute the black vote to the point that it was like spread out so thin over every district that there was no political power. And the way that this was remedied when people sued these maps were violations of the Voting Rights Act was you would create a majority minority district, which is why in these southern states like Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, that are very Republican, but have large black populations,

their Democrats have a couple of seats because they've drawn these majority minority districts. Like Alabama has two Democratic seats. Mississippi has one Democratic seat. Just to give you, like, I don't think people realize how large a part of the population in these southern states, black people are. One in four people in Alabama is black. One in three people in Mississippi are black. And so if they strike down, if they say that majority,

minority districts are a violation of the equal protection clause, then we will lose seats almost every Democratic seat in the Deep South, because they will just divide the black vote up in a way that suggests that there will be no representation for the black community, no representation for Democrats from these. It is a, it is a huge, huge deal. And it would be the complete fall of the voting race. It's like the last thing remaining is the Roberts Court has chipped away at it year after year after year. If they take this down, that will be the end of it. Yeah, I guess the only potential reason for hope is that they have looked at Voting Rights Act stuff before. And as they chipped away at the whole Voting Rights Act, they have not touched this yet.

But again, maybe, you know, I don't know if we've seen a case with this court, with this composition yet on this. So, it's quite concerning, that's what I'd say. So Trump isn't just trying to stop counting immigrants. He's, of course, also trying to deport as many as possible. Here in L.A., ICE agents are now jumping out of the back of Penske rental trucks at home depots. To arrest any brown people, they suspect of not having papers, which Mayor Karen Bass says is violating a court order prohibiting the government from racially profiling. The Trump administration has now asked the Supreme Court to take a look at that temporary restraining order so that they can go about racially profiling all that they'd like. So stay tuned on that one.

In Texas, the new Fort Bliss detention camp is about to start holding. holding at least 1,000 people in tent-like facilities and will ultimately hold up to 5,000, making it the largest detention camp in the country. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has also approved the use of military bases in Indiana and New Jersey for the same thing. The Trump administration is also bringing back their family separation policy by telling parents they have a choice. They can either be detained and deported without their kids or leave the country with them. The New York Times has found at least nine cases where family. have been separated. The administration's also now targeting pro bono immigration lawyers for

the first time. DOJ is currently trying to sanction Joshua Schroeder for the crime of challenging the deportation of his client in court. So now they're sending a message not just to the big law firms, but to lawyers who are doing pro bono work for immigrants. And Ice Barbie herself, Christy Noam, announced this week that there's no age limit, no more age limit, or college degree required if you want to mask up and join Stephen Miller's secret police force. The Department of Homeland Security actually tweeted, quote, serve your country, defend your culture. No undergraduate degree required. One person who signed up to defend his culture, actor Dean Kane, last scene playing Superman on a series that ended in 1997, he said he'll be signing up to serve ice.

So, Dean Kane, newest ice agent. Dan, are you ready to defend your culture? Admits the freak out of the Sydney-Sweeney ad where everyone was talking about the Nazi, you know, Nazi eugenics. The use of the term culture here is that is not coded language. That is as explicit as you could possibly be about what we're talking about. I thought we were talking about crime. I thought the whole thing was we want to protect our borders. We want to keep American safe.

Or maybe we want to make sure that, you know, if you're further to the right on immigration, You want to make sure that these undocumented immigrants aren't taking jobs from American citizens or benefits from American citizens. But that was an argument at one point. Now we're just straight to culture. What culture do we defending? What culture do they think we're defending? Yeah, there's a very interesting follow-up question here for the people who tweeted this out and the people who believe this stuff. Please describe the culture that you think we're defending.

Is it a, is it Stephen Miller's culture? Is it Donald Trump's culture? I guess it's like the culture of just making a bunch of money off your public office. Is that the culture? It's a culture of white Christian people is what it means. That's what it means. That is what billionaires, is that the culture? People who can take as much as they can possibly get based on how much power they have.

I mean, this is just, it is a very common phrase used by people pushing neo-Nazi, white supremacist, eugenics-based ideas. Like that is, that is what they are saying. It's like, it's not even, like, we used to do a lot of, like, oh, he's, he's winking to the proud boys. And it's like, that's not even that, like, the people, they're not winking. Like, this is what they believe. This is not, like, some clever political signal to get the proud boys to support Trump. This is just the people in charge now believe this. Like, it doesn't even occur to them to not use this language.

Like, it is, it is what they, there's no subtlety here. I know. And it's, it is not like a random Republican politician is tweeting this. It's not even like some White House staffer. This is the Department of Homeland Security, the name, Homeland Security. It's supposed to be about keeping America safe, not about defending your culture, a culture that, if anything, is about a place where anyone can become a citizen and where a multiracial, multi-ethnic country of 300 million people, I thought that was our culture.

Apparently, Stephen Miller thinks no. I'm going to preview of my conversation with Pete Buttigieg this week. on the Sunday show, I gave, I showed him a clip, a very disturbing clip of a J.D. Vance speech that he gave at the Claremont Institute over the July 4th holiday, where J.D. Vance actually says that the Declaration of Independence and the ideals in the Declaration of Independence are over-inclusive, over-inclusive. And that should not be, America should not just be thought of as a creedal nation based on an idea, based on a belief. Because if you believe in the Declaration of Independence and what it says in there, that could mean a billion.

foreign citizens trying to come into America just because they believe in the ideals of America. And we can't have that. It's fucking wild, man. It is not. It's... There's a longer conversation to be had about J.D. Vance. I know. I know. There's a lot going on there. I started to have it with Pete,

but I could have a much longer conversation about J.D. Vance. Because also this week, by the way, Trump said he is the most likely heir parent to the MAGO movement. Though then he made sure he got into Marco Rubio mention because he, you know, likes to play reality TV host there and he's, he's setting up the competition for 28, but he did say he's the most likely air. So we'll be with, unfortunately, J.D. Vance will be around for a while.

Hard to believe, but we've saved what's potentially the most dangerous news of the week for last. Secretary Brainworms Jr. announced that Health and Human Services Department will be pulling the plug on federal research into MRNA vaccines that are currently being developed for the flu, COVID, cancer, and other conditions. Kennedy claimed that MRNA vaccines aren't effective against upper respiratory infections, despite the fact that they saved millions of lives during a pandemic that was about an upper respiratory infection. Donald Trump used to take credit for MRNA as one of his signature accomplishments. Here's how we responded, we're reminded of that this week.

You were the driving force behind Operation Warp Speed, these MRNA vaccines that are the gold standard. Now your health secretary is pulling back all the funding for research. He's saying that the risks outweighed. the benefits, which puts him at odds with the entire medical community and with you. What is going on? Research on what? Into MR. Well, we're going to look at that.

We're talking about it. And they're doing a very good job. And, you know, that is a pest with Operation Warp Speed was whether you're Republican or Democrat considered one of the most incredible things ever done in this country. But, you know, that was now a long time ago. And we're on to other things. So one of the many, many experts sounding the alarm about this reversal, that includes Trump's first surgeon general, was tweeting about it this week as well. But one of the other experts is Dr. Michael Osterholm, the director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, in the author of the upcoming book, The Big One, How We Must Prepare for Future Deadly Pandemics.

He spoke with Dan just before we recorded. Here's that interview. Mike Osterholm, welcome to Pod Save America. Thanks. Appreciate being here. So earlier this week, the Trump administration canceled $500 million in grants for the development of MRNA vaccines. You called this one of the most dangerous public health decisions you've seen in your career. How will this set us back?

Well, it actually sets us back in several ways. But let me just land on the most important and one of real significance. And that is that today we are really poorly prepared globally. for an influenza pandemic. If we were to have a really, truly big one like 1918, it would exceed anything we saw with COVID. And there is a way to get better prepared, and that is to have vaccines that you could quickly make and deploy.

Right now, globally, our capability of making flu vaccine is that about 2 billion doses in 15 to 18 months. And what I mean by doses I'm talking about is two vaccinations per person. So basically three quarters of the world would not have vaccine in the first 18 months and some of them would never see it. That's just because we have this very outdated 1950s technology for making flu vaccine and chicken eggs. Well, along comes RNA.

And the MRNA right now that we see is a perfect candidate for making flu vaccine. And some of the early research surely supports that. if we had that vaccine available at the time of the next pandemic, we could probably make enough for the world within 12 months, which would fundamentally change the whole game around an influenza pandemic. That now has pretty much been thrown out the window with this new change as the U.S. government will not be basically supporting overall MRI vaccine work. And more importantly, they continue to support a type of research that has been going on since the 1950s. Salk himself was involved with it. And it's really unfortunate because we just don't see

a lot of upside on this particular vaccine, but that's what they're now counting on at the NIH. Yeah, I guess that's my question, right? The critics of RNA vaccines or MRNA vaccines say that they don't, you know, they don't catch mutations, that there's questions about them. and they want to go back to whole virus vaccines the way we used to do it. One, how do you respond to the questioning of the efficacy or safety of veterinary vaccines, and what are the downsides of going back to the old way of doing it? Well, first, the old way of doing it was no longer used because it didn't work all that well. Actually, believe it or not, a split-cell vaccine, which we have now is where we break the

virus up a bit, is actually provides more contact with different parts of the virus that would otherwise be protected as a whole virus that gives you a better immune response. So we abandoned HOSL, you know, 40 years ago because it was not providing with us with good results. Somehow, I think there are some that now believe that just because it's on the hands of the current leadership at the NIH, it's suddenly going to change and be different. We don't know how. Our center actually is responsible for tracking all influenza vaccine work in the world.

and we have a website that's maintained that actually today you can go on it and find out exactly every product that's out there where it's at in terms of its research, what phases it and what it's dealing with. And so we really have some expertise in flu vaccine evaluation. And I can tell you that the virus from the NIH at this point does not even rank anywhere near of interest to most researchers at all. You know, obviously $500 million is a lot of money. Can the private sector step in here? Are the pharmaceutical companies continue to develop these vaccines, or do they need government support to do it?

Well, this is where it gets more complicated. And I say that because number one is that there was about $500 million already put in by industry. And that, I think, is going to evaporate quickly because the handwriting is on the wall. Why invest in something for which the U.S. government is not going to support or move forward? And so, if anything, we've lost a lot more than $500 million in terms of research dollars. The second thing is, it's just going to have a dampening effect, I think, on a number of biotech sides in the United States because they see this uncertainty. You know, we've heard people talk about the business impact of the terrorists. It's about the uncertainty. Well, now there's even more uncertainty about what this administration will do, not based on science, but largely based on ideology.

What will they do? And so I think you're going to see a lot of companies that would otherwise be in this business actually getting out or moving to a country outside the United States. And so you brought up influenza several times here. We are right now watching very carefully bird flu in this country with obviously fears that it could be communicable to humans. I assume this affects that our efforts to prepare for that as well. It does. And it's really important when we talk about influenza. We're talking about all the viruses, whether it be bird flu or seasonal flu, whatever that goes on and causes the pandemic. But let me also remind people, as much as they don't want to hear this, and they surely don't find it necessarily moving because they just don't believe it. But one of the concerns that we've had is that the kind of coronavirus that we had with COVID was not the worst of the worst of the viruses. This particular virus actually was highly infectious, but actually killed it about a rate of about one to one and a half percent of the population that it infected. If you look at SARS and MERS, two other coronaviruses, SARS hitting in 2003 in China, spreading around the world somewhat and brought under control. MERS taking off 2012. You know, we saw it too. Those viruses killed between 20 and 35 percent of the people.

but they weren't that infectious. And so we were able to contain them. It wasn't like dealing with the wildfire. It wasn't like dealing with the wind. Well, in the last few months, we've now identified a new coronavirus in a bat in China that actually has the characteristics of transmission like COVID and has the ability to kill like SARS and MERS. So it's got the two worst things you'd want to see in one virus. That virus could be the cause of a pandemic tomorrow, which,

Imagine instead of having 1.5% of the population dying, you're now talking about 20, 25%. That is not just scary talk. That is real. You know, nobody wanted to believe the COVID pandemic was going to occur. Look what it did. And now I'm telling you, we need to be better prepared just for what could be a much worse kind of pandemic. And is it that this technology, like would you start developing a vaccine for that now or it's just when that possibly became a pandemic, the capacity? to quickly spin up a vaccine goes down because we are not supporting the development of these vaccines? The answer is yes and yes. What I mean by that is that our goal with both influenza and coronavirus vaccines is to get ones that are more universal.

They would cover a broad brush of them. And that's actually part of this work that we've been doing with the vaccine roadmaps. And so wouldn't it be ideal if you had a vaccine that you could take and eight years later, suddenly a pandemic breaks out with a totally different virus, but you still have protection. So we're working on that very thing. In the meantime, if you can't get that, at least what you want to have is the capability of making an effective vaccine against the virus that emerged, and you can make it in such quantity quickly enough that you can actually have an impact around the world.

You know, we say often, and it may sound trite, but it's really critical. Vaccines are important, but not that important until it become a vaccination. And so the key feature is going to be, can we get people to take it? Which was actually the third point I was going to make about Mr. Kennedy's comments. He, you know, again, created fear in the minds of many people by what he said. These vaccines aren't safe. You know, the benefits do not outweigh the risk. You know, you leave people like with statements like that are just factually not true.

Of course, that's going to diminish interest in the vaccines. If there are people out there who are, you know, we now have the federal government of the United States spreading anti-vaccine, conspiracy theories, anti-vaccine misinformation, if people are, have questions, you know, concerns, like, where should they go to get good information about vaccines right now? Well, this is one of the challenges. The federal government agencies used to be one of the most reliable sources, NIHNCDC. You can't trust them now. You can't. There's some very incredibly qualified people who still work there. There's not everybody's gone.

But the problem is that the leadership in both cases are now ones of people who are inserting into whatever they put out, ideological information, not scientific information. And so that's a challenge. I think it's going to be places, and I surely don't want to sound self-serving here, but our center, for example, has a major website presence where we have news every day. we keep, it's current every hour. And so there's places you can go get that. The information is linked, not just what's on our site, but whatever credible information

is out there. So we kind of do the actual evaluation of should this information be linked. So there are places like that. There's centers at Brown. There's a center at Johns Hopkins. There's our center that are providing, I think, the information that people can count on and use. Well, Dr. Osterholm, I would say when I heard this announcement, I thought it was bad.

But now after talking to you, I realize it's really, really bad, and I'm quite concerned. But thank you very much for this information. It's important for our listeners to know the consequences of these decisions coming out of HHS. Thanks, Dan. We're going to go to a quick break, but one reminder before we do that. If you need an outlet for all the rage you're feeling processing the news, highly recommend Hysteris YouTube series, This Fucking Guy. Every month, hysteria hosts Aaron Ryan and Alyssa Master Monaco take a deep dive into the worst people in politics.

This is the copy they told me to read. Uh-oh, haven't read it yet. Think of it like a true crime series where the crime is always someone who sucks having too much power and influence. That's awesome. Great copy. The show has covered Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Stephen Miller, my buddy, and lots more. But the new episode of this fucking guy is all about DHS secretary, ICE agent, cosplayer, and noted dog killer, Christy Nome. Wow.

exciting. Also, check out this week's South Park. Great, great Christy Knoem content, which we covered on our YouTube channel, the Pod Save America YouTube channel. You should check it out. Subscribe to the Pod Save America YouTube channel because, you know, when people are searching for Sydney's Sweeney discourse, we don't want Megan Kelly's show to come up. We want Pod Save America to come up, right? That's the genius behind your Twitter fight. Pod Save America is brought to you by Rocket Money. A lot of people aren't aware of how much they spend each month. Do you know how many subscriptions you pay for?

No. What about how much... I haven't used Rocket Money in a while. You spend on takeout or delivery. I don't want to know that. It's probably more than you think, but there's an app designed to help you manage your money better. Rocket Money is a personal finance app that helps find and cancel your unwanted subscriptions.

Monitors are spending and helps lower your bills so you can grow your savings. Their dashboard lays out your total financial. financial picture, including bill due dates and paydays in a way that's easy to digest. You can even automatically create custom budgets based on your past spending. Rocket Money will even try to negotiate lower bills for you. The app automatically scans your bills to find opportunities to save and then goes back to work to get you better deals. They even talk to customer service so you don't have to.

Get alerts if your bills increase in price, if there's unusual activity in your accounts, if you're close to going over budget, and even when you're doing a good job. Rocket Money's 5 million members have saved a total of 500 million and canceled subscriptions. With members saving up to $740 a year when they use all of the app's premium features, cancel your unwanted subscriptions and reach your financial goals faster with RocketMoney. Go to rocketmoney.com slash crooked. Go today. That's rocketmoney.com slash crooked.

Rocketmoney.com slash crooked. All right. A few hopefully lighter items before we go. Starting with a quick check-in on what those zany Cuomo brothers are up to. So there's Andrew. who's refusing to take no for an answer from the voters of New York in his quesotic mission to run for mayor as an independent. And we learned this week that he may get some help in that mission

from another New Yorker who doesn't take no for an answer when he loses Donald Trump. The New York Times reports that Trump is considering getting more involved in the mayor's race and that he and Cuomo spoke by phone after the primary. Cuomo, who's trying to sell himself as the hard-boiled vet who can take on Trump, also told business leaders this week that he actually doesn't want to. want to fight with Trump. And he thinks they'll basically see eye to eye. So, Dan, I'm no political expert here. Is Donald Trump's endorsement, the one you're looking for when you're trying to

win over the voters of New York City? Is that a helpful endorsement in New York? I would, Donald Trump made gains in New York City in 2024, but he still got his ass kicked. And so it's sort of a crazy thing. Like, it just speaks to the absolute cynicism of Andrew Cuomo, which is his path to victory is essentially being the Republican nominee who then gets a slice of the Democratic electorate. And so that's why he doesn't want to fight Trump anymore. He's trying to get Curtis Slewa's votes and some of Eric Adams' votes. That's how that's his cause. There is no path for him as the candidate of independence and some Democrats. He knows he can't win with Democrats. And so he's completely changing his stripes. He ran as the guy who the one guy

who was tough enough to take on Trump. But now that the voters said, no way, he's changing entirely who he is, is in a last ditch pitifully desperate attempt to win election. How excited do you think Zoran Mamdani is about Trump potentially getting involved in this election? He did a little press avail about this and the excitement seemed palpable, I would say. Their campaign must be like, yes, more. Please come campaign for Andrew Cuomo or Eric Adams or both or neither. Just come to New York. Say nice things about him. So unfortunately, that wasn't the only Cuomo in the news this week. Andrew's equally brilliant brother Chris, former CNN anchor, now News Nation anchor, he attacked AOC on Twitter this week over a video of a speech she gave on the house floor about the Sidney-Sweeney jeans ad. The only problem? The video was a deep fake, clearly identified as such, and only sounded like a real speech if you're an absolute fucking moron.

Here's a sample. Sydney Sweeney looks like an Aryan goddess. and the American Eagle jeans campaign is blatant Nazi propaganda. I mean, fuck. Watching that sultry little temptress squeeze into a Canadian tuxedo three sizes too small

with her bouncy little fun bags on the screen staring at you piercing through the core of your soul with those ocean blue eyes that could resurrect the furor from his grave in Argentina. Honestly, it gets better, worse, better.

It's funnier. So the younger Cuomo posted an outraged reaction, reading nothing about Hamas? What? Or people burning Jews cars? But Sweeney Jeansad? Deserve time on floor of Congress? What happened to this party? I'm just, I'm speaking like this because the spellings were all over the place.

Lots of typos. Fight for small business, not for small culture wars. He really unloaded a lot in one tweet. after being mocked by the entire internet not often the entire internet comes together for something anymore but they did for this called out by AOC herself Cuomo replied with a sort of apology

not really reading in part quote you are correct that was a deep fake but it really does sound like you no it doesn't before doubling down on the Hamas thing demanding that she send him a video of her demanding that Hamas surrender immediately

So that's it. We just all got to, everyone send your videos of you calling on Hamas to surrender to Quirce Cuomo by EOD. Thank you. So I'm embarrassed to admit this, but I watched a three-minute clip of Chris Cuomo from his show addressing this controversy. Yes. Now, I watched it on the internet because I would not know how to find. That's a real, you're a real sick of. I appreciate that. If you told me that the winning lottery numbers for tomorrow's Powerball, we're going to be a broadcast on News Nation tonight, I would not be able to get that. I would not be able to get that. I would not be. any richer. But I watched it. And I would say, I know Chris Cuomo a little bit because I used to do political commentaries. He used to, he never invited me to the gym.

I was not a spotter for him. But I used to do CNN, like I was a CNN political commentator for a few years. And like the, like America's centrist Jimbrose stick is a lot. But I actually really thought he would just like genuinely apologize and just like, I fucked up. Like that is something I think in the past.

he might have done before he was fired from his job for advising his brother on his brother's scandals while he was at CNN, but it's in here and or there. But he didn't. The three minute clip is basically that is that tweet. He just, he just, he says, I, I messed up. It was a deep fake. It was AI, but how it like, but it sounded like her. And then he went on a tirade about how she, you know, has not demanded that Hamas surrender, which is the one thing Hamas has said they're waiting for. I'm telling you, they are in the tunnels. Yes. And they are like, if enough people on social media, libs especially, call for us to surrender. We're coming out of those tunnels with our hands up. That's it. The war could be over. Yeah. Un fucking real.

Speaking of the Sydney-Sweeney controversy. Oh, yes. We here at Pod Save America, we found ourselves in the middle of a right-wing discourse on it this week. Uh, my It's my fault. I started it. Yeah, it is your fault. Please enjoy the following clip of Megan Kelly and Charlie Kirk, appraising our merits. My own thought on it is, having engaged in a back and forth at length with one of the Pod Save America guys last night, again, who remains a mystery to me. The only one I know is that Tommy guy. I don't know the other ones.

And this guy seemed genuinely hurt that I didn't know who he was after arguing with him. And then even one of the other guys. I don't know. Tommy Vitter or something, I think. Maybe one of these days, you'll solo a show, and then I'll learn your name. But until then, you're just one of the Pod Save America guys. Sorry. Not everybody can do it. And it's just a low testosterone group of complainers and whiners.

But please continue, Megan. I don't know. Where do you want to begin there? I mean, I don't know why I don't ask them this day, but Tommy, what's going on? Yeah, I mean, I asked Tommy. What's the backstory? He refuses to disclose. Oh, does he?

Yeah. And the way she said Tommy, it was very, it was very loving in an otherwise pretty tough couple seconds for Megan, it was like, except Tommy. I know Tommy. Yeah, it's very strange. I would also say what I'm most, am I outraged by the low testosterone thing? No. No, I don't.

What I'm outraged by is that she does not know about the fucking hit podcast, offline with John Favro, a solo podcast with your goddamn name in it. This isn't a, this isn't a big thing either, but we're using solo as a verb now. We're soloing. I think that's a verb. I think when you are in music and podcasting, I think you solo. She's solo. Okay. I'll give her that then. I will say her bit to me about not knowing me. Like, I don't give a fuck if Megan Kelly ever knows me or I talk to her or whatever. It just doesn't matter. But the bit just seems really weird and forced to me. Like, she spent a good part of her day responding to me on Twitter, a person she has followed on Twitter for years and has replied to before.

And the reason she knows my name is because it's right there in the Twitter account that she was replying to for several hours. I mean, that was a wild use of your time. Well, you know what? I don't get into Twitter fights anymore that I don't think I can win. And this one was so fucking ridiculous because it started with Megan Kelly lashing out at Beyonce in a Levi's ad. And the people who told us for a couple weeks that the left was losing their mind over Sidney Sweeney and jeans and how fucking crazy, she decided to then go crazy over Beyonce in a Levi's ad, called her fake, called her fame fake, called her success fake, Beyonce, who has just like one of the most talented, successful people in the world. And it's like you can not like her music if you don't want, but what? what are you doing? And my only response to Megan, which wasn't really a response to her,

but I was like, here's the thing. You take a poll of the country and I don't know, 80, 90% of people would be like, I like the Sydney Sweeney ad, I like the Beyonce ad. I like both of them. Or at the very least, I don't dislike either of them because most people are fucking normal. And Megan Kelly is not. As are all the people fighting about this online. I sent you some polling that buttressed your argument with Megyn Kelly. Did you use that? Did you reply with that? No, because then I saw The New York Times story did a whole, they did a analysis of social media about this, that just a time story just ran.

And, you know, my whole contention was this is in a real fight. This is a couple people on the left posted TikToks and tweets about this. The right then saw those lefties, I don't even know if they were lefties, the people who complained about the Sydney-Sweeney ads who were saying, it was, you know, eugenics or Nazi or whatever. And then the Wright found those. And then they decided to do a couple weeks of roadblocked coverage of this, quote-unquote, scandal. A bunch of media outlets wrote about the scandal. They did not necessarily criticize Sidney.

I believe that in terms of media outlets, it was like one MSNBC op-ed on their page and, like, one Washington Post story. That's about it. And then everyone else wrote about the controversy. So the New York Times said, in fact, by the time, right-wing users were in an uproar. Only a few thousand posts on X mentioned Ms. Sweeney, according to data by Tweetbinder or social media analytics

company. Fewer than 10% of those expressed clear criticism of the actress or ad, according to the analysis by the Times, which used AI to help flag posts for review. Lovely. Overall, there were three times as many posts supportive of the campaign and Ms. Sweeney on X as there

were posts critical of them in the days after the campaign began, an analysis by the time showed. Nearly three quarters of posts that were critical of Ms. Sweeney or the ad had fewer than 500 views. Here's my question to you. Why are you telling me this? Why are you telling me this? I want everyone to know. Why aren't you telling Megan Kelly this? Well, I did, I, um, well, I call her Laura Ingram now. Actually, today I called her Ann Coulter, because we're just, I'm just going to do that now. And so I did post the screenshots from the piece in my last exchange with Megan right

before I came in here. I know. So you don't know if she's, but you don't know. You don't know if she's been replying to you. I don't know. No, I don't know. That's exciting. Jane Coastern, our Whataday host, came into the office yesterday, came into my office yesterday and said, please stop, stop arguing with Megan Kelly. And I promise Jane, I would. But then the Times story came and it was too good not to post. And also, I wasn't going to talk about this. And then Megan did what Elijah predicted she would do and decided to talk about the whole Twitter controversy on her show with Charlie Kirk. Left me no choice. Yeah, that's fair. I just would like to remind her,

listeners that we, every year we do our New Year's resolutions. And we all had different things who fucking crushed theirs. Mine was related to my physical mental health. I think loved when to read more books. I can't even imagine what Ernest thing Tommy had. And yours was to post more. And you for the first time are crushing it. I've never, I've never made a New Year's resolution that I have kept more than this one. Well, which is a great bounce back from your, I'm going to volunteer more from last year. It's like giving up broccoli for Lent, you know? You're just like lead into it.

Next year it will be drink more. It's perfect. That's our show for today. Thanks to Dr. Michael Osterholm for coming on. I'll be back on the feed on Sunday talking with Pete Buttigieg and answering some of your questions. Be sure to check it out. Have a great weekend.

If you want to listen to Pod Save America ad free or get access to our subscriber Discord and exclusive podcasts, consider join. joining our Friends of the Pod community at cricket.com slash friends or subscribe on Apple podcasts directly from the Pod Save America feed. Also, please consider leaving us a review to help boost this episode and everything we do here at Crooked. Pod Save America is a Crooked Media production. Our producers are David Toledo, Emma Ilic Frank, and Saul Rubin. Our associate producer is Farah Safari. Austin Fisher is our senior producer. Reed Churlin is our executive editor. Adrian Hill is our head of news and politics. The show is mixed and edited by

Andrew Chadwick. Jordan Cantor is our sound engineer with audio support from Kyle Seiglin and Charlotte Landis. Matt DeGroote is our head of production. Naomi Sengel is our executive assistant. Thanks to our digital team, Elijah Cohn, Haley Jones, Ben Heffcote, Mia Kelman, Carol Pellevieve, David Tolls, and Ryan Young. Our production staff is proudly unionized with the Writers Guild of America East.

Thank you.