Pod Save America - Trump Mocks Israel, Speaker Race in Chaos

Episode Date: October 12, 2023

As the crisis in the Middle East deepens, the Republican presidential candidates respond with their best: Donald Trump praises Hezbollah, Tim Scott says Biden "has blood on his hands," and Ron DeSantis tries to make it about the southern border—the American one. Meanwhile, the House GOP still can't agree on a Speaker, "MAGA Mama Bear" Kari Lake enters the critical Arizona Senate race, and George Santos and Bob Menendez each get stunning new indictments.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.Join the World-Wide Digital Experience "Pod Save America Live from DC" on October 19 at 8 PM ET with Co-Host Symone Sanders and Special Guests Senator John Fetterman, Chef Jose Andres, and Jennifer Carroll Foy. Tickets: https://www.moment.co/psa  

Welcome to Pod Save America. I'm Jon Favreau. I'm Dan Pfeiffer. On today's show, Republicans nominate Steve Scalise as Speaker, but it's still not clear he has the votes to get Save America. I'm Jon Favreau. I'm Dan Pfeiffer. On today's show, Republicans nominate Steve Scalise as Speaker, but it's still not clear he has the votes to get the job. Trump protege Carrie Lake jumps into the pivotal Arizona Senate race. And Congressman George Santos is hit with 10 more felony charges and is somehow still in Congress. But first, the biggest story in the world and in U.S. politics continues to be Israel's response to the horrific terrorist attack by Hamas.

This is now a war that so far left thousands dead, including at least 27 American citizens. There are still at least 150 hostages in Gaza. That also includes some Americans. And there's a real fear that other Middle Eastern countries could join the conflict. As usual, Tommy and Ben have been doing an outstanding job covering this for Pod Save the World. So make sure you're up to speed on that show. We're going to start the show by talking about how the war is affecting American politics. Here's President Biden during a roundtable with Jewish leaders at the White House on Wednesday, where he again offered his full support for Israel. what was going on walking through those gates. You could not fail to understand

as a country what was going on. And that's a fact. It had a profound impact on my children and my grandchildren. Some thought taking a 14-year-old grandchild would not make a mistake, but it took them one at a time. I got three more to go. And folks, it's important. In the days ahead, we're going to continue to work closely with our partners in Israel and around the world to ensure Israel has what it needs to defend its citizens and cities and to respond to these attacks. The United States has Israel's back, and I have yours as well, both at home and abroad. So the president also gave a pretty big speech on Tuesday, addressed the nation, that was widely praised by Jewish and Israeli leaders. The Israeli ambassador to the U.S. called it the most pro-Israel speech from a president in history. How do you think most Americans will react to Biden's response so far?

on so far? This is clearly, and for obvious reasons, one of those stories that happens abroad that's captured the nation's imagination. It is dominating news coverage, conversations. People are heartbroken and horrified at the images and the stories they're seeing. Obviously, our country has a very close relations with Israel, a very special relationship. As I'm sure you do, I have friends who have family who still live in Israel, people who have been called up into the reserves as part of this, who are living in fear of their lives. People are horrified by what is happening to innocent civilians in Gaza. And I think President Biden has addressed this in a way that people will appropriately see as strong, resolute as a commander in chief, you're seeing both in the round table that we played the clip of and then the speech you're seeing,

where I think Biden is at his best, which is delivering a clear, strong message as commander in chief and empathy and understanding for what is happening in the world. And I think his response thus far is being rightly praised. Yeah, I mean, one thing you can say for sure is it is easy to tell when Biden is delivering a speech or making remarks that he truly deeply believes in and feels passionate about. And I think that's been the case with almost all of his remarks since the attack. I think, you know, right now, most people in this country are seeing images and hearing horrific stories of, you know, horrific, gruesome terrorist attacks that have claimed theation of those attacks and for his support for the people who were attacked. Second question, do you think Biden faces any political risk by offering unconditional support for Israel at this point? for Israel at this point? The way this has been discussed on Twitter, on cable, is this idea that the Democratic Party has moved left on Israel in recent years. And you do see this in polling, that there is less sort of reflexive support for Israel. But I think that that is a

overly simplistic understanding of what has happened. For most of the adult lives of a lot of Democratic voters, they've only really seen Israel under Netanyahu. It's not so much the Democrats per se have moved left, although certainly some have. It is also that the Israeli government and how they have handled Palestinians, their efforts for peace, have moved to the right, and that there is much more open criticism of that, both among voters and certainly among elected Democrats. There's no doubt in my mind that President Biden is deeply concerned about civilian casualties in Gaza, from innocent Palestinians who do not support Hamas, do not support certainly what Hamas did over the weekend, and would leave if they could,

but they can't. But he's made a decision, the best way to influence Israeli conduct is not to publicly or even privately pressure Bibi himself, it's to do it through other channels in the government. There may be a point in time in the coming days and weeks where President Biden will be under pressure to say something publicly about how Israel is responding in Gaza. We are not at that point yet. And so we'll have to see what happens then. But as of right now, I think he's approaching this in a way that sounds right and feels right to most people, but there are certainly risks down the line. Yeah. I mean, the poll you said, it's a Pew poll from March. It's been going around.

Democratic voters said their sympathies in the Middle East lie more with the Palestinians than the Israelis, 49 percent to 38 percent. But again, that was in March and that was before this horrific terrorist attack. I would not expect to see the same polling results today. today. But then, of course, who knows, a week from now, a month from now, six months from now, I do think one thing that we have learned in this country from the aftermath of 9-11 is that what's most important enough and difficult to do is to go after terrorists and terrorist organizations like Hamas without making policy decisions that lead to more war, death, and suffering for everyone involved. And I think if several weeks from now, we're seeing more Palestinian deaths, more Israeli deaths, a war that has spread to other Middle Eastern countries, the political dynamics could change very quickly. But, you know, as you said, Biden has made the decision, and there's some reporting on this in Playbook today, that back when the last Israel-Gaza conflict in 2021, Biden's view then was that only by unequivocally backing Israel did he have any chance of influencing Netanyahu if the conflict escalated to a point that the American president needed to urge restraint. And so it seems like he's doing that again now. And he did, you know, on Wednesday at that same event, he said that he told Bibi, quote, with all the anger and frustration, it is important that Israel operates in Gaza according

to the rules of war. And I think that is very important to emphasize first and foremost for moral reasons, but also because not following the rules of war is one way that a justified response devolves into a larger war that leads to a lot more people dying, Palestinians, Israelis, and maybe a lot of other people. So it is something to keep in mind. One group of Americans decidedly unimpressed with Biden's response, Republican politicians. As always, they seem to be competing to see who can make the most unhinged comments about the president. And leading the pack right now is self-professed nice guy, Tim Scott, the guy who says conservatives are, quote, starved for hope. Let's listen. So while Hamas carried out these attacks, Joe Biden has blood on his hands. His weakness invited the attack. His cash giveaways to Iran helped fund terrorism.

And after the attack, his administration suggested that Israel just stand down. I don't know. I think Lovett's going to start writing better speeches for his favorite candidate. That was Tim Scott's second comment about this, second set of comments about this. So he did a first set of comments, which no one remembers because he didn't say something completely fucking crazy. And then he's like, I got to up the crazy so that I can get more attention. And there it is. You know, so now he now he's accusing Joe Biden of having blood on his hands. What is going on there? And do you think anyone believes that shit who doesn't already despise Joe Biden? No one believes that who doesn't despise Joe Biden. And Tim Scott's not trying

to appeal to anyone who doesn't despise Joe Biden. Tim Scott's problem is he is losing and he is losing badly. And he's not in one of these situations, a little bit like Nikki Haley, where voters just aren't seeing him. Tim Scott has a bunch of billionaires like Larry Ellison who are pouring tens of million dollars of money into ads for his campaign through a super PAC. He's had as many ads, if not more, run on his behalf than any other person running, including Donald Trump. And voters aren't buying what he's selling. So he's decided to make a desperate ploy to go from being the nice guy anti-Trump to being just a low-rent version of Trump. I have no concerns about this politically for Joe Biden. Everyone watching, you can just see how Tim Scott even read the lines. He didn't believe them. He practiced them

in a mirror to try to sound like someone who thought they might sound sincere. It's totally ridiculous, totally embarrassing and pretty gross on Tim Scott's behalf. Very gross. It's just, it's like, you know better. And you're just, you're doing this because you're 50 points down to a guy that you're too chicken shit to attack that you're actually running against in the primary. So you're out there saying stuff like you have a right wing government in Israel, the place that was attacked, praising Joe Biden. But an American politician, a right wing politician in America is saying that Joe Biden has blood on his hands. Like,

it's fucking absurd. So speaking of the guy who's 50 points ahead, Donald Trump, Ron DeSantis and a few others have moved on to another line of attack. I'm pretty sure I jokingly predicted this on our text chain and then it actually happened. Let's listen. Instead of keeping terrorists and terrorist sympathizers out of America, the Biden administration is inviting them in. You know why? Because he's got a boss. Who's his boss? Barack Hussein Obama. Do you think our enemies knowing that we have an open border are not taking advantage of that? There's going to be a terrorist attack in this country that we're going

to be able to trace back to the southern border. On one hand, it seems like it'd be a bit of a challenge for Hamas to hop on a plane from Gaza to Mexico. I'm not sure if they have direct flights right now. But on the other, there are plenty of polls that consistently show that Biden's weakest approval ratings are on immigration and border issues. Even some Democratic governors and mayors have been criticizing him recently. So does this attack worry you or is it just too nutty to stick and too many steps? Your prediction that this would happen was so good because it had already happened. Because that morning I accidentally stumbled on Meet the Press while trying to find the London football game. And I saw Nikki Haley make this exact attack. And it took me back to 2014 when Tom

Kott was running for the Senate. And he said that ISIS was going to cross the border during a previous surge in migrant crossings at the border. Republicans can't help themselves here. There is a very legitimate political vulnerability around border issues in immigration. For sure, it seems they've done a very good job of weaponizing it, making it seem worse than it is, taking the worst parts of it. They even attacked Joe Biden for when he does a good job. You constantly see them tweeting out, you know, X number of kilos of fentanyl were caught at the border today.

It's like, yes, that's the point. They caught the people or X number of people detained at the border. Yes, they got them. And, but this is once again, a bunch of people were trying to, they're not trying to appeal to swing voters or Democrats or anyone else. They're trying to show how ridiculous or MAGA friendly they are to MAGA voters. Yeah. Like I don't, I don't, I don't think many people are dumb enough to think Hamas is coming over the border, but people aren't happy with the situation at the border. It could make them think that some people crossing the border may want to cause us harm, right? But the idea that, you know, there's like civilians in Gaza Strip right now are struggling to get out. They can't get out.

They can't escape. But like, yeah, Hammas is getting on planes and they're going to mexico it's just fucking absurd uh and it's again it's crass and it's just it's another example of republican politicians taking a crisis and just trying to figure out what political opportunity um they can what political advantage they can get out of the crisis um attacking Joe Biden. So pretty gross. Donald Trump, who is always as shrewd as he is thoughtful in these situations, gave a speech in West Palm Beach yesterday that may have created a bit of a problem for him among supporters of Israel and his fellow Republicans. Let's listen. But Hezbollah, they're very smart. And they have a national defense minister or

somebody saying, I hope Hezbollah doesn't attack us from the north. So the following morning they attacked. They might not have been doing it. But if you listen to this jerk, you would attack from the north because he said that's our weak spot. I'll never forget that Bibi Netanyahu let us down. I'll never forget that Bibi Netanyahu let us down. That was a very terrible thing, I will say that. And so when I see sometimes the intelligence, you talk about the intelligence, or you talk about some of the things that went wrong over the last week, they've got to straighten it out because they're fighting potentially a very big force. They're fighting potentially Iran.

And when they have people saying the wrong things everything they say is being digested by these people because they're vicious and they're smart so ron desantis uh remember him he's barely still around barely uh he immediately tweeted that trump's comments were absurd hate to say it agree with ron desantis what was going on there what was trump thinking uh like what where did come from? Is that just like him being a pundit? Him just freelancing? Him just trying to take credit for everything? Because he also he was talking about, you know, when Bibi let us down and and, you know, they they killed the the IRGC guy, Soleimani. the IRGC guy, Soleimani. And he's like, I got it done. And then Bibi tried to take credit for it.

But it's just like, what was he doing? What was that? You asking after playing a Trump clip, what was he thinking is such a funny way to do it? He was thinking about nothing. But like, you think in a situation like this, he's like, all right, I'm going to follow the other Republican. Like there's a playbook out there that the party is using. Right. Joe Biden has blood on his hands.

We all love Israel. Right. Like there's even if he was being crass and it would be an easy playbook to follow. Instead, he's got it. He's just got to insert himself in there and be like, you know, Bibi, I had some problems. I'm much stronger, much stronger with Iran. You wouldn't believe how strong I am. We have talked in recent months on this podcast about how Trump has been more disciplined. You see him reading the prompter more.

He's clearly being prepped for his interviews, particularly the ones with mainstream media, in ways in which he never was at any previous point in his political career. This is not one of those times. This is where he has defaulted back to cable news viewer candidate. He saw that Klesol, some clip from the Israeli minister online. Maybe he heard someone talk about it and he just decided to start, open his mouth and let it all come out without any... He's just telling you what's on his mind, just telling you what he's thinking. He hasn't really formulated the thoughts yet. He's obviously... I'll tell you, it gives me a little hope. Yeah, it is honestly one of the more hopeful moments we've had as it comes to the 2024 election is that he has not changed that much and he still will, in high leverage moments, default to being

the general dunderhead candidate that he is. I mean, I know this is a bit of a tired and unproductive game, but imagine if Joe Biden- But let's play it. a tired and unproductive game, but imagine if Joe Biden... But let's play it. But imagine if Joe Biden in the last week had said in a speech that Bibi let him down, the Israeli defense minister is a jerk, Hezbollah is smart, and Israel needs to strengthen themselves up. Imagine that. Also, like, last month, last month, during Rosh Hashanah, Trump said the Jewish Americans who didn't support him suspicious in light of how Bibi's government would benefit politically from the attack.

That was Trump's dinner date. I mean, I just you're right. It's an unproductive game, but it has to be said all the time. I don't really, I guess we could do some sort of exegesis of modern media culture, but it's mind-boggling that Trump's comments are not, they are a bigger deal in Israel than they are in the United States. And understandably, I understand why people in Israel would be upset at Donald Trump attacking Israel at this moment, but Donald Trump's running to be president of the United States.

He's the leader of Republican primaries, up by 50 points. He makes absurd comments that if they had come from a, which we will get to in a second, from a member of Congress in the Democratic caucus, are treated as a bigger deal than Donald Trump saying it. We're just like, ha, ha, ha, what a knucklehead, who cares? And it's part of a pattern of behavior. It's a demonstration of how he's unfit for office. It does speak to an asymmetry in the media environment that Democrats do not have the capacity and maybe the willingness to lift these things up and make Republicans respond to them. I mean, it's fucking wild. All right. So as you were just alluding to, there's also this Axios headline that seems like it was designed to trigger just about everyone. Squad comments on Hamas reignite Dems Israel tensions. So this is a story about how

some of the most progressive House Democrats initially reacted to the Hamas attack, especially Cori Bush, who called for ending U.S. aid to Israel and Rashida Tlaib, who declined to criticize Hamas and blamed, quote, the apartheid system that creates the dehumanizing conditions that can lead to resistance. When White House Press Secretary Corinne Jean-Pierre was asked about these comments, she called them, quote, wrong, repugnant and disgraceful. And now Republicans are hammering every Democrat who hasn't condemned these comments. What's your take on this on this drama? That you and I have made a series of very poor life choices that require us to, A read that story, and then B, sit in front of a microphone and talk about it. Yeah, that's who we are.

That's our decision. The lack of foresight there on our part. It is an example of how the political media culture in the most consequential important moments drags us to the least consequential, least important parts of any one story. A small percentage of Democrats said something that a lot of Democrats disagree with. And now every other Democrat has to publicly come out and condemn that. To what end? What does that accomplish? What is the politics of that? As we were saying earlier, why aren't Republicans forced to condemn what Donald Trump has said? Like, why are Republicans forced to imagine? Let's just take an example. Imagine if during the Democratic primary, Eric Swalwell or Julian Castro or some other person who was not going to win the primary said Donald Trump had blood on his hands for an attack against Israel. Every single Democrat

would have to- We'd be having a problem. Every single Democrat would have to condemn that. And that did not happen here. And it Republicans with some enabling of the media are putting Democrats position where the focus is on our division instead of the fact that 98% or 99% of Democrats are unified in what the response should be in their comments in support of Israel. And we're worrying about the statements of a small handful of Democrats, which just it makes no sense. It is not, it's annoying. Yeah. I mean, look, it's the incentive structure for Republican politicians. It's who they are. It's, but it's also, it's the media environment, it's social media, a little preview, you know, of offline this week, Max and I are going to be talking about this, but like we have all been hit with the most extreme or dumbest or most inappropriate comments or conspiracies or lies from all over the place over the last week if you are trying to follow along on social media. And then, of course, things from social media can jump to cable and then they can actually, you know, affect actual politician

statements and responses. And so it's a complete fucking mess. I mean, look, I think to the to the statements themselves, like I think it is entirely valid to criticize the Israeli government, to urge restraint, to call for peace, to express sympathy for Palestinians and concern for the loss of life on both sides. But I also think you can only do those things if you start with a clear and unequivocal statement that places the blame for these attacks on the Hamas terrorists who committed them. And I also think the reason that you have to do that is not necessarily just like performative or political. It's because you can't let people think that you might believe that terrorism is a legitimate or even understandable form of resistance. Israeli occupation of Gaza does not

justify or even explain someone deciding to murder children and babies, even though that occupation has led to suffering and death. And if you release a statement that isn't crystal clear on that point, it's not just that you're going to be criticized or shamed or whatever, you will lose the ability to have your more legitimate criticisms heard by people. And I think that is the problem. And look, you know, AOC, who's also been very critical of the Israeli government, she did it right. Like she released a statement that said, I condemn Hamas's attack in the strongest possible terms. No child and family should ever endure this kind of violence and fear. And this violence will not solve the ongoing oppression and occupation in the region. There you go. You did it. Look, like you said, it is a couple Democrats in

Congress. It's also been like a lot of student organizations and a lot of other organizations here and there. And again, it gets blown way out of proportion because we do not know how many people these organizations actually represent. They are kids oftentimes being dumb. And so it gets blown out of proportion, and like the whole left gets painted like this. But if you're someone who wants to persuade people about what you believe is terrible policy by a terrible government in Israel, then, you know, you have to at least condemn terrorist attacks when they happen. I mean, you're exactly right that you have to be able to hold several independent but related ideas in your head at the same time. That what Hamas did was horrendous, inhumane, inexcusable, and a response is 100% necessary. You also can believe

and should believe correctly, I think, that the Netanyahu government's policy in Gaza and the West Bank is substantively wrong, morally wrong, has made the situation worse, but does not in no way explain, justify what happened, and also believe that the Israeli government should do everything they possibly can to avoid civilian casualties in the response. All of those things can be true at the same time and understand that. What bothers me about this is that we are defaulting again to this sort of post-9-11 Iraq war performative politics of we're going to take the comments of a small handful of people, either a couple members of Congress, student organizations, and we are going to use them as an avatar for the entire Democratic Party, the entire left, the entire world of people who have real substantive moral criticisms of how the Israeli government under Netanyahu has conducted itself. I was talking to some people over the weekend who were not involved in politics in those days about Congress renaming French fries freedom fries because we were mad at France. The fact that the Dixie Chicks got essentially cancel cultured out of American life, couldn't perform in public because they were critical of Bush. I worked for a Democratic politician who criticized Bush while Bush was abroad after 9-11 and was basically destroyed at home politically.

And that part is, there is a very real conversation about policy here, the response here, what happens next. And we're focusing on the least relevant parts of it. The amount of time and energy dedicated to a small handful of statements from a small handful of students representing a small handful of student associations is so counterproductive and dumb against what is a very real ongoing tragedy with huge implications for the region and the world. Yeah. It is the fucked up world, political environment, media environment we live in. environment media environment we live in and so for those of us who you know condemn the attacks but also want a lasting peace in the middle east and and and believe that you know there should be

a two-state solution and all the other things that we all believe like it is incumbent upon all of us who are working towards that future to be as disciplined as possible in our statements, knowing that the world is as fucked up as you say it is and that that's out there. You know, it's just, I don't, and I think that's a lesson for like a lot of student activists too, that if you're like part of resistance and part of activism is some measure of discipline in what you say and how you say it. And that's not just performative, but it's to make sure that you retain the moral authority to fight for the cause that you believe is just.

Your goal is to persuade, not perform. That's right. All right. Believe it or not, Republicans found the time to focus on other issues this week, especially in the House, in a behind closed doors secret ballot vote on Wednesday. Steve Scalise won the nomination to be Speaker of the House, edging out Jim Jordan 113 to 99. But that's just Republicans. As we know, you need a majority of all House members to become Speaker. All the Democrats will vote for Hakeem Jeffries, which means Republicans can only afford to lose a few votes, exact number depending on who's in attendance. And already, some of the party's biggest attention seekers are saying they intend to vote for Jim Jordan on the floor. Let's listen. I'm not supporting Steve Scalise. I'll be voting for Jim Jordan. Unfortunately, Steve is going through a cancer battle of his own.

And, you know, I like Steve Scalise a lot and I like him so much. I would like to see him put his full efforts into defeating that. I plan on voting for Jim Jordan on the floor. I personally cannot in good conscience vote for someone who attended a white supremacist conference and compared himself to david duke so that was uh marjorie taylor green uh saying you can't have cancer and be speaker no she just loves him so much she loves him so much that she she wants him to all his energy on fighting cancer and not being speaker is really classy. And then Nancy Mace, who's just really trying to get attention every way she can. Wearing an A on her shirt because she has like a scarlet letter the other day because she said she's been silenced, which is funny because everywhere you look, there's a lot of Nancy Mace.

Also, she should read the book. Maybe not the message she's going for so as of this recording scalise doesn't have the votes there's still no speaker it's not clear what the holdouts actually want punchbowl estimates that uh scalise needs 107 more votes and that there are probably 20 to 30 never Scalise votes. We used to have never McCarthy. Now we got never Scalise. Though I got Matt Gates is for him.

Matt Gates was out there saying long live Speaker Scalise. So they got Gates on board, but now they've lost a whole bunch of others. What the hell is wrong with these people? And how do you think this gets resolved? Like, what is this? I have no idea how it gets resolved. I thought yesterday when we were working on the outline after Scalise won the nomination and then Jim Jordan came out and said that he was going to vote for Scalise and he offered to give the nominating speech. I thought we were on the glide path to Scalise

becoming speaker, the Republicans just realizing they don't have the energy to go through what they went through both in January and then last week with a thousand votes to try to get to 217 and not getting there. They would all just go with the path of least resistance. But alas, these people remain poorly acquainted with their own self-interest. And there's no idea how this – there is – Dave Wasserman of Click Political Report tweeted something that made a lot of sense to me. He says, there may be no Republican who can get 217. And the most interesting thing I've seen – and this is obviously going to change a thousand times after we've published this podcast, but is that there are some Republicans are thinking about how they can give Speaker pro-temporary Patrick McHenry, who's just sitting there in the seat holding the gavel and just kicking Democrats out of their offices, how they can give him more power so the House can start operating as a temporary fill-in, which may be the only thing they can do in the short term. Because it doesn't seem like Steve Scalise is getting there.

The worm seems to have turned against him. Jim Jordan clearly doesn't have the votes. Again, I know this is fantasy politics in this day and age. Give it to me, Sorkin. There's also some report. Hakeem Jeffries has been very clear that he's looking for ways to work with Republicans to elect a Republican speaker if they are willing to work with Democrats on a few issues, raising the threshold for the motion to vacate, a plan to fund the government beyond November

17th so we don't have a government shutdown, promise to bring legislation to the floor, providing aid to israel and ukraine of course republicans are not taking uh jeffries up on this yet though there's been some scuttlebutt that like maybe some moderate more moderate republicans if this floor fight now goes on forever we go with another 15 votes or 17 votes or 100 votes on the floor and everyone's screaming on tv all day maybe some republicans will be like yeah let's give the democrats some some some wins so that we can have a functioning house and still have a Republican speaker. I will not be holding my breath for that, but that is, they could do that, right?

If you want to be a responsible governing party, you're all out there screaming at the TV about how it's embarrassing and the world is watching. This is what the Ayatollah wants. I heard that from, I think, Mike McCall at the Foreign Relations Committee. As in Punchbowl Reader, the Ayatollah. Yeah, Hamas, this is what Hamas wants. They're watching cable. They're seeing Nancy Mace and they're cheering.

Here's the thing. Of course, this was not going to be resolved behind closed doors among Republicans because there were no television cameras there. The whole thing now is about getting attention. These people want to have a floor fight. They want to have roadblocked coverage of them all yelling on the floor of the house

and talking about why Steve Scalise sucks because he's, you know, establishment and a rhino and all the bullshit. And then they're going to talk about how great Jim Jordan is. And then they can all get on TV and that gets them grassroots fundraising and that gets them more fame. And that's why Nancy Mace is on like every side of every issue. You know, she's attacking her party on their abortion stance. But then she's with Jim Jordan.

She's on Steve Bannon's podcast, even though she voted to hold Steve Bannon in contempt of Congress and sent him to jail. The whole thing is fucking nuts. There's no ideology. There's no nothing at this party. They're just attention seeking fucking. It's wild. I don't know. Yeah. I mean, what is happening here is the direct result of a Republican party that is incapable of governing. If you hate government and your reason for existence as a political entity, the only thing that patches over all of your various ideological disputes is a desire to destroy government at every level, this is what you end up with. That's how you end up with Donald Trump as your president. That's how you end up without a speaker. It's how you end up with debt ceiling crisis, shutdowns. It's frankly how you end up with George Bush in Iraq and Katrina. It is an argument about why Republicans cannot be allowed near the levers of power for the

rest of time. Like this, this is it. This is what a Trump administration will be like again. This is what a Republican Senate will be like. This is the Republican Party. This is who they are. This is what they do. And it is dangerously dysfunctional. And it is just, it is a, it is a desperation for fame at any cost, right? And it's like these people would either,

they'd be fine being on a reality television show, an influencer, or a job in politics, because then they can maybe get a, get a show on Fox or they can go do a couple of cable hits while they have a nice office in Congress. That's all they want. That is all they want. And guess what? And one of them, one of them who went that route became president United States and is still

their fucking, you know, cult leader. I think it's actually a little different than just a desire for fame, pure fame, full stop. It is that they understand, and Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert and, frankly, Donald Trump have shown them that attention is power. You don't have influence in the Republican Party be able to raise online money by rising to be the ranking member of the Homeland Security Committee. It's by being a MAGA media superstar. Yeah.

Well, some of them certainly want power, but some of them, because, you know, like Steve Scalise has called in the holdouts and he's like, what do you want? What can I give you for your vote? And they're like, nothing. I just don't like you. I just want to yell about you on TV. He doesn't seem likable.

It's not like they're like, I have this secret legislation that's going to hurt people that I want you to pass. They're just like, well, I don't know. I just, I don't know. I want to get more airtime. Let's turn to the Senate, which Republicans are trying their hardest to fill with as many kooks as the house uh starting with arizona's most telegenic election denier and self-described maga mama bear carrie lake the former news anchor who lost her bid for governor in 2022 officially

launched her 2024 senate campaign this week complete with an endorsement from donald trump uh let's listen to her a little bit from her announcement speech. Well, let me tell you, this mama bear has a whole lot of fight left in her. And I'm really tired of watching our politicians retreat. They have surrendered far too many hills. We're on the final hill right now. And I'm not surrendering this hill. I am not going to retreat. I'm going to stand on top of this hill with every single one of you. And I know you're by my side as I formally announce my candidacy for the United States Senate. What is the hill? What hill?

Is the hill an issue? Again, there's no real ideology here. There's no issue. She's just on a hill somewhere. It's a little more like a grassy knoll than a hill, frankly. So a lot of Republicans and Democrats, including me, thought Lake would be a tough candidate to beat in 2022. Fortunately, we were all wrong. Now that she lost, there are some Democrats who've been hoping she'd get in the race. What do you think? I think you're not giving yourself enough credit. She was a hard candidate to beat.

Yeah, she was. She was. I thought that if there was going to be a MAGA election-denying candidate that won besides him back then, I thought she'd be one of the ones at the top of the list. She came the closest. She won by six-tenths of a percent on the same day that Mark Kelly beat Blake Masters by six percent. Blake Masters is just a historically bad candidate, which is why he's also running, by the way. We should say in this race, he's in single digits.

I thought he had dropped out. He did? I just saw a poll with him at like, maybe he is. He's at like four or five percent, and she him at like, maybe he is. He's at like, he's like four or 5%. She's at like 40%. I guess, I guess whether Blake Masters is running in this race is an existential question because he's not winning. So it's like, yeah, right. So what do you, what do you think about her entrance into this race?

I don't think we should take her lightly. She, there, I mean, there is a reason she did better than all the other MAGA extremists Trump facsimile candidates in 2022. She does the Trump Act better than anyone else. She is, I mean, tortured Hill metaphor aside, she has onstage charisma and appeal. She gets the entertainment part of the Trump show in ways that others don't. I would imagine, and we'll get to this in a sec, that the Democrat, that Ruben Gallego would be favored against her, but you would rather run

against Blake Masters than Carrie Lake. She has a shot. She certainly can win the race, and we shouldn't take it for granted. Yeah. So now let's talk about the full race, assuming that she wins the primary, which is just an assumption right now, but again, she's leading by a lot in the Republican primary. Kyrsten Sinema hasn't officially announced that she's running for reelection. If she does, it'll be a three-way race with Democrat Ruben Gallego and, again, most likely Carrie Lake. Do you think Sinema being in the race hurts Gallego, helps Gallego, or too soon to say? All of the polling that I have seen, both public and private, shows that Gallego can win a three-way race. I think the dynamics here as relates to what

relates with Sinema is similar to the way we're analyzing a three-way race with Robert Kennedy, Jr. in it at the presidential level, which is Sinema, like RFK Jr., is much more liked by Republicans than Democrats. Democrats actually hate Kyrsten Sinema. She has very low appropriations among Democrats. But if you think that a no-labels candidate hurts Joe Biden against Trump, then you have to imagine that Sinema makes life harder for Gallego because there are going to be people who don't love Gallego, don't love Democrats, but do not like Kerry Lake. So Kyrsten Sinema gives them a place to go other than Gallego. So two-way race between Gallego and Kerry Lake, I imagine, is much better for Gallego, but he can still win a three-way race if Kyrsten Sinema decides to run.

The truth is she has not said she's not running, but she also has done nothing to prepare for a race. She is a prodigious fundraiser when she's running and she's done almost nothing in terms of fundraising over the last couple cycles. So there's some indications she may not run. It's a good point about your no labels comparison, but there is something different about it to me, which is, first of all, we don't have a no labels candidate yet. So that candidate could theoretically be taking votes from Biden right now. We don't know who it is. Kyrsten Sinema is a known quantity and a very disliked quantity by especially Democrats. The reason people would maybe defect from Biden versus the reasons people would defect from

Gallego might be different as well. Because, you know, there's the Biden age thing seems to be people's biggest issue and his, you know, handling, he's an incumbent handling of the economy, whatever it may be. Gallego doesn't come to the race with any of those problems. But again, it's like it's, it's too early to tell. You sent me this split ticket analysis on this race. Sinema's team thinks she can get 10 to 15 percent of Democrats, 25 to 35 percent of Republicans and 60 to 70 percent of independents. All three of those numbers seem pretty high. They seem quite high. So to win the race, she'd have to just in the Republican number, she'd have to she'd have to get 600,000 people in Arizona to vote for her and Donald Trump, which also seems like a tall order. Or her and a third candidate for president.

Right. Especially if like Carrie Lake is in the race, right? Like if you're a Trump voter, it's hard to imagine a Trump voter who declines to vote for Carrie Lake, but does vote for Kyrsten Sinema. If you were in a three-way race, I would say Gallego is the most likely to win, Carrie Lake is the second most likely to win, and Kyrsten Sinema is a distant third in that way. I would agree with that. I also think how Kyrsten Sinema runs her race has an impact on Gallego's chances. If she gets in the race and all she does is attack Gallego for being too liberal, and he's basically fighting a two front war against Kerry Lake and Kyrsten Sinema that makes his life harder than if she is attacking equally

or attacking no one. And so the conduct of the race doesn't make this that's I have this that's the same analysis I bring to RFK and junior in a Biden Trump race. If he's just going to attack Joe Biden, from the left on various issues, that's makes life harder for Joe Biden, even if he's more popular among Republicans and Democrats. Yeah. And then it also matters, of course, what Carrie Lake does. And the New York Times piece on this said that she's and her team are a little bit nervous, though they seem confident, but that she's they said that she's going to be attacking Kyrsten Sinema quite a bit. So if she starts attacking Kyrsten Sinema as being too

liberal, then it's gonna be harder for Kyr... I mean, it's interesting. And it's also a case where, you know, Trump and Biden will get the lion's share of the media coverage. But in this race, because Sinema is the incumbent, you can imagine all three candidates getting an equal share of the coverage. And so that it's going to be a much more even playing field in terms of like, people knowing they are i mean we joke all the time about three-dimensional chess but a three-way race like that really is as close as you get to three-dimensional chess in politics because it's very complicated yeah but again huge implications because you know if everything goes well for democrats in the senate and we uh you know protect most of our incumbents basically

all of them except one. And that's an incumbent seat. And that's an incumbent seat, right. Then, and Sinema gets replaced with Gallego and Democrats hold the Senate. We probably, at that point, and if Democrats hold the House and Joe Biden wins, you would have the votes at least to eliminate the filibuster for passing the John Lewis Voting Rights Act and protecting abortion access. Since those are the two issues where just about all of the Senate Democrats, except for Sinema and Manchin, would be willing to remove the filibuster for.

I would say there are close to zero scenarios where Democrats hold the Senate and lose Arizona. Yeah. No, I think that's right. I think that's right. All right. A few quick housekeeping notes before we move on. Halloween is around the corner, which means it's a great time to start listening to Ruined, our excellent podcast about horror films hosted by Love It or Leave It head writer and occasional Pod Save America game host Hallie Kiefer, as well as her squeamish friend and co-host

Alison Leiby. Every week, the two hilariously unpack a different horror movie. Thank you. How exciting. We got a live pod, Save America, on October 19th. And we have really outbooked ourselves for this one. John Fetterman, Jose Andres, Virginia State Senate candidate, friend of the pod, Jennifer Carol Foy, and our guest host, Simone Sanders. Also, we will be live streaming the show. So if you can't make it, you can watch from home. See where else we're heading in the next couple of months and get your tickets at crooked.com slash events all right finally uh we are ending with a new segment we're calling the crook political report because we're fucking dorks actually if you get that we

we're huge dorks for making the joke if you get the joke you're also a dork you're also a dork that's right if you laughed you're a dork if you didn't don't worry about, you're also a dork. You're also a dork. That's right. If you laughed, you're a dork. If you didn't, don't worry about it. You're fine. All right. Representative George Santos was hit with another 10 criminal charges this week in a superseding indictment that includes conspiracy, aggravated identity theft, wire fraud, and credit card fraud for allegedly charging $45,000 on the card of a donor without their knowledge.

Tom Suozzi, the Democrat who once held the seat in a district that Joe Biden won in 2020, announced this week he'll be running again. About six New York House Republicans introduced a resolution to expel Santos. Doesn't seem to be going anywhere. Nothing seems to be going anywhere in the House right now. They can't find a speaker. It's certainly they're not going to move a resolution to expel George Santos. Here's a question. Why do you think Democrats haven't been able to make Republicans pay a political price for protecting a guy who even some Republicans want to expel? not sure we're not making them pay a political price yet. If these six Republicans are who represent districts, battleground districts in New York are trying to get rid of the guy,

probably means there's something in their polling that shows they want to get as far away from Santos as possible. But we can't talk about this without mentioning the indicted elephant in the room. We have our own problem, which is New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez, who got another indictment. Speaking of superseding indictments, tis the day for superseding indictments. He was just hit with one, a superseding indictment today, right before we started recording, a first for us,

that charges him and his wife with conspiring to act as agents of the Egyptian government. Dan, is that bad? I generally like to wait for data. I'm not going to wait for data on this one. It's a bad crime, politically very bad. And Bob Menendez's continued presence in the Senate

is a problem for Democrats. It makes it harder, obviously very awkward to make the case against Republicans for keeping their indicted member in their caucus. And you know it's a problem for Democrats because every Democrat in a tough race has called on Menendez to resign. They did it almost in unison a few weeks ago when these indictments came out. And he needs to go. It is a huge problem. He's being primaried by Andy Kim, Representative Andy Kim, maybe others. But you talked about this. I wrote about it when it happened. It is

a very large political problem for Democrats. Even if we're never going to look as bad as the guy standing by the president who, the former president with 91 indictments, it just makes it so much harder to have a conversation about it, to have moral authority to talk about it when we have our own, a person in our own caucus indicted for many of the same crimes as George Santos. our own a person in our own caucus indicted for many of the same crimes as George Santos. I just don't get it. Like every every Democrat in a competitive Senate race, plus a whole bunch of to their credit, a whole bunch of other Senate Democrats who aren't in competitive races, who aren't running for reelection this year, have called on him to resign with the exception of for competitive races, Joe Manchin uh so these are the senators who've been asked

about it but declined to call on him to resign and said oh we should either let the legal process play out or that's a decision for the voters joe manchin tim kaine katherine cortez masto ben ray luhan i don't what's chuck schumer doing what's what's going on there al franken was not charged with anything and whether or not you believe the allegations, a bunch of Democrats came out within weeks, including Chuck Schumer, calling on him to resign. And then he did. Now we've got multiple federal indictments against Bob Menendez for I mean, I just I don't understand it. for, I mean, I just, I don't understand it. I have to imagine that all of these Senate Democrats, strictly the ones in the tough races, don't all come out within a day without Chuck Schumer's involvement in that.

He obviously understands the huge political problem here. And I imagine he's also working somewhat behind the scenes to try to convince Menendez to resign. I cannot explain the rest of these people. I cannot explain. Joe Manchin seems like a layup for him. I don't even know what he's... Maybe he thinks because Donald Trump, with all of his indictments, is up by like 40 points in the general election polls in West Virginia,

that it's a pro-indictment state. But I think that's misreading the political environment. I truly don't know. He's going to go out and commit a crime. This is my only ticket. This is my only chance. I got to get indicted. He's going to get indicted himself. He's like, this is my only ticket. Yeah. This is my only chance. I got to get indicted.

Also, I just want to underscore the absurdity and just brazenness of the George Santos crime. Because we talk about a lot of these charges, and some of them are tough for voters to understand. Here's what George Santos has been most recently charged with. So a donor gives him his credit card, which is a, don't text George Santos your credit card number. I thought he just donated to the campaign. No, he texted George Santos, like here's my credit card number

so you can charge something. So you can, I want to donate to the campaign. So George Santos takes his credit card number, racks up all these charges, including $12,000 that was transferred to George Santos' personal bank account. And then on the FEC report was like, where did all these donations come from? Because obviously $45,000 is not supposed to come from one person for any kind of donation. the names of a bunch of people and then took the names of some of his family members and said that they had all donated as a to just make all the donations make sense from this one donor who he

just defrauded by just stealing money from him i mean this this one donor needs one of those apps that gives you an alert when there's an usually large charge on your account. Truly wild. Truly wild. So yeah, that's what's going on with George Santos and Bob Menendez should resign and George Santos should resign and Donald Trump shouldn't run for president. There you go.

That's just, that's the, really it's a difficult moral ground that I'm planting the flag on. And thus concludes the first and probably last episode of the Crook Political Report. Oh, you think it's going to be the last? Well, there'll be a lot of talking about crooks, but maybe the last time we embrace this branding. Crook Political Report?

Yeah. Okay. Well, no one wanted to join us today. So thanks to no one for joining us as a guest. Hard to blame them. I'll be honest with you. But everyone have a great weekend and we will see you next week

and hopefully see some of you DC listeners at our show on October 19th. So everyone have a great weekend. We'll talk to you next week. Bye everyone. Pod Save America is a Crooked Media production.

Our producers are Olivia Martinez and David Toledo. Our associate producer is Farrah Safari. Writing support from Hallie Kiefer. Reid Cherlin is our executive producer. Thank you. Matt DeGroat is our head of production. Andy Taft is our executive assistant. Thanks to our digital team, Elijah Cohn, Haley Jones, Mia Kelman, David Toles, Kiril Pellaviv, and Molly Lobel. Subscribe to Pod Save America on YouTube to catch full episodes and extra video content. Find us at youtube.com slash at Pod Save America. Finally, you can join our Friends of the Pod subscription community for ad-free episodes, exclusive content, and a great discussion on Discord. Plus, it's a great way to get involved with Vote Save America.

Sign up at crooked.com slash friends.