Pod Save America - Trump "Proudly" Supports Abortion Bans

Episode Date: April 9, 2024

Donald Trump once again takes credit for overturning Roe v. Wade and promises to allow states to enact even the most extreme abortion bans. He also promises billionaire donors more tax cuts and whiter immigrants. Joe Biden announces a new student debt relief plan for another 23 million people and finally gives Benjamin Netanyahu an ultimatum. Then, Wisconsin Senator Tammy Baldwin stops by the studio to talk to Jon Lovett about her tough re-election campaign, TikTok, and what actually counts as milk. 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.

Welcome to Pod Save America. I'm Jon Favreau. I'm Jon Lovett. I'm Tommy Vitor. On today's show, Donald Trump promises his billionaire donors more tax cuts and whiter immigrants. Joe Biden announces student debt relief for another 23 million people and finally gives Bibi Netanyahu an ultimatum. And later, Wisconsin Senator Tammy Baldwin stops by the studio to talk through her tough re-election campaign, TikTok, and what actually counts as milk.

Yeah, what does count as milk? Stay tuned to find out. Is this a of the wisconsin trip i wasn't on yeah sure yeah okay everything great milk today the best trip we've ever been that was an incredible trip the inside jokes from that trip that you don't understand never stop talk about it but first trump said over the weekend that he'd finally be releasing a statement on abortion that was designed to quote win elections that was in his post uh and in a video posted on monday he again took credit for overturning roe v wade and promised that as president he'd let states pass even the most extreme abortion bans without any exceptions here's a clip many people have asked me what my position is on abortion and abortion rights, especially since I was proudly the person responsible for

the ending of something that all legal scholars, both sides, wanted and, in fact, demanded. Roe v. Wade. They wanted it ended. It must be remembered that the Democrats are the radical ones on this position because they support abortion up to and even beyond the ninth month. The concept of having an abortion in the later months and even execution after birth, and that's exactly what it is. The baby is born, the baby is executed after birth is unacceptable, and almost everyone agrees with that. My view is now that we have abortion where everybody wanted it from a legal standpoint, the states will determine by vote or legislation or perhaps both. And whatever they decide must be the law of the land.

In this case, the law of the state. Many states will be different. Many will have a different number of weeks or some will have more conservative than others and that's what they will be at the end of the day this is all about the will of the people just beautiful beautiful guys uh guys pretty sick a little deranged it's the uh also uh just a little all over the place at the end there he's yeah he's clearly was reading some of it from a from a prompter and he still couldn't fucking he reads the riffs it's the most it's the most um when he has to do something like this it's the most like a hostage he sounds you know he's he's uh deeply uncomfortable so uh trump had been weighing a 15 or 16 week national ban but

ultimately decided that whatever that was, it's better politics. What do you guys think? Is he right? I think so. I think he's trying to muddy up an incredibly extreme unpopular position on abortion. And he's betting that this video will make someone the right angry, like Mike Pence, his former vice president who angrily tweeted, I guess, or truth. I don't know what he does anymore. Whatever Pence does, he's mad about this. But Trump is betting the far right is going to turn out no matter what. And they'll at least get that he's winking here about his real position. I think the political challenge for Biden is that a lot of people believe the Trump

persona from the Apprentice days. They don't believe that he's personally opposed to abortion, especially low education swing voters don't necessarily know that he's the reason Roe versus Wade was overturned. So I think this is the right political bet. What do you think, Leavitt? Yeah, I think that's right. I also think he's banking on the fact that the statement is going to be covered at face value. Yes. A, it's going to be covered as if the position he's taking is a position he will continue to hold, or B, that you can even accept this characterization of what he's saying is a position he will continue to hold, or B, that you can even accept this characterization of what he's saying, because there's nothing in his statement that actually

says, I oppose or I will not sign a national abortion ban. There's nothing. There's nothing in it that precludes, you know, if he were to end up signing a national abortion ban, there are people that say he's changing, that he's going against his word. He has not given his word. He has made no promise to not do what everyone expects him to do, which is sign a national abortion ban. Yeah. You say if Congress passes a federal ban, will you veto it? Honestly, he didn't say much new. Right. For all the buildup to this, it wasn't much new. So I think it was better politics than him endorsing a 15 or 16 week ban. But I still think better politics isn't necessarily good politics like i do not think he has solved his problem at all here he still hasn't answered

will he sign a national abortion ban if it comes to his desk he still has not answered the question as a florida resident is he going to vote to keep the six-week ban in florida and the big one will he ban abortion medication a lot of his goons have been telling reporters that they want him to invoke the Comstock Act, which would ban medication abortion. A law from 1873. From 1873. And, of course, two-thirds of abortions are through abortion medication. The Texas Solicitor General who designed their state's ban said to Politico at one point, we don't need a federal ban when we have Comstock. So you have to believe that

Donald Trump is not going to further restrict abortion. You would have to believe that even though he filled his administration with fundamentalist right-wing kooks last time around, that he's not going to do it this time around and now that dobbs has been decided that they're not going to just decide to do what they want to do and have wanted to do for a long time which is use the federal government to ban medication uh abortion that you that you can send through the mail i mean okay if you want to believe that that's fine by the way it's going to be the same kooks it's not a big new group of kooks i would say there'll be there'll be more and same kooks. It's not a big new group of kooks. Worse kooks. I would say there's worse kooks. There'll be more and worse kooks, but the same people that helped put together the plan to promote the judges and write the executive actions to do everything they could to restrict or overturn or ban abortion will be the same people that come in next time.

had this report, the 2025 project. In it, they talk about how the next conservative administration has to obviously sign a national abortion ban if they can get it through Congress. But even if they can't, yes, they want to go after Mipha Pristone. But there was a part that I went through it and I just looked through all the parts. First of all, this thing is fucking insane. Just one sentence is just I happened upon by accident. It's like 500 pages. Pornography should be outlawed. The people who produce and distribute it should be imprisoned. Just kind of off, just kind of in there. Good to know. But one part of it says the FDA, this is about Mifepristone, the FDA is statutorily charged with guaranteeing the safety and efficacy of drugs and therefore should withdraw this drug, Mifepristone, that has proven to be dangerous to women and by definition fatally

unsafe for unborn children. And if that is their logic, right, their logic is that no abortion drug can be definitionally safe, right? That means any kind of abortion treatment, anything, any kind of care that could lead to an abortion would be something that the FDA would try to overturn. And so there could be no technical ban on the books in California, but they will go bit by bit through every single way that a person accesses abortion care and make sure that that is inaccessible or punishable or criminalized. Yeah. And then there are the steps that would land a national abortion ban on his desk. If Donald Trump wins the presidency, it is virtually guaranteed that Republicans will

have the Senate. It is pretty likely that Republicans will have the Senate. It is pretty likely that Republicans will have the House. They get the House, it will easily pass through the House or an abortion ban. The Senate, I do think, is more of a challenge because if they have 51 votes, yes, they could get rid of the filibuster to pass one, but they probably don't have Collins and Murkowski for an abortion ban, but they could still have 53, 54 seats, right, if Donald Trump wins. So then imagine a Republican House passing a ban and a Republican Senate passing a ban and then it getting to Donald Trump's desk. Donald Trump, who does not have to face voters again. Right. We think he's going to be like, no, no, no, no, no.

This I'm going to I'm going to veto at this point. He's going to sign it. So Biden responded saying Trump is responsible more than anyone in America for the cruelty and chaos unleashed by Dobbs. And Biden promised to make the freedom to choose the law of the land if he's elected with a Democratic Congress. Here's a clip. Donald Trump just endorsed every single state ban on reproductive care nationwide. All across the country, women are being turned away from emergency rooms or being forced to travel hundreds of miles or ask a judge just to get the basic care they need. That's Donald Trump's vision for this country. He said it himself. He punished women who seek out the care they need. If MAGA Republicans put

a federal ban on his desk, he'd sign it. Donald Trump is the reason roads ended. If you reelect me, I'll be the reason why it's restored. Campaign's also out with an absolutely gutting new ad about a woman from Texas who nearly died twice after she was denied care for a miscarriage because of the state's abortion ban. What did you guys think of the Biden campaign response, which has really been pretty full-throated and been happening all day? They've had surrogates out, they've got ads, they've got the president out, they had the vice president out. What do you guys think? I think they understand that this is one of the most important ways that they're going to defeat Donald Trump, but they're not going to let him get away with this statement. And they're really

going to not, and what I think really important about it is they're not going to let it be reported at face value. They're going to make sure that they're in the story, calling him a fucking liar, which he is, but also pointing out all the ways in which he's responsible for Roe being overturned. The ways in which Roe being overturned doesn't just affect people who need abortions, but affects people who need all kinds of medical care. Yeah, I'm glad that they jumped all over this. I mean, I, too, was a little disappointed with how credulous the reporting was, at least the first round of it on this video. I think Biden did a good job of being clear what he would do. I think we need to push back even more on this disgusting claim that Democrats want to kill infants after they're born. I mean, that is murder. It is illegal. Even in blue states,

it's outrageous. That doesn't happen. It never happened. But it's a Trump talking point. But I do think that that ad that you're talking about is those kind of stories will do the most to influence opinion. But Biden in his statement, I mean, I think his point is going to be, look what Trump did, not what he says. That's all you need to know. Make this broader argument about it's not just Trump that will get elected. It's this right wing extremist crop of zealots in his coalition that wants a national abortion ban. And then I think he has to point out the inconsistencies, which is Trump can say that he's for certain exceptions for the life and health of the mother or for rape or incest. But if he's OK with these extreme state by state bans, that completely undercuts that position.

Yeah. And I thought the Biden campaign just has been tweeting out like state by state some of the most heinous extreme bans and now trump owns all of those bans there is there's a little bit of like people trying to convince democrats trying to convince people like this is what trump would really do this is what's in his mind he's lying and like do i think he's a liar yeah of course but we don't have to convince people of that we don't have to exaggerate much here all you have to do is exactly what he's already done what tommy was just saying and he owns every single ban that is currently in place right now including his home state yeah well the i would also say you know you he actually doesn't say health of the mother he says life of the mother which there's a lot of reasons a person would need an abortion because of their health one being that they would like to have children

in the future right uh that this doesn't provide exemption for. The other thing is, I think sometimes Trump gets exempt from normal politics because he's crazy. And then when he's normal, gets exempt from normal politics because he's crazy. And in this case, treat him like a normal politician, like John, you mentioned this, but Florida, Florida voters will have the opportunity to either protect abortion access in Florida or basically approve a six week ban. No, there's no 15 weeks. There's no, Oh, we're going to find the perfect thing. He's going to have a, he has to have a very simple choice for the next year. That will be ahead of him, whether he would be in favor of a six week ban or protections. It's an either or, and he should just be hammered on that until he provides an answer. Because I don't think I assume he's going to avoid answering for as long as he possibly can.

And medication abortion is popular among Republicans. You know, this is like very early. It's an 80-20 issue. Yeah, it's used in early stages of pregnancy. It's 60% of abortions, medication abortion. I mean, there's some weirdness on the numbers when you talk about whether people approve of getting shipped over state lines, I think, because the polling was bad more than anything, but it's a very popular path for people. Yeah. And you can, you know, you can debate what he's going to do, what he might do, what he has done this span, this many

weeks. But I think him owning what has already happened proudly, as he said in the video, and then watching an ad like that from the Biden campaign for most voters, that's how this is going to land this debate and by the way we're going to get another cycle like he's going to be asked the next time he does any kind of a mainstream interview like does this mean you're going to veto a national abortion ban and he is going to fumpher i mean who knows what he's going to say but that is going to be the next round of this hopefully get it on the right wing interviews too yeah i know hugh hewitt doesn't have a spine but eventually he'll talk to like a you know some christ Christian outlet or something. You know what he's going to say?

He's going to say, before it even gets to that, I'm going to bring both sides together. We're going to make everyone very happy. Yeah, he just lies. So you would sign him. So you would sign him, man. We're going to make everyone very happy. Look, you know what I did? I killed Roe vs. Wade. Everyone wanted me to.

Anyway. Yeah. Anyway, have you seen the eclipse? Beautiful, beautiful eclipse. So Trump also hosted a big fundraiser in Palm Beach over the weekend with some of the worst billionaires on the planet. People who profited off of the subprime mortgage crisis, compared higher taxes to the Holocaust, and opposed the Civil Rights Act, just to name a few. I mean, John, just be careful, because for two of those, they could be our billionaires, too. They could be our billionaires too.

Trump promised the billionaires more tax cuts, said he only wants immigrants from quote nice countries like Denmark and Norway, and accused Joe Biden of pooping on the Resolute desk. Did you guys catch that one? I mean, I didn't catch that one, but I read the story. You read the story, yeah. The campaign claims that the event raised $50 million,

which would be double what Biden raised in New York the other week. Lots to unpack there, starting with the money. You guys buy the $50 million number? Here's how I feel about this. Do I believe they would lie to say it's double, say it's double? Oh, we doubled it. We doubled it.

Absolutely. Do I also believe that a group of the country's absolute fucking worst billionaires would get together to give $50 million to the guy whose only legislative accomplishment is cutting their taxes? Yes, I believe that as well. So I'm really open. I'm really open. My mind is open. We will not know for sure until we see the campaign finance reports, but it's possible. So remember, they're raising money for the Trump 47 committee, which is a joint fundraising account that goes to the Trump campaign, the RNC, state parties, and Trump super PAC. So that committee can accept a check up to $824,600 per person. So is it possible that they found 60 billionaires like the ones Lovett just described and said, right, the max possible. I mean, one person I talked to said they heard this event

was all the low hanging fruit for Trump. And like you said, this is like, you know, they view this as an investment in a future tax cut instead of donation. There's a lot of low hanging fruit. I mean, there's a lot of fruit in that room, like super rich people, right? You big check. But it's also possible that they're just screwing with the accounting and that a big chunk of what they're reporting was super packed donations, which can take unlimited money from whomever. And, and also, by the way, that will end up paying Trump's legal bills so the biden campaign thinks that they're reporting a bunch of super PAC money and that this is just

an apples to oranges comparison with his event in new york can i just say one more thing on this if if they want to lie about raising 50 million dollars from some of the worst billionaires in the country who he then just promised a whole bunch like another trillion dollars worth of tax cuts to go for it i would gladly cede the title of big money campaign i don't know why we get into this thing where it's like oh the biden is 25 million oh it's double we're more than you like no but raising a lot of money like this is a necessary evil in politics who the fuck cares who raised we just need a we just need a well-funded campaign to run a bunch of ads and beat donald trump yeah i think they were doing the kind of they did the 25 million number to show like look We just need a well-funded campaign to run a bunch of ads and beat Donald Trump.

Yeah, I think they were doing the kind of, they did the 25 million number to show like, look at the strength of this thing. Which was good. At a time when the polling wasn't great. This is just like, Trump double. We double. You bad. We double.

You old shit on desk. We double. That's what that is. You can certainly imagine Trump reading the $25 million headlines and saying, we need to double this, figure out how to make it happen. And also, it could be donations that have been coming in for a long time. It could be a bunch of earmarked things for this event. It seems to me like tax cut for billionaires and white immigrants only

isn't the message to win over those swing voters. But maybe some of these voters are cross-pressured by their opposition to Joe Biden shitting in the Oval. I don't know. What do you guys think? LBJ famously took meetings on the toilet. The mountain comes to Muhammad with Biden. Right.

Hustle culture has gotten pretty bad, so maybe you're just sort of skipping a step here and being even more efficient. Just reading the words in the New York Times, when we asked attendees, they said he was referring to Biden actually defecating on the desk because when i clarified i assumed it was fake news meticulous report i assumed just

i assumed it was fake news i assumed that people were misreporting a trump ridiculous statement that he was saying you think it was just a friday news dump i did the usual usual dc bullshit but uh but that no what i thought is i thought it was that he was saying biden is so old he's soiling himself at the desk but then you look at the text and he says i don't even want to touch the desk right so it's like oh so it's on the desk here's i don't know if he put a lot of thought into it maybe he's just one up he's just riffing he's just riffing he's just he's just looking for stuff yeah that, that's the work. All right. So speaking of the president, when he's not pooping in his desk, he was in Wisconsin Monday where he announced a new plan

to provide debt relief to more than 23 million people who are still paying off their student loans. Ever since Republicans in Congress and the Supreme Court blocked Biden's earlier plans to provide debt relief, the administration has been able to use its existing legal authority to help more than 4 million Americans. The plan he announced this week would obviously be a much bigger deal, up to 23 million people. Here's the president talking about it. Today, I'm proud to announce five major actions to continue to relieve student debt from more than 30 million Americans since I started my administration. Starting this fall, we plan to deliver up to $20,000 in interest relief to over 20 million borrowers and full

forgiveness for millions more. So the question with all these Biden student debt plans is, can he actually get it done without it getting blocked? And who does it help? What do you guys think? I hope we can get the checks out before Clarence Thomas gets back from Bora Bora. Just get those checks out. We've got an election to win here. Hopefully there's no clawback provision. You know, I remember the first round of this. I said early fall, they think. The first time we went through this round of student debt, I remember the first round of this. I said early fall. They think the first time I the first time we went through this round of student debt,

I remember like reading carefully about like the rationalizations and all the reasons and the different ways he could like kind of structure the thing. Now I'm just like, fucking get the checks out. We got to win. I don't care. Get the kids some money. And this one's hard because obviously in the first round, President Biden was pushed very hard by progressives to cancel student debt.

He was concerned that it might get struck down in the courts, which is why he hesitated for a while. Then he put forward what was actually a more generous plan in a lot of ways than I think people were expecting. Then the court struck it down and then everyone was like, God damn it, Biden. Yeah. Then some progressives were like, what's wrong with you? You should have just used another law somewhere and found it and blah, blah, blah. Yeah. I mean, I think that's what he did. So, well, what they've done is, you know, they've they've tried some creative approaches that they've, as you said, they think they've provided nearly 150 billion in student debt relief despite the Supreme Court ruling. So they're trying another path. They know they're going to get sued. I mean, we talked to them and they said, yes, we know we're going to get sued. But I think the idea is to get caught trying here and make clear this time that the republicans are the ones blocking him not president biden blocking student debt from getting canceled and i mean they did have their lawyers go back and look and see like what could be more feasible to do right so this is a different this is all according to the washington post this is a different law they had the 2003 heroes act is what

they tried the first time it got struck down this is based on the authority they have in the 1965 higher education act and um which allows the education secretary to compromise, waive, or release loans under certain circumstances. So in this instance, there's four groups of people who would be helped by this. So they would wipe away some or all of the interest on loans that have become bigger than what was originally borrowed. Also, cancel debt for people who do qualify for some existing student loan relief programs, but just haven't applied yet. So they would just cancel it for them. People who are still paying off their loans 20 years after they took them out or 25 years for graduate degrees, and then they are creating a special

hardship program. So if you also have high medical debt or childcare or something like that, then you can apply and potentially get a waiver. So they do also have high medical debt or child care or something like that, then you can apply and potentially get a waiver. So they do seem like they're not like this blunt force. Everyone gets student debt relief that a court could easily,

I mean, the court could still strike it down, but you can see where they're trying to find. Yeah. The other instance specifically is if you got convinced to go to a school

that lost its accreditation, like one of these junk for-profit schools, but you still have a huge debt and no diploma anymore, they will cancel that debt too. It makes a lot of sense. Yeah, I mean, where I'm at with all this is like, okay, I think it's great.

I think we should be doing everything we can to fulfill the promise of canceling student debt, go through the law books, find some fucking thing, get the lawyers in there with, I don't know, Mike Rafish, probably not, and just find ways to do this fine but like we do like the idea that like the way the government now works is congress does nothing and then administrative lawyers like comb through the books to find various little rules they can abuse to do the things like okay i guess that's that's the world we're going to

live under that's what we did for daca that works works. Pen and a phone. No, no. I'm literally about that's what I'm saying. That's what the laws are abused. Come on. That's what, look, that's what like, look, DACA was a way to get around the fact that Congress wouldn't do anything on immigration. These are all ways in which the administration is basically legislating. I'm for it. I think we should do it.

I think we should do as much as we possibly can, as long as we have a completely fucking useless and feckless Congress. But it is like in the long term like we have accrued more and more power to to to the white house and then these presidential elections feel like the stakes are total because they are yeah i just think there's i think there's also a lot of gray area in some of these laws that are open to interpretation right like i don't think it's obvious sure but like do i think that whatever law they're using was written so that decades later the president could go through and wipe away vast swaths of student loan debt?

Probably not. I don't care. Go for it. Do it and be legends. We'll see. We'll see. What a country. The president has also been making news on one of his biggest challenges with young and progressive voters, the war in Gaza. Last week, after an Israeli strike killed seven aid workers from Jose Andres's World Central Kitchen, aid workers from Jose Andres' World Central Kitchen. Biden finally told Netanyahu that if Israel doesn't change course by immediately announcing steps to, quote, address civilian harm, humanitarian suffering, and the safety of aid workers, that, quote, we won't be able to support you. That last quote is from an Axios report on the call. Bibi responded by finally allowing more humanitarian aid into Gaza, where millions are suffering, many on the verge of famine. Biden hasn't specified what the consequences will be if Netanyahu doesn't do more.

But conditioning military aid is presumably now on the table. This comes as more Democratic politicians and voters well beyond the progressive base have criticized Biden's Gaza policy. Tim Kaine applauded Biden for the move, but said, quote, this was an obvious solution that should have happened months ago. Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland said that it shows, quote, when the president uses leverage to enforce his demands, he gets results, but that we will, quote, look feckless if we do not match our words with deeds. Seems right to me. What about you guys? Do you think this could be a turning point? I hope so. I mean, in the near term, 419 A-trucks got into Gaza on

Monday. 322 A-trucks got in on Sunday. In February, the average per day was 98 trucks. Two highest totals since October 7th. So there's been an impact. That increase is good. Also, it proves that the slowdown in the previous months was entirely the result of a policy choice made by the Israeli government, not other complications that you saw blamed in the previous months was entirely the result of a policy choice made by the Israeli government, not other complications that you saw blamed in the media. It's also gross that it took the death of seven Western aid workers to get here, but I'm glad we're here. So yeah, I agree it's long overdue. I think the next step is getting a ceasefire agreement. That gets more complicated because it's a negotiation that involves Hamas to secure the release of these remaining hostages, at least the ones that are still alive.

But the negotiators were reportedly mad that Netanyahu was not giving them enough flexibility. Biden pushed him on that too. So we'll see if that gets things moving. And then there's the question of Rafah, which is that city in Southern Gaza where there's like a million people sheltering. Rafa, which is that city in Southern Gaza where there's like a million people sheltering. The U.S. position is that the Israeli military should not launch an invasion into Rafa, at least until they get a plan that shows how they'll protect civilians. The U.S. has said they're yet to see such a plan, but Netanyahu today or Monday said that he has set a date for a Rafa invasion. And he keeps saying things like we're in the middle of this war. So I do hope the message is, no, we're not. We're at the end of this war and you need to end it. The problem though, is politically Netanyahu sees this war

as a lifeline. And he is worried that he will face elections once it's over, that his party will get destroyed. He will lose power and then face a bunch of corruption charges. So that's the long-term complicating factor that makes all of this harder going forward. I do think that the politics at home at here for Biden have changed pretty significantly. And that you have, I mean, you've all kinds of people criticizing him for his Gaza policy, including according to the New York Times and other reports like Jill Biden, Chris Coons. Yeah. Like his wife has been saying, Joe, this needs to end. So it was amazing and also just like really frustrating to see that like he does one call to Bibi where he finally gives him an ultimatum and then immediately see the aid truck start

going into Gaza. And it's like, well, I don't know. I don't know how the people who were who were were defended the, like, you know, the hug BB strategy in private, and he's got to maintain his leverage. It's like, well, well then it was self-evidently stupid from the beginning. And by the way, also the people that defended the claim that Israel couldn't get aid in for weeks and weeks on end. And then also, by the way, on the other, the second Biden does shows just puts puts the puts like real pressure on Netanyahu in this call. Republicans immediately put forward a resolution to say that he's being insufficiently pro-Israel. Right. Yeah, that's good. He's going to deal with that. I mean, I've heard a lot of people cast doubt on whether this is a real political problem for Biden.

Certainly the polls now show that his Gaza policy is unpopular with a majority of voters. Sending more weapons is unpopular too. Right. Now, whether voters' opposition to his Gaza policy is a deal breaker for them is still unclear. But I would say two things, like one, in a rematch against a guy you beat by only 40,000 votes last time, every single thing matters. And also, it's like beyond the politics. I just haven't heard a moral case or any case at all for like why the only way to dismantle a terrorist organization and free hostages is to kill and starve tens and tens of thousands of people, including children and babies. It's because there is no case.

This war is a moral, strategic, and political disaster. The morality of it is the death toll, the number of children who've been killed using starvation as a tool of war. But then strategically, even the Israeli military intelligence services do not believe that you can defeat Hamas entirely. They will exist as a terrorist organization, as a guerrilla organization. They're not going to go away. You can diminish their capabilities and reduce the threat, but you cannot kill off the organization or kill an idea or a resistance to occupation. So they're not going anywhere. And I worry that a generation of young people are being radicalized and that that radicalization is not just going to be pointed at the Israeli government. It's

going to be pointed directly at us. And you're seeing this thing metastasized into the Middle East. You're seeing the Israelis bombing Iranian generals in a diplomatic facility in Damascus. Now we're all waiting to see what the Iranian response is and whether they're going to fucking attack Israel directly or attack some U.S. interests in the region. Like nothing about this is making anyone safer. It is all just getting worse. You know, it really drives me nuts as people were like, well, no one's calling on Hammas to just release the hostages hamas could end this war tomorrow it's like of course hamas hamas being murderous monsters who use their own people as human shields like that that doesn't absolve the israelis or any of us from like our duty to protect people and to like think about the consequences that you just laid out of carrying on this war of course they're like murderous terrorists we get that yeah

you can't spend six months running all the civilians into one city and then bomb that city you just simply there's no it's not not complicated the calling on hamas argument frustrates me so much because everyone is calling on hamas to release the hostages they have been since the very beginning they're holding innocent civilians everyone wanted to release the hostages the us doesn't have diplomatic relations with hamas we don't talk directly with hamas we talk to hamas through intermediaries like qatar or egypt or other countries right so we don't even have a relationship with them so there's no leverage there we have leverage with the the Israeli government. We can shift as we just saw the way they prosecute this war. And that's what everyone's been looking for. Netanyahu after October 7th had bad options and worse options. And he chose the

worst of all options, which is this war and this death toll and starvation as a tool of war and this disastrous situation we're now in. And by the way, he's facing massive protests inside of Israel. You're starting to see big protests in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. You're seeing former hostages who have been released calling on him to do more. You're seeing the families of hostages. I mean, the real question is how many of these hostages are alive at this point.

And I don't say that to blame Netanyahu or the government. But again, like the only time hostages have gotten back is through a negotiated ceasefire, temporary ceasefire between the two sides. And I think that's what everyone's been looking for. only time hostages have gotten back is through a negotiated ceasefire, temporary ceasefire between the two sides. And I think that's what everyone's been looking for. You saw Netanyahu today, well, recording this Monday, once again said there's a date for when we're going to go into Rafah. How, I mean, obviously he intends to do that, but he's also negotiating. Yeah, he, I mean, look, there's, you could, I wonder if he's using that to put political pressure on Hamas, but I don't

know. Are they feeling political pressure at this point? I haven't, like, I can't he's using that to put political pressure on Hamas, but I don't know. Are they feeling political pressure at this point? I, I, like, I can't, we have no read on what they think, you know, even the negotiations that are happening at Qatar, like with some political operatives that don't even live in the Gaza strip. Most of the time they negotiate with the U S and Israel and Egypt, and they try to pass a message into Gaza to get it to Yaga Sinwar, who's sitting in a tunnel somewhere hiding out. And it's like, I see the people in Qatar really speaking for him, the military leaders on the ground, we just don't really know. Well, I wish it had happened a lot sooner, but I'm really glad that Joe Biden made that call.

Bibi Netanyahu is a bad guy. Like, again, there are not great options here for Biden or for the Israelis after October 7th. But Netanyahu is a bad person, a bad leader, and he should not have been given this much rope. Yep. Before we go to break, I thought we'd just talk about maybe some other quick stories everyone should be paying attention to. I noticed today, first of all, RFK Jr.'s campaign, what a fucking mess. It's a juggernaut. What are you talking about? You're doing great first there was something on friday where he released a full statement about the uh the january 6th rioters

okay uh insurrectionists and basically was like i have not examined the evidence in detail it's always great when you put that out in your statement uh even though the evidence is there for all to see and it was on television it was on television yeah famously on television trump but reasonable people tell me there is little evidence of a true insurrection. They observed that the protesters carried no weapons. Then he promised to appoint a special counsel to investigate the prosecutors instead of the people who pleaded guilty or were convicted by a jury of their peers for violently assaulting police officers. Then when everyone pointed out to RFK Jr. in his campaign that actually they carried a lot of different kinds of weapons, flagpoles, mace, explosives, all the kinds of stuff,

he goes, oh, yeah, yeah, I was told there actually were weapons. So that was great. And then the campaign's New York director was caught on video talking to some supporters and said the following. She said, the Kennedy and Trump voter, our mutual enemy is Biden. If nobody gets 270, Congress picks the president. So who are they going to pick?

If it's in a Republican Congress, they'll pick Trump. So- A quiet part out loud there. But it doesn't actually make it, I can't, how does it make sense? Because like, I like the idea that there's Kennedy people out there being like, it's Trump and Kennedy versus Biden. That's great, keep doing that., it's Trump and Kennedy versus Biden. That's great.

Keep doing that. But you still have to get electoral votes. So what are we talking about here? I think what she was saying is like, the most important thing is to make sure that Joe Biden doesn't become president. And obviously, we'd love if RFK Jr. becomes president. But, you know, and the chance that he's not going to be, we'll get Trump. But there's another guy that hates vaccines up there. Donald Trump i mean that's probably the rest of our sentence it's uh what a

fucking dilettante it's just like it's just unbelievable just it's like there's this blundering oaf running around making absolutely no sense for rfk to help donald trump by throwing it to congress he would have to get an electoral vote yeah i mean i'm sure they mean anything they believe all kinds of crazy things. I'm sure they think. Was he going to do great in Omaha? Maybe that's it. Maybe it's an Omaha play. Yeah.

One other story worth watching. So this is a very weird one. So this is about the Montana Senate race. So there's a Republican named Tim Sheehy. He's running for Senate in Montana against John Tester. He's a former Navy SEAL. Apparently at some point in his life, he got shot and he still has a bullet lodged in his arm. Over the years, the story about

how that bullet got into his arm has changed. He once said that the bullet was from his time in Afghanistan when he was serving in the US military. Other times he says he accidentally shot himself during a visit to Glacier National Park in Montana. He dropped his gun. It discharged. The bullet went into his arm, whatever. So both these stories are on the public record. The Washington Post was like, hey, what's the deal with this discrepancy?

So she says, oh, actually, I lied about shooting myself by accident at Glacier National Park. The real story is I fell. I hurt myself on a hike. I had to go to the ER. Someone was like, what's up with that bullet in your arm? And he said, then he had to talk to a park ranger. So he lied to the park ranger and said, I shot myself because he wanted to avoid an investigation into the shooting in Afghanistan because he never reported it and didn't want to get his buddies in trouble. Now that's weird on a number of levels. One might imagine that an ER doctor

would notice the difference between a bullet wound from that day and one from a few years ago. That's one area where it seems to fall apart. He also previously said that he was shot multiple times in Afghanistan. In his book, he said he was shot multiple times. So who knows where, like if he was a democrat you'd have swift boat veterans for truth you know chasing him out of the state as we speak because he's a republican first thing that popped into my mind is like john kerry john yes who knows how this will play but um what a weird story that is strange that is strange because i think if i shot myself in the arm i would lie and say it happened in combat but i wouldn't make up multiple wounds you wouldn't

make up a lamer story no you wouldn't go worse with it you wouldn't pay a fine really weird shout out uh washington post liz goodwin great story and also go donate some money to john tester he's a great john tester needs to win chur brian needs to win i mean two really really tough senate races and we have to win both of them and have biden win to keep the senate so we have uh we have time Baldwin on, and this is his audio just came out that her opponent said that about nursing home residents. Well,

you only have a five or six month life expectancy. Almost nobody in nursing home is in a point to vote. What? What? Oh, that's awesome. That's awesome. This guy is,

she, I, I, the race is getting tighter. She should kick the everving shit out of this guy love tammy love tammy all right few uh few bits of housekeeping before we get to uh senator baldwin um first love it or leave it will be in austin texas on april 21st april 21st where love it will be joined by joyelle nicole johnson zach zucker the sklar brothers and tim miller and

joe rogan sorry no no couldn't get him Couldn't get him. And then you're going to DC on April 25th for another great show with Josh Gondelman, Sam Jay, Al Franken and Mehdi Hassan. That one's almost sold out. Wow.

And finally, if you're here in LA, Pod Save America will be live at the LA Times Festival of Books on April 21st. Hysteria's own Aaron Ryan, Dan, Tommy and me

are going to have a great show. That's a book burning, right? That's a book. Yeah, that is a book burning. We'll be book yeah that is a book burning we'll be burning well the tapes will be so hot those books might burn huh we'll be burning our books

yeah that's sort of a like a self-hating thing right right self-preservation you can get tickets for all of those shows be the books you want to burn

in the world you can get tickets for all those shows at cricket.com slash events also subscribe to friends of the pod I don't know if you guys

listened to the Thursday pod did you hear Dan do a passionate push for friends of the pod subscription he said that we are we don't do it as well and he was like i'm gonna do an actual endorsement of signing up to subscribe to friends of the pod and it was really good as long as you don't ask us any follow-ups yeah of course we did anyway old simpsons you'll get access to polar coaster where dan calms your nerves and freaks you out about the state of the polls. You can also listen to Crooked's most unhinged podcast that will probably get canceled for someday. It's called Terminally Online. Don't you think that'll do it?

What a welcome respite. It's for subscribers only, and it's where we talk about the craziest shit on the internet that week. Subscribe to Friends of the Pod to listen to our exclusive pods only at crooked.com slash friends. When we come back, Wisconsin Senator Tammy Baldwin. Joining us today, United States Senator and someone who is so pro-dairy,

I took a lactate before she sat down just in case. It's Senator Tammy Baldwin. Greetings. Good to have you back. It's great to be back. So the Wisconsin Democratic primary was this past Tuesday, and people upset with President Biden's Gaza policy organized a push to vote uninstructed, similar to the uncommitted vote in Michigan. That ended up getting 8.3%. Does that worry you about Biden's path to winning Wisconsin in November? You know, one of the things I would

reflect on that is these were people who voted and they voted in the Democratic primary. These are people who said, I'm fed up and I'm staying home. They sent a message and this message, I understand the frustration, the heartbreak that we're seeing. What I hope is that both their message is effective and that in November, there'll be a very clear choice, both to support Biden, but also to understand that another Trump presidency would be catastrophic, both domestically and abroad. So let's talk about that. We're meeting here Friday, April 5th. You said in a post that any U.S. aid to our allies must be in line with our values, and we cannot be complicit in Netanyahu's indiscriminate bombing. I should also note that in that tweet, you reiterated that you called for a release to all hostages and your position that Israel has a right to defend itself. But has your position changed? Because you supported aid in the last round in February, you did introduce an amendment

about making sure humanitarian aid, or you supported an amendment about getting aid in. But does that mean you're saying there shouldn't be military aid to Israel as long as they're prosecuting the war in this way? Are you calling for conditioning aid? Well, first of all, there are conditions already embedded in U.S. law. And recently, the president did sign an executive order articulating additional conditions. What I am observing is that Netanyahu is indiscriminately bombing. Netanyahu has charted a course that is not allowing humanitarian aid in. We've seen catastrophic loss of civilian Gazan life, as well as aid workers, as we saw horrifically this past

week. And he needs to be held to account. You see protests in the streets in Israel demanding change in course. And I support that. I also have to say that just in the last couple of days, my colleague Tim Kaine talked about our support for defensive weaponry so that Israel can protect itself. But so long as we see this course of the war, that offensive weaponry ought to be limited. and re ought to be limited. So let's talk about the race that you're in. President Trump endorsed your opponent, Eric Laguna Beach, have D at an event in Green Bay. He said of you is what Trump said. She's a very weak candidate. I mean, if you lose to her, that's not a good thing, right? Now, this is this is this is wishful thinking on Trump's part, because you're an historically strong Wisconsin candidate. You won by 11 points, the highest percentage achieved by a gubernatorial or senatorial candidate

in Wisconsin since 2006. You beat a popular former governor and cabinet official, Tommy Thompson, by five points to win the seat in the first place. And that's in a state where four of the last six presidential elections have been decided by less than one point. But this is the first time you're running

when Trump is on the ballot. Does the turnout that that will entail give you any concerns, any challenges you're thinking about? There's a lot baked into that question. There is a lot. Let me start with the end of that question. We were just talking about the Democratic presidential primary in Wisconsin on Tuesday. And let's talk about the Republican presidential primary. 12% voted for Nikki Haley, who's been out of the race for a month or so. 3%, I think, voted for Ron DeSantis, who's been out of the race for even longer. So you've got a solid 15% of Republicans participating in the Republican presidential primary who are not voting for Trump. So I don't necessarily see a completely unified front on that side.

So how that will impact turnout, how that will impact that 15% of Republicans who just couldn't vote for Trump, even though he was really the only candidate left standing. We don't know how that's going to play out right now. But, you know, in terms of my race, I do view it fundamentally differently than I did my first race in 2012 and the midterm race that I won in 2018. Our state has gotten even more divided. You know, Trump won Wisconsin by one percentage point in 2016. Biden won by one percentage point in 2020. This is a rematch. And I don't see as many ticket splitters. So this is going to be a really tough race. And of course, the Republicans landed their hand-picked recruit, their top recruit, Eric Hovde.

Eric, if you don't know anything about him, while he was born and raised in Wisconsin, he spent his adult career either on the East Coast or the West Coast. He is president and CEO of a bank called SunWest Bank, a-based, $2.8 billion enterprise. So he owns a bank in California. He lives in Laguna Beach. He was named among the most influential business people of Orange County three years in a row. So he has a lot of presence in Orange County. We don't have an Orange County in Wisconsin. We don't grow oranges in Wisconsin, right? Dairy. Dairy. Not oranges, right? And so this is

a multimillionaire who's self-funding and is simply out of touch with the people that I fight so hard for every day in the Senate. So he is self-funding and he's already up on the air with millions of dollars. 4.3 so far. 4.3 million dollars so far. But you've been campaigning and working in Wisconsin for such a long time. Are these ads having an impact? How are you trying to blunt the impact of a candidate who is already promising to produce the most expensive race in the history of Wisconsin? Yeah. So make no mistake, we are a pretty evenly divided state. And any Republican, a generic Republican, whatever name you want to put, starts with about 44 percent of the vote.

you want to put, starts with about 44% of the vote. It could be anyone, but that's what kind of state Wisconsin is. And then when you have somebody who can put so many millions of dollars on the air and on digital ads, their support only goes up. This is going to be a really tough race. And his investment right now of $4.3 million of his own wealth into TV ads and digital ads has increased his support. This race is kind of a dead heat right now, according to polling that I've seen. And yes, I work really hard both as a senator and on the campaign trail. both as a senator and on the campaign trail, one of the things that I try to do every year is just get all around Wisconsin. And so I just wrapped up my Dairyland tour,

1,400 miles on the car and 19 counties and stops with farmers and with owner of a brewery, a microbrewery or craft brewery. I started in Superior, Wisconsin. This is the northwestern part of the state in a snowstorm. They canceled the meetings we had planned because schools were closed, businesses were closed. So the first thing I did was stop and thank the snowplow drivers who made it possible for me to get there safely. That's politics. With donuts.

Oh, wow. That's it. That's how you win. That's how you win. They needed a sugar high to get back out on the roads and keep us all safe. So it actually was when I started talking about the turnout, what I wanted to get at is you're a lesbian progressive.

I think you know that. you're a lesbian progressive. I think you know that. I do. I do. But you have done and likely will do better in rural parts of your state than most Democrats could hope to perform. So what do Democrats not understand about competing in rural parts of the country? What have we lost? Yes, and I have some solutions in mind too. So I'll start by saying Wisconsin has had very gerrymandered maps for our state assembly and state senate. And what that has led to

is that almost all the Democrats in the state legislature come from cities. Some suburban areas. There are very few Democrats in the state legislature who represent rural areas. For me as a senator, I represent a whole state. But I think the conversation with rural voters has essentially been stymied by those gerrymandered maps. If you are somebody who wants to engage in public service, you live in a rural area, you look at the map and say, there's no chance a Democrat could win in this district and people don't run.

So we have new maps now in Wisconsin, which is very exciting. And I really think it's going to change the conversation. If you have a real shot at engaging in public service, running for office, winning, representing your area, we're going to have much more diversity of districts and people who really do understand rural issues as Democrats serving in the state legislature. So I know that's getting kind of technical and in the weeds, but it is, I think, going to make a fundamental shift. I make it a point to get out to my rural areas, to go to red counties and purple counties. And lots of times the people I meet with will say, I don't remember the last time we saw a U.S. senator in these parts

and especially a Democrat. I hear you on that. There's been a lot of headwinds and a lot of, you know, identity propaganda from the right to kind of turn rural parts of the country against Democrats or kind of inoculate rural parts of the country against Democrats. But it's more than just that, right? Because you see not just in politically drawn districts, but at the state level, you'll see a state like Kansas protect abortion rights or or a state like Utah expand Medicaid. But these are states where a Democratic policy can do well on the ballot. But a Democratic person is seen as sort of anathema in some way. And I'm wondering if like put aside the districts, is there something about how we're communicating?

Is there something about how we're communicating, right? Is there something that Democrats have lost in how they communicate that you think is important? That's a great question. First of all, I want to almost respond by saying I think we don't understand as Democrats how Republicans and conservatives and MAGA types are communicating with one another and defining Democrats. So you might show up at a place and they've been hearing, reading, being exposed to, in many cases, misinformation, disinformation about Democrats. And if you don't understand the way they're communicating, sometimes it's challenging. But what I find, and I want to get back to the sort of rural urban issues, is when you show up, you convene, you know, I'm going to keep on hitting on dairy with you, but when you convene dairy farmers who work so hard every day and yet are challenged by high input costs, low prices, and you listen and then you move from listening to action and you're successful with those actions in the Congress of the United States, and then they see the difference. Word gets out. And I think that type of action and success can overcome the disinformation that people are exposed to. But I'm not going to pretend to understand how they're communicating, how, which is scary to me, I wish I did, because I do think that there's a lot of Because I do think that there's a lot of myths and stereotypes put out there that before a Democrat or somebody like a candidate like me even engages, they already have preconceptions that aren't true. But you can, my opponent is so sort of unaware of the challenges that real Wisconsinites face, including, you know, comments he's made about farmers. And it's just, you know, we have to get that word out, too. you know, we have to get that word out too. Let's talk about your opponent a little bit more.

So he seems pretty wishy-washy on democracy. There's clearly an effort just for politically wants the benefits of being embraced by and embracing Trump, but doesn't want the baggage, right? So he says, oh, the election, oh, I don't think it was stolen, but there was some fishy stuff going on, right? Or, you know, he says, oh, I don't like this kind of negative politics, but he wants Trump's endorsement. He endorses Trump, the most vicious political, the personal attacking politician we've ever seen in our lifetimes. How do you make sure that he doesn't get to have it both ways? And yeah, how are you talking about the relationship between Hovde and Trump and what it would mean for the kind of senator he'd be? Yeah, so he kissed the ring this past Tuesday when former President Trump flew to Green Bay, Wisconsin and shared a stage with him and endorsed him. We now know where Hovde stands with the MAGA agenda. And we also know because he did once before run for U.S. Senate

in 2012, and he didn't win the Republican primary. He came shy of defeating Tommy Thompson. primary. He came shy of defeating Tommy Thompson. But he's on record. He was 100% opposed to abortion rights. He wanted to overturn the Affordable Care Act in its entirety. What he was saying about Social Security and Medicare made it very clear to me that he would never be in a position to have to rely solely on Social Security for his retirement and doesn't understand the lives of people who do, who don't have a pension, who don't have savings. We have to hold him to his word. We've seen Trump. He lined up everything that needed to happen to overturn Roe versus Wade. It was his three justices. He wants the credit.

He takes the credit every time he can. Right. And then he's saying other things. We have to hold them to their original word. They get in power again. Eric Hovde is going to vote for a national ban on abortion. I'm the champion of the Women's Health Protection Act, which would codify Roe v. Wade. I'm the lead Senate author on that.

You couldn't have higher stakes in a race like this. You elect him, the Senate goes into Republican hands, they pass a national abortion ban. You reelect me and we're fighting to restore those rights, just like I fought to restore other rights threatened in the Dobbs decision, including by passing the Respect for Marriage Act. So you talked about the stakes. The last time I saw you, we were in Wisconsin during that race for the Supreme Court seat, which Democrats turned out and were able to win. It was a huge impact on the state. But one of the things that you've said, that Ben Wickler, the head of the Democratic Party in Wisconsin,

has said is that Wisconsin has been a bellwether for what's been happening in this country. And one of the ways that that's true is this is an incredibly divided state, a state that has Ron Johnson as one of the senators and you as the other, that's gone from Governor Scott Walker to Governor Tony Evers. That's an incredible shift on just on a tiny number of votes. How is this possible? How is it possible that politicians

as radical, extreme, ridiculous as Ron Johnson are so competitive in a state that Joe Biden won, in a state that may determine who the next president is. What are we missing? Is it the dairy? Is it all that milk? No, it's not. Okay. So, and I, just for a quick history snapshot, you know, I have the honor of serving in a Senate seat that was once held at the turn of the last century by fighting Bob La Follette Sr., an icon in our state and in our country. And later, after his son served, it was McCarthy in the same seat, the same electorate, followed by Proxmire, followed by Cole, followed by me. We do have a very interesting electorate in the state of Wisconsin. And it shows you how high the stakes are this time around to turning the vote out and talking to those, Trump supported an insurrection and told the big lie about the outcome of the last presidential election.

We cannot allow that to happen again if we cherish our democracy. splitting decline. And yet in an election this close, there are people out there that very well may be either Baldwin Trump voters or Baldwin Biden voters. There probably are going to be Baldwin Trump voters because you're probably going to outperform Joe Biden. What are those? You must meet them. You must see these people. Talk to them now. What what what have you learned from talking to these kinds of sort of independent or true kind of ticket splitting voters in Wisconsin? Yeah. So I can tell you a couple of stories. I remember going to the groundbreaking of a county-owned rural hospital in Lafayette County. I worked really hard to help them be able to afford to replace their decrepit old hospital with a new state-of-the-art facility and brought home dollars, federal dollars, to help them do that. with a big Trump bumper sticker on his pickup truck, took the microphone at this celebratory event and couldn't stop singing my praises. I was humbled. And I repeated it and they're like,

that guy? No way. Really? He said great things. But showing up matters. Listening and delivering matters. And that's where you produce some of those Trump-Tammy voters. Another one that I will never forget actually does deal with substance as well as dollars and support. I was touring a foundry. This was before the last election. And it's a foundry that makes things for our nation's infrastructure. And so I was taking this tour and the guy showing me around on the tour kind of points at me and says, why do you keep picking on my guy, Trump? Like, what? Why do you keep picking on my guy, Trump? Well, maybe he deserves it, I responded. He was kind of, you know, he didn't really crack a smile. He shows me what he does, and I move on.

And one of my staff members said, okay, so you're a big Trump supporter. What do you think of Tammy Baldwin? And he said, do you see what I do for a living? I make components of our nation's infrastructure. If it were not for buy America policies, I wouldn't have a job. This job would be in India. But buy America policies that I champion in the United States

Senate every day means that we have this really great paying union job in Wisconsin. Now, I want to make that guy into a Biden Baldwin voter because we've never had a president who's been as good on organized labor, first one to ever walk a picket line. My gosh. So I hope we can do that. But that was a great example of a Trump-Baldwin supporter back in 2018 that I found. And it was like, okay, sometimes it's issues. Sometimes it's listening and showing up. And just, I think about all the casework we do, and I don't want to get into the details, but I can't tell you how many veterans we've helped get their benefits that they've earned and deserved, but were, you know, twisted up in the red tape. Or how many people who we helped with their social security or social security disability? Those stories are shared. Yeah.

And do you think you can get some of those people to understand, right? Like the people that identify with Trump, but who see you as having benefited Wisconsin, do you think you kind of coax them over? That's what we're going to try to do. To try to get them over? over? That's what we're going to try to do. I want to run a campaign that is successful and helpful to all Democrats on the ticket, from our state assembly and state senate candidates who are now sprouting up all over the state now that we have a fair map, and up through the top of the ticket. And I hope we can do that. So I want to ask you about two more things. One is Senate's currently debating this House

bill about TikTok. You came out in support of the House version of the bill. The ACLU says that the bill is a violation of the First Amendment. It's also been strange to me, like there may be very valid concerns about TikTok and its effect on privacy and the fact that it has this foreign interest. But it feels as though there's been a lot of kind of classified briefings for members of Congress and senators, but not enough leveling with the American people about something that they're choosing to use. Do you think the American people deserve more information before any kind of bill is passed, even if the goal is to have TikTok sold to an American company, that could potentially lead to a ban. Yes. So the answer to the specific question is yes.

And let me say of the House-passed bill, I'm still studying it. I'm likely to support it. You know, I'm still studying it. I'm likely to support it. I think the goal of divesting it from PRC influence and Chinese ownership is very important for our data security and all sorts of. But I would have written a different bill. What I think is that we do not have any sort of apparatus that would not just evaluate TikTok, but evaluate all sorts of devices and applications, software, and educate. These are the risks. And then be empowered to take certain steps up to and including banning. But that is, I think, a better approach because this one is pretty platform specific.

But I can give you any number of examples of other products that we have in maybe our households that we should be informed about. And we don't have any way of voicing that. And you talked about classified briefings, and I can't disclose what I hear in classified briefings, but some of the information that we could gather if we put our efforts behind it, I think would inform consumers. I like to know about my products, you know, whether it's food and nutrients or where it comes from, or in this case,

are there risks of losing control of my data, somebody being able to surveil my whereabouts? You know, I don't want to too much bring it back to the Dobbs decision, but there was a lot of concern when this reverted to states like Texas that your location data could be surveilled. And if you were three hours in a Planned Parenthood parking lot, you could be prosecuted or pursued. People should know that their devices allow that to happen and be educated about the choices they make. Yeah, because it does seem like if the goal was to get TikTok to go from being Chinese-owned to American-owned, then whatever data is being collected is still being collected. We all have kind of resigned. Right now, we have resigned ourselves to just having absolutely no idea.

But you're saying you would like to see some kind of larger privacy bill beyond just focusing on TikTok. Absolutely. I want to be an educated consumer. Oh, I don't. I don't want to know what's in the food. I don't want to know what the phone's collecting. I just want to live my life. Don't tell me. I don't want to know what I don't want. So many calories are in my sandwiches. Don't tell me. I'm trying to live. I think that you can just pass up on that information, but I'm going to look at it. All right, great. Fine. I think that's fine. Now, speaking of giving consumers information, you've introduced a bill and called on the FDA to make sure non-dairy milks don't get to gallivant around town wearing the milk label. That you think the milk label belongs on dairy products, not whatever they're squeezing out of almonds and soybeans. What should we call what they're squeezing out of almonds and soybeans? Well, we could even do a contest around that. I think almond beverage sounds great. Almond beverage? Almond juice?

Almond juice. That would be okay. So there's not a statutory definition of beverage or juice. There is a statutory definition of milk. Of milk. And it comes from an animal that lactates. So goats, that counts. Yes. You can say goat milk. We can still say goat milk, everybody. And cow milk, but none of this almond milk.

That would be my preference that the FDA actually enforce the law that they are required to enforce. I'm kind of with that. They're declining. They're declining to do so right now, which is very frustrating to my farmers. So, you know, the use of the name actually has a serious impact on their business. There's a lot of consumers, again, you don't need to have knowledge about what you consume if you don't want to. Yeah, I'm a low information consumer, yeah. But what I would say is, you know, it's not a nutritional equivalence. And if you just hear that, say, almond milk is better for you because it's plant-based, children need calcium.

Babies need nutrients that milk provides. Don't suggest that this is a nutritional equivalent by using dairy names. So, yeah. Wisconsin's culture is not your costume, almonds. Is that what you're saying? Yeah, that's right. But I'm not for- Getting some looks. I was going to say, but we were just talking about TikTok.

I'm not talking about banning almond beverage. No one's saying you are. You just want to label it differently. I think juice. I think we have to face the fact that just because it's milk in its appearance, it's just juice because you get it the same way you get juice, don't you? You squeeze. I don't know what they do to make almond milk. There's some great YouTube videos about it. I'll let you know the link later. Okay. Now, last question. You're gay. We talked about that earlier.

Let me ask you this. And you may not have an answer. Moona or Boy Genius? I don't have an answer. Okay. I'm a Moona girl. What are your thoughts on Renee Rapp? Oh, gosh.

You're going to show how... No, no. This is what... Listen, I think, look, these coastal elites, they know about Renee Rapp. They know about Muna and Boy Genius, not the hard scrabble, milk chugging, you're too busy, you're too busy under a cow doing this to know what Muna is. I think the answer is yes, and that's really, you're supposed to brief me before this interview. This is part of the fun. Senator Tammy Baldwin, thank you so much for your time. Thank you. And what can people do to help in the campaign right now? Go to TammyBaldwin.com. There's all sorts of opportunities there. So obviously people can

give, people can volunteer. We even have a toolkit on how people can amplify the message online using all sorts of social media, including TikTok. Including TikTok. So yeah, a lot people can do to help. All right. Senator, thank you so much. Thank you. All right.

Are you going to give me the cultural references? Let's actually keep, let's leave this on. Let's, yes. Okay. Okay. So basically, here's what we got. So Muna and Boy Genius are two groups. They're both have three members.

They are a mix of bisexual and queer performers. I'm a Muna person. I'm a Muna person. You're Boy Genius. You're Boy Genius. So can I tell you that my era, it would be Elton John or Queen? For sure. And what would you have chosen?

Elton John. Okay. And I think that's fine. Both of the movies, the biopics came out like right about the same time. And I found them both very fascinating. But yeah, that's my, you know, in my high school, you know, basketball games when I'm in the stand, it was, we are the champions and I will rock you. I have Elton John phases and I have Queen phases.

I absolutely love both. I will see neither of those movies for very simple reasons. I do not like movies about artists making art because it always ends up with somebody going like, what kind of Rhapsody should it be? What kind of Rhapsody? Bohemian Rhapsody. You know what I mean? It's like, I don't want to know how this was made.

I don't want to see how the sausage is made. You know? Okay. Okay. Well, we're definitely done a second time. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks to Tammy Baldwin for joining us today.

And we'll have another episode for you on Wednesday. If you want to get ad-free episodes, exclusive content, and more, consider joining our Friends of the Pod subscription community at crooked.com slash friends. And if you're already doom-scrolling, don't forget to follow us at Pod Save America on Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube for access to full episodes, bonus content, and more. Plus, if you're as opinionated as we are, consider dropping us a review. Pod Save America is a Crooked Media production. Our show is produced by Olivia Martinez and David Toledo.

Our associate producers are Saul Rubin and Farah Safari. Kira Wakeem is our senior producer. Reid Cherlin is our executive producer. The show is mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick. Jordan Cantor is our sound engineer, with audio support from Kyle Seglin and Charlotte Landis. Writing support by Hallie Kiefer. Madeline Herringer is our head of news and programming. 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

Tolles, Kirill Pelleviv, and Molly Lobel.