Pod Save America - Will the Supreme Court Upend 2024?

Episode Date: February 9, 2024

Republicans find creative new ways to humiliate themselves for Donald Trump. The Supreme Court hears oral arguments in Colorado’s 14th amendment case against Trump, and Special Counsel Robert Hur won't charge Biden for mishandling classified documents. Then, Jon and Dan put their dignity on the line and place bets on the Super Bowl in our new game: All Bets Are (Shaken) Off. 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 Dan Pfeiffer. On today's show, the Supreme Court hears arguments as to whether Donald Trump can run for president after participating in an insurrection and prepare to decide whether his criminal trial for trying to overturn the last election will take place before the next election. And the DOJ decides not to bring charges against Joe Biden for mishandling classified info, even though the special counsel in that investigation decided to take a few shots at him. info, even though the special counsel in that investigation decided to take a few shots at him.

But first, Republican politicians have spent the week finding new ways to humiliate themselves just to keep the criminal defendant who lost them the last few elections happy. Nikki Haley, herself no stranger to humiliation after a bruising 30-point loss in Nevada to the formidable none-of-these-candidates, did do a great job summing up the cost of her party becoming a cult look at what happened yesterday trump loses the case on having immunity for whatever comes next republicans lose a fight on the border they lose a fight on israel aid the head of the republican party loses her job everything that donald trump, it's chaos. No notes from me. What about you? I mean, really wish she had found her voice a little bit earlier in this campaign. She might have beaten none of the above. Like the chaos message, clearly most Republican voters don't

give a shit about it. They either like Trump's chaos or they don't see it as chaos. But, you know, independents and swing voters have certainly rejected Trump and Republican chaos in 2018, shit about it they either like trump's chaos or they don't see it as chaos but you know independence and swing voters have certainly rejected uh trump and republican chaos in 2018 2020 and 2022 so and 2023 don't leave that one out in 2023 yeah so we'll uh we'll see how that goes all right let's start with congress as uh as hayley mentioned where republicans negotiated the toughest most conservative immigration deal in decades. Then Trump ordered them to kill their own deal because he thinks chaos at the border will help him beat Joe Biden. So they killed it.

They're moving ahead with a baseless and fairly useless effort to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas so that Trump can have a talking point on the campaign trail. But they failed at that because Republicans picked a creepy backbencher for Speaker who can't count votes. And now that the Senate potentially does have the votes to pass the aid for Israel, Ukraine, and Taiwan that a bunch of Republicans have said that they want, they're going to even greater lengths to embarrass themselves by saying things like this. Finally, I just want to ask whether or not this new bill that's just about foreign policy, whether you're going to vote in favor of it. Foreign money for Israel, for what's happening in Ukraine.

What do you think of that standalone foreign policy bill? David, I voted no already a few minutes ago, and here's the reason why. Unfortunately, what this administration and Chuck Schumer, they are doing is using the crisis in Israel to support other priorities of the party. We should first secure our southern border. Oh, my God. No to the border deal because Biden doesn't need legislation to secure the border. And no to foreign aid because it doesn't come with border legislation. That was Tim Scott, by the way.

Tim Scott gave the best speech at the 2020 convention, once seen as the party's fresh-faced future, and now he sounds like a zombie Trump bot stuck on repeat. It is just wild that what the Senate is trying to do right now is the exact thing that Joe Biden asked them to do four and a half months ago. All they're voting on is his original request for supplemental aid for Israel, Ukraine, Taiwan, and a couple other things. That's it. And so we went through this whole process about negotiating a border deal, combining these things because we're probably said they need.

They killed it in like 17 minutes and are back to just trying to pass the thing Joe Biden asked for. What a gigantic waste of time and tremendous incompetence from this goat rodeo of a political party that controls way too much of government. And they still might not pass the national security funding bill. They might not pass the aid. And even if they do, where's it going well that's what yeah what do you think happens now so so first of all the senate republicans are able to propose amendments to the uh foreign aid bill and

they want to amend it with wait for it border security proposals so they want to it's weird they want to if only they could pass funding for ukraine and israel and taiwan but also pair it with like tougher border security wouldn't it be they should do like a deal with democrats where they figure out oh yeah yeah maybe like lankford and murphy could get in a room together and try to figure this out just just spitball in here yeah those could be some ideas. Yeah, they could do that. So they're going to offer amendments, but we'll see. It might pass the Senate because a cloture vote passed. And so there's now enough Senate votes to pass this thing. And Mike Johnson hasn't yet said that it's dead on arrival in the House like he did with the combo foreign aid border bill. But he also has people like Marjorie Taylor Greene,

who has said that she'll file a motion to vacate if he lets aid for Ukraine come up for a vote. So what do you think happens here? I think it's pretty hard to imagine that Mike Johnson will be able to put a Senate passed bill that includes funding for Ukraine on the floor of the House. I think that would be, I think that I imagine Marjorie Taylor Greene is right, the sentence I don't say often, and that would be the floor of the House. I imagine Marjorie Taylor

Greene is right, a sentence I don't say often, and that would be the end of his speakership. The whole reason they came up with this whole border security thing was to avoid taking that singular vote because voting on Ukraine aid, one, is a huge problem for him with the Freedom Caucus, but two, it drives a gigantic wedge through the middle of the Republican Party between your more traditional neoconservative anti-Russia types and the America Firsters and then the people who like to cuddle up to Putin. And so he doesn't want to have that vote because it would be very bad for him. So that's what he's been trying to avoid. So it's hard to imagine that if they don't do the place where he drew the red line on border security, that he would just take this up and pass it. I mean, the guy seems not particularly good at his job, so

maybe he will stumble ass backwards into doing it. But if you took what he said seriously, which I really recognize you should not based on the last few months of his speakership, it seems hard to imagine he would actually bring it up given that. But who the hell knows anymore also as of this recording on thursday afternoon donald trump hasn't weighed in yet but if donald trump tells them to all vote against uh foreign aid they're going to vote against foreign aid because they have no policy preferences of their own that they won't subsume for donald trump i mean like i'm sure some of them still have i'm sure some republican politicians still have policy preferences. Some of them really like tax cuts for the rich. They like to deport dreamers. They like to outlaw abortion. I can't think of a single policy

preference they wouldn't sacrifice for Donald Trump. They have now put electing this man again as president ahead of policy beliefs, moral beliefs, their constituents, their careers, their reputations, their own names, in the case of Ronna McDaniel. Actually, we say cults jokingly. I don't see how the Republican Party is different than an actual cult. I mean, it's a strong statement there, but it's hard to poke holes in, I'll be honest with you. there but it's hard to poke holes in I'll be honest with you I mean like how many Republicans if Donald Trump if Donald Trump told a bunch of Republicans to put on a collar get on all fours and he was going to walk them around Mar-a-Lago with a leash in front of a bunch of television cameras how many would say no I like a handful maybe yeah I mean it's basically what ron de santis basically did before he ran

president so yeah i think i think that's very i mean i i don't think he listens to this podcast but if he did i imagine he will try to do that because i imagine he would he would enjoy the prospect of making some of them do that i mean they're all pretty close to doing that now i mean i mean figuratively that's exactly what they were doing. That is exactly what they were doing. Literally, who knows? I don't, I really want to see it, but figuratively, that is what is happening in Congress. Speaking of Republicans who've been completely neutered, Mitch McConnell.

Did you ever think you'd live to see the day where Senate Republicans turn on Mitch McConnell for being too much of a squishy bipartisan dealmaker, which is apparently what all his, or what a lot of his Senate Republican colleagues are doing now. They're calling for him to step down. They want new leadership. I have spent probably more time than is healthy imagining Mitch McConnell's political demise. In the many scenarios in which I imagined that, I did not think it'd be one where Ted Cruz would get the upper hand on Mitch McConnell. So that was a surprise to me. I think this is actually a pretty significant moment because the dominant figure of Republican politics in the last 20 years is Mitch McConnell.

It's not Donald Trump. It's not George W. Bush. It's Mitch McConnell because all the things that... Donald Trump does not exist without Mitch McConnell, right? Mitch McConnell helping change campaign finance laws going way back. Mitch McConnell stealing the Supreme Court seat to give voters permission to vote for Trump, even voters who did not like him in the 2016 election. I don't think Donald Trump wins that election on Mitch McConnell.

And he's been this dominant figure in part because he ruled with power and strength. And the way the last 48 hours or so played out is a sign that he has lost his fastball. His reign is essentially over. I would be surprised if he is the Senate leader in the next Congress. Oh, and I think that's true no matter who wins, no matter who wins the White House or the Senate. I think he's done. Yeah. And that's not even just age and capacity.

It is his way of governing. There's actually some metaphors or lessons for Trump here is that he ruled with an iron fist for all this time. And once you've been exposed as weak, once the people get to look behind the curtain, it is over. And this week, he was the one who demanded that bipartisan deal. He shepherded it. He supported it. He brought it forward. His staff was in the room the whole time negotiating. And it blew up in his face. He misread the politics. And he voted against it. And then he misread it. He brought it forward. His staff was in the room the whole time negotiating. And it blew up in his face. He misread the politics. And he voted against it. And then he misread his- Right. He misread the politics. He misread his own power. And so this is the end

of Mitch McConnell. The Mitch McConnell era in Republican politics is over. And the worst part about it is it's probably going to be replaced with something even worse than Mitch McConnell, right? Probably less effective in all the bad ways than Mitch McConnell, but even worse than Mitch McConnell, right? Probably less effective in all the bad ways of Mitch McConnell, but even worse. Well, and there had been some debate because Mitch McConnell was like, well, you know, obviously he got rid of the filibuster for Supreme Court justices, but has said that he wants to uphold the filibuster for legislative issues. And there's some debate, would he really do that or not? If they got back in power, wouldn't he get rid of the filibuster for legislative issues. And there's some debate, would he really do that or not? If they got back in power, wouldn't he get rid of the filibuster to pass an abortion ban or other priorities? That debate is moot now because there will be no Mitch McConnell and the next Republican

leader in the Senate will absolutely get rid of the filibuster. Do you think President Donald Trump is going to care about the history and decorum of the Senate filibuster if it's standing in the way of him passing an abortion ban or some other piece of horrendous legislation he wants? Of course not. Which is all the more reason why Donald Trump wins the presidency and Republicans win the Senate. Chances of a national abortion ban, extremely high, extremely high. And I think they've gotten higher since Dobbs happened. Oh, 100%. 100%. I agree with that. We talked about how Trump and Republicans intentionally stoking chaos at the border

is a huge political opening for Democrats. Biden started hitting them on that front from the White House this week. But I don't know that anything could be more politically effective than some of the soundbites we've heard from Republicans themselves. Here's ultra conservative senator turned rhino cuck trader James Lankford talking on the Senate floor this week. In fact, I had a popular commentator four weeks ago that I talked to that told me flat out before they knew any of the contents of the bill, any of the content, nothing was out at that point. That told me flat out, if you try to move a bill that solves the border crisis during this presidential year,

I will do whatever I can to destroy you. Because I do not want you to solve this during the presidential election. Fun fact, right-wing radio host Jesse Kelly is the person that James Lang langford was talking about you know jesse kelly barely see him on twitter once in a while he he uh he he tweeted this clip and he's uh took credit saying he may be a eunuch but i'll say this about langford he's got great taste in radio called him a eunuch see he's a radio host jesse kelly yeah he's a radio i don't know where but yeah you learn

something new every day how hard should biden and democrats lean in to this argument that basically langford was making do you think it's easy enough for voters to understand as oftentimes whatever's happening in congress is quite difficult for voters to understand it doesn't really break through but for something this, can they get it to break through? They sure as hell got to try. I think it was great the president spoke out about it the other day. He should be speaking about it every day. He should talk about it in the State of the Union. Everyone should do it because it's not just, there are two reasons for this. One is border security is Biden's worst issue. In that NBC poll that we've all hate from last weekend,

he's down 35 points on who you trust more on border control and immigration. 35 points. And here we have a chance to go on offense on it. Now, I think you and I talked about this before on this podcast. The argument isn't that Trump's weak on the border. It is that Trump put himself over border security. And that to me is a message that is believable, that Donald Trump and Republicans put their own politics ahead of what was best for the country. Because all your messages should be sort of almost a nesting doll of your positive message and your negative message against your opponent. And that message against Republicans, that they're unwilling to work with Democrats,

they want to put their own political well-being ahead of the country, fits exactly into what is the most appealing part of Biden's brand to most voters, that he is someone who is willing to work with anyone and everyone to get things done, that he is in it to help other people. And that's just the perfect contrast. And so it's not that this particular thing is going to break through and there are going to be people running around talking about the demise of the Lankford-Murphy compromise. particular thing is going to break through and there are going to be people running around talking about the demise of the Lankford-Murphy compromise. It's going to be that this is a data point to tell the larger story, which highlights what people don't like about Republicans, what they like about Joe Biden. So we got to run with this. It is a rare opportunity and it's not that

often you get to go on offense on your opponent's best issue, which is border security. And I think that they need to expand it beyond border security. I mean, this is a message frame for all of the other issues, right? And it's an argument to make to voters who are unhappy with not only the border, but the cost of living, state of our politics, whatever. And Biden and the Democrats can say, we have solutions. We've been willing to reach across the aisle to get stuff done. We have gotten some stuff done by working with some Republicans over the last several years. But most Republican politicians in this party are only in this for Donald Trump. And Donald Trump is only in this for himself.

And I think you just run that play on every single issue. And you can point to a whole bunch of different examples. There's also like a we haven't even talked about the tax bill that's moving through Congress that's bipartisan that would extend the child tax credit like do we bet that that's going to get passed i don't necessarily i don't have a lot of hope for that even though it's a huge difference right exactly and like do they want to give oh and chuck grassley republican senator chuck grassley already said he's against it because it would give joe biden to win well it would also like alleviate poverty for millions of children but like you know they don't give a shit. I just think this is a really important thing, really important message to get across. I think Biden especially has to do this in the State of

the Union. The Grassley quote and some of the other ones that we've mentioned are just a real example. Have you ever seen a group of people who are more apt to confuse the script in the state's directions? That's the reason you're killing the bill. It's not what you're supposed to say about why you're killing the bill. You fucking knuckleheads. So thank you for that. So Trump has convinced Republican politicians to basically paralyze Congress, potentially let Vladimir Putin roll through Europe.

He also got Republican Party leaders to essentially rig the primary process for him, which is why Nevada gave him his own caucus tonight, Thursday night, that will award him all the state's delegates. But you know what? All this was still not enough. Even though RNC chair Ronna McDaniel rigged the primary and even changed her name for Trump, she reportedly stepped down after the South Carolina primary so that the boss can replace her with some stop the steal goon from North Carolina. It sure seems like Donald Trump has a stronger grip on the Republican Party than he ever has, despite losing them the last three elections and facing 91 felony

counts. What's up with that? Are they just giving their voters what they want? What's... Donald Trump has never been more popular with Republican voters than he is right now. That's why. This is, we can blame, yes, a bunch of these politicians, weak, amoral, immoral human beings unwilling to take the slightest bit of a stand on behalf of patriotism and history and all that, of course. But the reason this is happening is Republican voters, particularly the ones who vote in primaries, love Donald Trump. They love him more than any of these other yahoos. And so you guys are having this conversation about why people are endorsing Trump when he's just going to toss you aside like Ron or Romney McDaniel.

And it's because you're going to lose your primary. The people who don't endorse Trump, like Ron or Romney McDaniel. And it's because you're going to lose your primary. The people who don't endorse Trump, they get sent, they're done, right? The handful of fucking morons who endorse Ron DeSantis are in a world of hurt right now because Donald Trump's going to make them pay for it.

And Mitt Romney, out of the party. James Lankford's going to get a primary in 2028. Mike Gallagher from Wisconsin, who was one of the few Republicans who voted against the Mayorkas impeachment, now the party's pissed at him. They're like, you know, sick in the base after him. He's going to probably have a primary.

Like it's just every single person. Mitt Romney, Liz Cheney, Jeff Flake. Remember these people? They all stood up. They're all out of the party. Mitch McConnell now. Mitch McConnell. Exactly.

They're all toast. So at least, I mean, there's the lesson here, I guess, is either you are all in and up Donald Trump's ass or you're all out and you light yourself on fire like Liz Cheney did in Mitt Romney's time, right? Where you at least can go down fighting for something you care about. The people who sit in the middle, like Mitch McConnell, they're the ones who end up getting completely screwed in this. Yeah, I will say that it is a cycle here, the cult dynamic, because it's not just that these Republican politicians have no choice because the base loves Donald Trump so much. The base loves Donald Trump so much because all these Republican politicians are constantly saying how much they love Donald Trump. And so is the right wing media. And so because these Republican politicians are so scared of saying what they really think about Donald Trump, a lot of them, then the base is like, oh, all the people I'm listening to, all the information I get, all the media I see, all the leaders I see on TV, all the Republicans I vote for,

they all love Donald Trump. So of course Donald Trump's awesome. Can I say one thing about the Ronna firing? Yeah. She was pretty bad at her job. I mean, let's just be honest here, right? I mean, and how hard was the job at this point? Well, she's in charge of the Republican Party and the Republicans lost the 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, and 2023 elections. So almost every single year she was in charge of the RNC, they lost seats. So, you know.

Yeah, well, lipstick on a pig here. She's got Donald Trump as the party leader. Watch this. I'm just saying. That's the irony. The guy that fired her is the reason the Republican Party has been doing so poorly. That may be. I'm not saying that she is the main reason they kept losing, but her record is not one you can really take to the bank either. I mean, she's a terrible human being. I think that seems pretty clear. A person completely incapable of shame or self-awareness,

but also pretty piss poor record as RNC chair, so. Think she'll go back to Ronna Romney, McDaniel? Think she'll put the Romney back in now that when she's gone? I hope she, if she shows up at a Romney family reunion, Mitch just slams the door in her face. I guess he said nice things about her already. He said nothing but love for my cousin. Oh, Mitch, come on. It's too nice, Mitch just slams the door in her face. I guess he said nice things about her already. He said nothing but love for my cousin.

Oh, Mitt, come on. It's too nice, Mitt. Blood thicker than water, I guess. So let's talk about one of the last institutional bulwarks against a second Trump term, the judicial system. On Thursday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case that will decide whether Trump could be kicked off the ballot in Colorado. It certainly sounded like they will rule in his favor.

The conservative and liberal justices were skeptical of Colorado's case, with most of them making some version of the argument that a single state shouldn't be able to decide who the rest of the country can vote for. Notably, they didn't say much about Colorado's finding that Trump did in fact participate in an insurrection. They seem to want to stay away from that. So to be continued there. So our usual disclaimer here, we will save the legal analysis

for our friends at Strict Scrutiny. You should absolutely listen to the great conversation on Wednesday's pod about this case between Kate Shaw and Lovett, who he actually has his LSAT score tattooed across his back. Did you know that? I not surprised to know that. No. And also you should check out strict scrutiny dropped two bonus pods this week, one on the 14th Amendment case and one on the Trump immunity case. So check those out. But Dan, for us political hacks, do you think there will be political implications from what seems like it'll be a win for Trump here?

I don't think so. While I don't feel as strongly about this as John Lovett, I've always had some political anxiety about how this was going to play out, in part because I always assumed the Supreme Court would just put Donald Trump back on the ballot. And so we're having this conversation that gives Donald Trump the opportunity to argue the system is being weaponized against him. The Democrats are the ones who are anti-democratic. Democrats are the ones who are interfering in the election, which is all bad faith bullshit. But it feels like this is going to be dispensed with pretty quickly. And I guess maybe Trump will try to use this as a way to say that he's not an insurrectionist. Yeah, he'll definitely do that. He can do that, but that is going to be so overtaken by what happens in the January 6th

trial that I know we'll get to. So yes, he could say that for a few days. I'll send some truths about it. The glorious Supreme Court says, rules for Donald Trump. I did not engage in insurrection. He can say all those things. But then what will really matter is what a jury, if this trial happens on time, that a jury of 12 citizens, what they say about whether he committed insurrection or not. And so this is a little ephemeral.

I'll also say that even if for some reason, unlikely reason, the Supreme Court decided that Donald Trump couldn't be on the ballot in Colorado. Like, can you imagine the political fallout from that, that he's not on the ballot in Colorado? Other states have decided that he is on the ballot. It doesn't necessarily even line up with the political leanings of the state. Right. Like Illinois said he should be on the ballot. Maine said no. And can you imagine like some Republican state saying, no, he's going to be on the ballot. Maine said no. And can you imagine some Republican state saying, no, he's going to be on the ballot and the Democrat state? I mean, it would have been

a fucking crazy, crazy disaster, I think. Yeah. That's ultimately what always gave me, like, I'm not here, I'm not one to argue with, I don't know, a Larry Treiber or Kate Shaw about the constitutional merits of this, but what always gave me political anxiety was it was the worst of all worlds. He was going to be off the ballot in one or two states that were non-competitive. And so we would not be stopping Donald Trump in insurrectionists from coming to the White House. We would just be giving Donald Trump, an insurrectionist, the opportunity to weaponize the decisions by a few states that may help him return to the White House as an insurrectionist. So the court will also likely decide next week whether to weigh in on the D.C. Circuit Court's decision that Trump is not immune from prosecution. If they do, the speed with which they hear the case and issue a ruling

could mean a summer and potentially fall campaign where Trump is tried and potentially convicted for an attempted coup. Or the trial could be delayed until after the election and if Trump wins, never happen at all high stakes high stakes dan yeah what do you think a campaign looks like where the supreme court drags its feet and the trial gets pushed and what does one look like where trump is sitting in court being tried for election subversion in the middle of both party conventions in the summer? Weird. Seems really, the whole thing seems quite weird. I mean, regardless of the timing, what I think this is going to come down to is a huge battle to shape the outcome. Because we know from the polling, this NBC poll where Biden's down five,

but he wins by two. If you ask people if they would vote for Trump if he's convicted, the exit polls would show that four in 10 New Hampshire voters and one in three Iowa voters, Republican primary voters, would not vote for Trump if he were convicted or did not see anybody fit for president. All the polling shows that a conviction is very, very bad for Trump and would likely cost him the election as of today. But he has every day between now and a verdict to try to undermine that outcome by raising questions about the politicization of it, just all of his stuff about two-tier systems of justice and Joe Biden's weaponizing the government against me and all of this. And so you're in this battle and there's

going to be this tremendous asymmetry because Donald Trump, there are two people with the biggest bully pulpits or the biggest bullhorns in America, American politics are Biden and Trump. And Trump will have every single day to claim that this, the system is being rigged against them. It's a bunch of bullshit that it's a liberal judge, blue city, liberal city, all of that to try to undermine the outcome. Deranged prosecutor. Deranged prosecutor. Joe Biden has me on trial. He's prosecuting me as I'm running. Yeah, it of that to try to undermine the outcome. Deranged prosecutor. Deranged prosecutor. Joe Biden has me on trial. He's prosecuting me as I'm running. Yeah, it's going to be- He's going to do all of that because he's just got to move a small handful of people to think

that it's been rigged against him, to not buy the verdict, not to buy a conviction as a disqualifying event. And Biden, who to date, for following the normal protocols of normal politics, the policies of the Department of Justice, has not commented at all on these federal investigations into Trump, is going to say nothing about it? I don't know how you – It's hard to imagine and like what does the democratic convention look like if every day the convention we have speakers at night and biden's out there speaking and the first lady and they get obama just whatever and like split screen donald trump's in court well i like what happens at the debate if a debate were to happen it's just it is this election is unprecedented in so many ways. I mean, you have an insurrectionist running, you have the former president running to get his

job back. We don't have a real even base to understand what's going to happen because the 2020 election was so unusual because of it took place in a pandemic. And so it's incredibly impressive, but it's just like imagining how these two sides are going to interact when one side has decided to, for all totally understandable reasons, to not talk about what is the biggest issue, would be the biggest issue, the biggest news story happening every single day. I imagine at the convention, everyone who does not work for the Biden administration can talk about it in some way, shape or form. But the president and I imagine the first lady and the vice president would not. Nikki Haley is talking about it. Yeah. So it's like, of course, Democrats should talk about it. We got we don't. First, it was just, you know, PSA guest Chris Christie. But now now it's like Nikki Haley is out there talking about Trump and his trials and his immunity. Of course we have to talk about it.

And what I think Democrats have to recognize in this, because if Joe Biden's not going to talk about it, other Democrats are going to have to find a way to be pushed back against what Trump is saying, is Trump starts with an advantage here. came down, the majority of people, including a majority of independents, thought that one of the main reasons why these indictments were happening was to stop Trump from winning the election. They believe that politics is at play here because people are incredibly cynical about what is happening right now. They're incredibly distrustful of government. And the voters who are going to decide this election are often the ones who are most cynical and most distrustful of government. And the voters who are going to decide this election are often the ones who are most cynical and most distrustful of politics. And so it's not simply just us all believing that this is going to be totally fine and then a conviction in itself will stand. Trump has the ability to undermine it with enough people that he could still win when that happens. And this is the point where I should absolutely plug the latest episode of Polar Coaster, where I talked to Celinda Lake, the Democratic pollster,

on this very question of how a conviction would impact the 2024 election. She's got a lot of really good insight from polls and focus groups she's done about how voters are consuming the trials and the indictments and how they're thinking about it. So check it out. I can't wait to listen to that one. I also think that for as much as you want to talk to voters now and do focus groups now, it's just really hard to predict what the media and information environment is going to be like in the middle of a trial and what it's going to feel like if a jury convicts Trump and there's headlines all across the country and the world and across and like an everyone's screen everywhere that says Donald Trump has been convicted or not convicted or not convicted right yeah or not convicted and I do think how the trial

even and even before the conviction or or not, how the trial plays out and how people understand how the trial is playing out, how it's covered, how it's talked about, not just from Donald Trump, but from the mainstream media, by Democrats, everyone else, is going to be hugely important in how people process the information and ultimately make a decision about Trump's guilt and whether they're going to vote for him or not. I mean, just like the testimony, you know, there's this big story in the New York Times Magazine about Mark Meadows and whether they're going to vote for him or not. I mean, just like the testimony, you know, there's this big story in the New York Times magazine about Mark Meadows and all the cooperation he's done. What you said, if someone high profile like that. Oh yeah, we haven't talked about that. Yeah.

Meadows, apparently Meadows got immunity and sat down for five hours to talk about Donald Trump, the guy who was his chief of staff with him during the, from the end of the November election through January 6th and after. He was right there and he just testified for five hours and got immunity. It was the point of contact between the war room that Roger Stone was in with the Proud Boys and the White House. But there are going to be these moments though. Is there going to be a mistake someone makes that Trump or other people can use to suggest that the system is being rigged against them. I mean, it's been a long time, very, very long time since you've had a trial like this

that has, I mean, really OJ, I guess, before- I was going to say, this will be bigger than OJ. This will be bigger than the OJ trial. But will there be cameras? No, right? I don't believe so now. Yeah, that's a huge difference. But you have Donald Trump going out every day if he's there. Every day. And speaking to the press. And what is the operation to push back against that? What is Biden going to say at a rally when Trump says something, but he can't comment? It's all, I mean, there are a lot of things to figure out here, but it is, I mean, this

is giant. This is everything that we're talking about, about the economy and the jobs numbers and GDP and what the polling says and the border security, but all these things are very important and they're going to be in an election. Everything's important, but then you have hanging over your head the biggest, most unpredictable thing that's ever happened in a presidential election coming at some point, hopefully, right? Depending on what the Supreme Court does. Yeah.

And I do, you know, listening to the justices today and the fact that they didn't touch or didn't really talk about the federal court in Colorado's decision that he participated in an insurrection. hard to imagine. And of course, anything is possible. But I find it really hard to imagine that the Supreme Court is going to say, you know what, we're going to kick this case. We're going to make it impossible to have this case heard before the election. I just find it really tough to believe that. But who knows? They're the Supreme Court and there's a bunch of Trump appointees on it and who knows? But it seems, I don't know. I don't know. From hearing them today, I don't know. I don't know either. Obviously, all the smart people seem to have that position. I will say there are moments when the fact that I'm a little older than you, or maybe significantly older than you, comes into play. And one of them is I was sitting, Bush v. Gore, right? I was in Florida

in a room with all the smartest lawyers that work for Gore, and they were all saying that – and all the legal experts were saying that it seemed incredibly unlikely the Supreme Court would intervene and stop the count in Florida. Then the Supreme Court intervened and stopped the count in Florida. So anything – and that was a Supreme Court that was much less political than this one. I'm just saying anything is possible here. If I had to bet one way or the other, I would bet the way you bet. But there's a middle ground where they just delay this thing so late that maybe the trial can't happen, right? Where they don't award – this is something they talked about in the strict scrutiny pod that was very helpful – is maybe they don't agree with Donald Trump's argument, but they hold hearings,

they have a hearing, and they make a decision, and it pushes the case off long enough that it becomes impossible to finish it by October. And that's probably not the outcome that John Roberts wants, but it may be the outcome that enough NAGA justices want. Yeah. Although, as Kate said to Love it on Wednesday's pod, everyone will know pretty early on in this process whether the Supreme Court is acting in a way that will push the trial past November or not. And everyone should respond accordingly based on, you know, when they issued the stay, if they issued the stay, when they take the case, when they deny cert, not right. All that stuff is going to tell us what the timeline is probably going to look like so we will know soon enough um what the plan is

here all right speaking of of just stomach turning topics uh we save the the most fun for last it appears trump's 2024 opponent won't be getting indicted anytime soon the justice department just released the final report from special counsel robert, who has decided not to charge Joe Biden with any crimes related to his own mishandling of classified information. Herr did find evidence that Biden quote willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency when he was a private citizen, but that evidence quote does not establish Mr. Biden's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The report went on to say that a jury would need to find that Biden willfully retained the classified info. And then they speculated that the jury would be unlikely to convict because Biden and his lawyers would likely present him as a, quote,

well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory. well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory. And it goes on to cite numerous examples of Biden having memory issues during his interview with the special counsel. It was basically just an in-kind donation to the Trump campaign from Robert Herr, a former Trump appointee and a former clerk for Justice Rehnquist appointed by Trump to be U.S. attorney in Maryland. Though, as Biden pointed out in his response, he spoke at the House Democratic Caucus on Thursday, the report also laid out the difference between Biden and Trump on the classified documents issue. As the special counsel wrote, and I quote, several material distinctions between Mr. Trump's case and Mr. Biden's are clear. And by the way, this is the Republican counsel.

Mr. Trump's case and Mr. Biden's are clear. And by the way, this is the Republican Council. Most notably, after given multiple chances, he returned classified documents and avoided prosecution. Mr. Trump allegedly did the opposite. According to the indictment, he has not only refused to return documents for many months, he also obstructed justice by enlisting others to destroy evidence and then lie about it that's the distinction that is the distinction so this sucks i mean it is it is like everyone remember what happened with james comey in 2016

is like uh 50 or 60 years ago uh this was i mean it wasn't a press conference, so I guess that part's better, but the report itself, like worse than what Comey did, because this guy went out of his way to just take shots at Joe Biden's memory. Only in our world can a report exonerating Joe Biden saying he will not be charged with a crime that Donald Trump was charged with and lays out in a clear detail as President Biden just did the differences between what Biden did and Trump did. Can that be bad news? That should be good news. He has not been indicted. He's not been charged with a crime. But the absolute partisan hackery involved in doing this, the way he did it is just – I mean, it's honestly breathtaking.

It is breathtaking the way he did this. He didn't have to do any of those things that wasn't necessary for it. The part that Joe Biden read is why Joe Biden was in charge of the crime. It's not that he has bad memory. What did this guy think he was going to do? He was going to get up there and the jury was going to be like, oh, I'm sure this guy forgot his class of information. That was not going to be the defense. I mean, I can only imagine how pissed the White House is. It's pretty stunning, but maybe not surprising. And maybe should be an argument against appointing Republican special counsels who work for Donald Trump to investigate Democratic presidents by choice, which is what Merrick Garland did.

But just, it's bad. It is very bad. And I think this is one of those things that is going to be – it's going to be a topic of discussion for the next period here. There's going to be several news cycles about this because it – Oh, yeah. misspoke and gave the wrong names of European leaders, which is something that I will say, having known Joe Biden a long time, he could have done 20 years ago, right? That is not a sign of his age. It's just when he's up on stage, that happens sometimes. But when you have those two things that are bubbling, and then you have the special counsel do this, you can see it on Twitter, you can see it in the text messages that we've gotten

from Democrats freaking out about it. It's going to kick off a panic cycle among Democrats, and it's going to be really annoying. Yeah, I mean, I get it. Look, so they go through, and the characterization of Biden's memory, right? Because a lot of people in a lot of interviews with investigators say, I have no memory of that. I have no memory of that. I do not recall. Right. People are sending around clips. Trump did memory in there, because they noted that, you know, at one point in the report, the special counsel talks about Biden's former counsel forgetting something and describes it as his memory of these events could well have faded over the course of more than six years. So like very like when other people that they interviewed for this forgot something, they

just said, oh, it could have it was a long time. They could have forgotten nobody. But with Biden, they were said, oh, it was a long time. They could have forgotten. But with Biden, they were like, he's a senile old man. It was just that blatant. And they use examples of he would say things like, 2013, was I still vice president then? Or 2009, was I vice president then? At one point, he couldn't remember the year that Beau died.

And all of this is happening. It was a five-hour interview, apparently, that took place the day after the October 7th attack in Israel. And so, and they have this special counsel

like thanking him. He's like, I know you're dealing with a lot right now. Thank you for sitting down for five hours, right? So there's all these like extenuating circumstances.

None of it's going to matter to the right or to like how this gets out in media, how this hits people, right? People are just going to see like, you know, he's a the line. He's like a well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory. Like that's just going to be what people remember.

And so, yeah, it's bad. And I like what do you do about it if you're the White House? I think the look, they have been dealing with age concerns from the very beginning. And it's not because of the media or Republicans. It's because like anyone who sees Joe Biden speak has that concern. And I think the only way to handle it is for Joe Biden to like go out there more and reassure people and talk and sit for long interviews and, you know, debate Donald Trump and do all the things that you have to do. And if they're not confident he can do that, then that's a bigger fucking problem. But if they are confident he can do that, then he's got to go do it.

Because, like, you can yell at the media all you want. And we can certainly yell at Robert Herr because he's a fucking asshole for doing that. And it was completely inappropriate. But it's happened. And people are watching Joe Biden every day. But it's happened and people are watching Joe Biden every day and they're seeing clips of him on TikTok that are in other places in social media that are way worse than when you actually speak to the man or see him sit down for an interview for a long time. And so I guess I think the only way through this problem is to like get out there more. I don't know.

What do you think? I am. The other thing that happened this week that sort of led to this was the White House's decision to not have the president do the Super Bowl interview. Yeah. Which I sort of, people were very worked up about that. As someone who staffed six Super Bowl interviews, they're always sort of weird. They're all very serious policy interviews while people are eating wings waiting for the Super Bowl to start.

So it's always weird. And so I was sort of like, yeah, I probably would have done it, but it's not, everyone thinks it's an obvious layout, but people, no one wants to hear you talk about Gaza and Israel while they're waiting for the Superbowl to start. Like, that's just not how people consume information, but I might call them back and just say, let's do it right now. Right. And it's, and then Biden was going to have to do things like this no matter what came in, whatever Robert Herr, whatever the fuck his name is, says in his report. This is not going to change the dynamic. It's just going to highlight the dynamic. It just becomes another reason why the dynamic of people being concerned about the president's age and competence has gone to the top of the news

cycle again. In that NBC poll, and I can't remember the exact numbers, but I think there's like a 19-point swing between 2020 and now on who you believe to be more competent and effective. Biden had a nine-point advantage in 2020 in the NBC news poll right before the election. I think he's down 16 now. And so part of that is people don't see enough Joe Biden. And the only way to change that is for people to see more Joe Biden. And there are two parts of these things, right? There's how do you stop the news cycle from happening, which is something like doing the Super Bowl interview where you just tell people. And then there's how do you just deal with a larger concern that is the largest impediment to Joe Biden's reelection is questions about age and capacity, is to go out there and show everyone that you can do the job by engaging

with people, being in debates, all of that. And so he's going to do that no matter what. I think the urgency probably bumped up a few weeks because of this report. And when we were in the white house we hated the part of you know media coverage that was all about the president's performance right was was was barack obama angry enough was he too aloof was he this and then it's like that's a you know figure skating judges i think is what pluff used to call it uh and they would judge you by your performance. But like that is unfortunately the reality we live in. And Joe Biden's performance when he speaks, when he gives an interview from now until November is going to be a huge part of whether he wins the election or not. Huge. Because even like we've been talking about the economy as a challenge for him. And we've seen now over the last several weeks, economic sentiment is getting better.

Consumer sentiment is getting better. It's starting to show up in the polls that voters are thinking the economy is improving and it's not yet redounding to Joe Biden's benefit. And part of that is because the concerns about his age persist. And the only like the only way to to address that is with Joe Biden himself. Right. Like the campaign's message is good. The White House's message is good. He's been like I totally agree that he's been a excellent president. I have huge problems with his Gaza policy, huge problems. But like legislatively, domestically, like he's, he's, all of that stuff is firing on all cylinders, but like, I'm telling you that he's gotta, he's, he's gotta perform. Right. And he's gotta like allay these concerns and fucking Robert Herr just put them front and center. The Superbowl interview. I will say one other thing about it is people generally think it's,

you're going to get a hundred million viewers and you're not. Cause the interview actually happens like two hours before the Superbowl. And so I think it's when the last one Obama did was like 15 million people. Trump had like 14 million when he did it. But it's still the biggest audience that he would get for a while, except the State of the Union, which is coming up in a month, like a month from today. And that now the stakes are always high in the State of the Union. They're always high in the State of the Union before the reelected. Now they're even higher. And because that'll be an audience of 20, 30 million people. was tweeting a excerpt from an old Politico story about Kevin McCarthy, where it said, like, on a particularly sensitive matter, McCarthy mocked Biden's age and mental acuity in public while privately telling allies that he found the president sharp and substantive

in their conversations, a contradiction, a contradiction that left a deep impression on the White House. It's like, yeah, guess what? Yeah, it's bullshit. Right. And like, I saw Biden last December and he, I said this before, like he remembered, he recognized my mother-in-law having met her four years earlier at one Katie Porter event. And he like recognized her in the White House and then told us stories and told my father-in-law stories about like the Bork confirmation with a level of detail that frankly was alarming. information with a level of detail that frankly was alarming. It's not like he forgot anything,

like he knew every single thing that happened back in the 70s. So it's not like, it's not the fact of his mental acuity, it is the perception. And I realize that's frustrating, but like that, it's the biggest task. The biggest task is to fight that perception. This is a very important point you made, which is if the things that Robert Herr claimed in his report were happening all the time, we would all hear about it, right? Because isn't that Biden's meeting with Republicans all the time? He's meeting with people who are with Democratic senators. Washington has a tremendous river mill, and just everyone would know if Biden was having huge mental lapses in meetings with people. It was just that you would do it because it is the single biggest issue in the election and Democrats cannot stop panicking privately to reporters. So you would be hearing about it. And the fact that you're not from

Republicans or Democrats, other than the Republicans who are clearly lying like McCarthy, is evidence that what Robert Herr is saying is not an accurate portrayal of how Joe Biden is on a daily basis. I think that's really just important. Yeah, no, it is. But the sense you get from him a lot of times when he speaks is not that he's not all there, but his performance feeds into the impression because sometimes it's low energy. Sometimes it seems like he's mumbling and swallowing his words. He's obviously got spinal issues that means he's shuffling around so it just it exudes old man even though like the words he's saying and his ability to like communicate in private

with people is extremely sharp so like that's just something that they got to work on and it's ridiculous that the fucking fate of democracy depends on that but that's where we are this is this is like our personal nightmare is that somehow the thing we've decried in politics our entire careers yeah i know it comes down to optics the things we think we hate most i know the fucking optics election great right and we can all scream about optics or you know do something about it so it's it's brutal all right enough of that uh when we come back we're gonna talk about the super bowl a little bit. Just end on something light. All right, we're back.

And I said we were going to come back and talk about the Super Bowl. So naturally, we had to bring on John Lovett. Boy, am I excited to talk about the Super Bowl, an event I absolutely knew was happening this weekend. I certainly didn't ask in our meeting yesterday about this Super Bowl. So naturally, we had to bring on John Lovett. Boy, am I excited to talk about the Super Bowl, an event I absolutely knew was happening this weekend. I certainly didn't ask in our meeting yesterday about this very episode. That's on Sunday.

At which point, everyone's eyes turned away. And speaking of eyes, there will be 114 million pairs of them tuning into the big game on Sunday, during which they'll gamble on approximately $23 billion

in Super Bowl wagers. And now it's your turn. Dan and John, it's time for the betting boys to put it all on the line. Here's how it works. I'm going to give you bets. Then I will give you the odds. You have to decide whether or not you want to wager. In a game we're calling, all bets are shaken

off. Now, here's how it's going to work. First of all, the stakes aren't cold, hard cash. They're your dignity. On Thursday, we will check in and see which of you came out ahead and which of you came out behind. The losers reward humiliation. The loser will have to send out a painfully earnest tweet

crafted by the team begging Taylor Swift to endorse Joe Biden. Oh my goodness. Boy, am I glad I'm hosting instead of playing. It's both what's written on this and what I'm feeling. But first, because our audience is a strong, quietly head to another room and listen to a podcast until the halftime show vibe, we wanted to quickly answer the question, what is sports betting? And here's the gist.

People bet on the game, but also on other silly aspects around the game, like how long the national anthem will be, and the less likely the predicted outcome, the longer the odds. And so the more you can win. To keep this simple, each wager will be 100 crooked bucks. Each of you can make five bets. You must bet five times, and there will only be seven opportunities. In other words, you can skip two. Okay.

But you're going to have to bet five times. Okay. But you can skip a max of two. Okay. It takes notes here then. This is complicated. First up, what color will the Gatorade dumped on the winning team be?

You can choose between orange, red, or blue. Orange, the odds are plus 240. No yellow, huh? Blue, the odds are plus 430. Red, the odds are plus 490. I'm sorry, could you do the odds again? Orange, 240. Blue, 430. Red, 490. Red'm sorry. Could you do the odds again? Orange, 240. Blue, 430.

Red, 490. Red being the longest shot and the most delicious. I'm going to take orange. Can we both take the same bets or no? Yeah, you can if you want. You're going to take it. And what are you going to wager? You have to wager.

You're raising 100. So you're just going for the plus 240. 100 on everything. So we're not splitting our 100 up among the five bets. No. No, no, no. You have 500. You get to bet five times.

So try to simplify it. You can bet five times. But then the winner is the100 up among the five bets. No. No, no, no. You have $500. You get to bet five times. So try to simplify it. You can bet five times. But then the winner is the person who makes the most money, not who wins the most bets, right? Correct. Correct. Yes, Dan. Okay.

That is right. You got it. Perfect. Okay. And I didn't have to Google, how do sports betting work? What does the plus 240 minus 110 mean? I had to figure it all out. I didn't have to Google how do sports betting work? What is the plus 240 minus 110 mean? I had to like figure it all out. I didn't have to do that.

All right, Dan, you want in on the Gatorade bet? Yeah, I will take the red. Wow. Dan takes the red. Okay. What did you take? You took orange? Yep.

Okay. What surprise guest will Usher bring out during his halftime show? You have three options. Justin Bieber, minus 200. So just so people understand, if you bet 100, you'll net 50. Nicki Minaj, plus 310. Taylor Swift, plus 550. I actually think those are pretty –

I would think you'd get better odds on that if I was being honest. Yeah, I thought so too. That'd be wild. Wild. But that's what the sportsbook says. And I listen to what these are. They're trying to get people to bet that's Taylor Swift money because it's free money for the sportsbooks. Yeah, that's right.

That's right. And so Bieber is what? Just minus 200. You bet 100 you're going to net 50. Sure. People would not be surprised just minus 200. You bet 100, you're going to net 50. Sure. People, I guess, would not be surprised to see Justin.

I'm skipping this one. Yeah, I'm skipping it. John's out. I'm skipping this one too. I don't think any of them are. I think people know Bieber's coming, which is why the ads

are so poorly. I insisted on this question. Who will have more completions, Purdy or Mahomes? Mahomes. Mahomes. And I don't think will have more completions, Purdy or Mahomes? Mahomes. Mahomes. And I don't think it means sexual completions. I think it must mean some sort of sports thing,

catching and throwing and so forth. They're, you know, obviously, I don't know who I like more, Purdy or Mahomes? Anyway. What do you have to give up for Mahomes? It's a hundred. It's plus 110 for both.

It's just who's going to have more between the two of them. They're basically, they're even. Plus 110 for either. I'll take Mahomes. I'm going to take Purdy. Wow, there it is. There it is. Love it.

Just as a piece of information that I think you would appreciate is that Brock Purdy was the last pick in the draft, which means that he is known, the last pick in the draft is always known as Mr. Irrelevant. And so it is quite a story that Mr. Irrelevant is playing in the Super Bowl as a starting quarterback. What a mean name for somebody who gets to be in the, you know, the irrelevant people are the people that weren't picked at all. Well, usually the person who's picked last doesn't last in the NFL very long. So that is their fame to fame right there. Next up, will Taylor Swift win more Grammys or will the Chiefs of Kansas City score more touchdowns?

So the odds for Taylor having more Grammy wins, that's minus 200. Are we talking more total Grammy? Like, we already know her Grammy wins. Right, we already know. Right. How many was it? This year or this year, right?

It must be this year. It has to be this year. Otherwise, it's like 23, so it would be. Right, that's what I'm saying. Will Taylor have won more Grammys this year, or will the Chiefs score more touchdowns in the Super Bowl? Taylor having the edge, that's minus 200. Chiefs scoring more touchdowns, that's plus 150.

Did she? We can look up how many Grammys. How many Grammys did she win? She only won two. And the Chiefs have more touchdowns? It's Chiefs touchdowns. Oh, I think. So will the Chiefs have three or more touchdowns is really what it's saying if taylor has one more grammys minus 200 if the chiefs would score more touchdowns plus 150 if they have the same push i'll let you go

first dan because i've been going i'll take the chiefs scoring more touchdowns i'll take that too wow okay okay okay okay next up will travis kelsey have more catches than taylor swift I'll take that too. Wow. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Next up. Will Travis Kelsey have more catches than Taylor Swift Grammy nominations? Over 6.5 catches. That's minus 200. Under 6.5 catches. Plus 135. Wait.

Will they have more? What is it? Will Travis Kelsey have more catches? Oh, Kelsey's catch. Okay, got it, got it, got it, got it. Catches. And it's 6.5 is the line. 6.5 is the line. Over 6.5, minus 200, under 6.5, plus 135.

Wow, so he must be very good. That's a lot of times to catch it. I assume 6. Yes, he's good. He's quite good. I'll do the over. Dan, what do you think? I will also do the over. Dan, what do you think? I will also do the over.

Wow. Okay. Okay. Okay. Really, right now this contest is coming down to the Gatorade color. No, no, no, no, no. Purdy versus Mahomes. But the odds on, if it's red Gatorade, you're walking away with this thing.

If it's red Gatorade, it doesn't matter. Dan's walking away with this fucking thing. Fuck, I hope it's not red Gatorade you're walking away with this thing if it's Red Gatorade it doesn't matter Dan's walking away with this fucking thing fuck I hope it's not Red Gatorade both teams are right who will be the first person shown

next to Taylor Swift during the Super Bowl Jason Kelsey plus 500 Ed Kelsey plus 900 Scott Swift plus 700

Cara Delevingne plus 900 Gigi Hadid plus 1000. Good. Wow. That's a, that those are,

that's, that's exciting. Huh? You see Gigi Hadid in that fucking booth, the thousand dollars. That's cool as hell. What if, what is this?

It's really tough. Like how do they do this bet? What if, what if we see Taylor and Jason is next to her and cares on the other side, which very possible. I don't, I don't know. Then the vet vo's on the other side, which is very possible. I don't know how... Then the vet voids. The vet void.

The vet void. You also can skip to the next one. You don't have to do this bet. You can skip this one. Can we hear the next one and then come... No. Oh, okay. Okay.

No. That's fair. Okay. I'm going to skip this one. I don't want to do it. Again, it's Jason, Kelsey... No, I don't want to do it. I don't want to do it.

I'm skipping. I'm skipping. I'm skipping. I'm skipping. I'm skipping. I'm skipping. I'm skipping. I'm skipping.

I'm skipping. Okay. Skipping. Finally, you both have to bet. The most important question. Will Travis Kelsey propose to Taylor Swift? Yes, plus 1,000, which is crazy, which is like, I think it's more likely that Taylor is seen with Gigi Hadid. Roughly the same odds as Taylor and Gigi Hadid and Taylor getting proposed to. It must mean that, yeah, anyway, the no is unfortunately minus 3,000. What? Which means that if you bet your hundred, you could net $3.

So the question is, do you want those $3, which I don't, which could make the difference if we crunch some numbers or- But otherwise you lose $100. Well, sure. Because it's not going to happen. No, no, no. If you bet right, well I'm saying you're betting that's the thing. You're betting on a dream. You're betting on love.

You can just try to keep your $100 and maybe win $3 or you can push your chips forward and think Travis gets on one knee. Yeah, I'm going to I should have bet on the The Ed Kelsey bet. chips forward and think Travis gets on one knee. And yeah, I'm going to, I guess, yeah, I should have bet on that. Should have been on the, the Ed Kelsey bet.

I feel bad for Ed Kelsey in this. Cause it's like, I think Ed Kelsey being seen next to Tyler Swift is only slightly less likely than the proposal. But like, why not? Why not Travis Kelsey's mom? Like,

why is she not on that list? Because I was going to say, why is she not on that list? Why not Jason Kelsey's wife? What about Brittany Mahomes? I don't know who any of those fucking people are, but the point is these are the ones that I think that had real exciting odds. Yeah. Okay.

But you know what? We can't go backwards. Okay. I'm just going to bet no then. You're betting no? Get my $3. You won't bet on Dan. I'm also betting no, but I would bet if you if there had been what are the

odds on he gets out on one knee for poses she says no okay hold on hold on hold on all right you know what let's make this more interesting i'm taking the odds up to two thousand two thousand that that travis will get on one knee you'll take the the whole fucking thing. No, there's no way it's happening. Why? Okay, Usher brings her out. She performs. Travis runs out onto the field from the locker room and then asks her to marry him after the performance. You want that?

What happens if someone dumps red Gatorade on Travis Kelsey after he proposes? And then Robert Herr walks out on the field, indicts them all. Yeah. No fun for anybody. Trump 2024. All right.

Well, we all heard it. We all have the odds. Basically a lot riding on red Gatorade at this point. And which quarterback has more completions. And that's what this was always the thing that was most important to me, this Purdy fellow versus Mahomes. And, you know, we'll run the numbers, we'll crunch the numbers, and we'll see what happened.

And we'll see who has to beseech Taylor on social media. Can't wait. Thanks, everyone. Bye, everyone. We'll talk to you on Tuesday. 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. 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. Thank you.