Pod Save the World - Happy "Liberation Day" to All Who Celebrate

Episode Date: April 2, 2025

Tommy and Ben discuss French far-right leader Marine Le Pen’s embezzlement conviction and what it could mean for France’s political future, reactions from world leaders to Trump’s promised “Liberation Day” when US tariffs on global imports will supposedly go into effect, and a spate of incompetent national security staffing stories from Elise Stefanik losing the UN nomination to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth bringing his wife to meetings. They also talk about the chilling effects of deportations and student visas being revoked and how the latest version of the Ukraine mineral deal will only lead to corruption and grift from Trump’s goons. Then Ben speaks with International Rescue Committee President David Miliband about the hole USAID cuts have left in the humanitarian response to crises in Myanmar, Sudan, and global health. 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.Sign up for our Friends of the Pod community at crooked.com/friends to start your 30-day free trial!

Pod Save the World is brought to you by fast-growing trees. Did you know fast-growing trees is the biggest online nursery in the U.S. with thousands of different plants and over 2 million happy customers? They have all the plants your yard needs like fruit trees, privacy trees, flowering trees, shrubs, and so much more. Whatever plants you're interested in, fast-growing trees, as you covered, find the perfect fit for your climate and space. Fast-growing trees makes it easy to get your dream yard. Order online and get your plants delivered directly to your door in just a few days without ever leaving home. They're alive and thrive guarantee, ensure,

your plants arrive happy and healthy. Plus get support from trained plant experts on call to help you plan your landscape, choose the right plants, and learn how to care for them. Not only do we love fast-growing trees, but a lot of people here at Cricket Media's office have used fast-going trees, including Naomi on our team. Got a couple plants. They said it came super fast.

It was way, way cheaper. Just like the name. They're also growing pretty fast. They're growing. They were much cheaper than any other quote for like a landscaping job that you will ever get. And let's be honest, if you go to the nursery in town, you don't know what you're doing. No. Also, it's also not the most exciting place.

It's hard to take all those plants home too in your car. Right. They're big. They're heavy. If it falls over in your car, you've got a mess. Let fast growing trees send them directly to your home. This spring, they have the best deals for your yard, up to half off on select plants to their details.

And listeners to our show can get 15% off their first purchase when using the code world at checkout. That's an additional 15% off at fastgrowingtrees.com using the code world at checkout. fast-growingtrees.com code world. Now is the perfect time to plant. Use world to save today. Offer is valid for a limited time. Terms and conditions may apply. Welcome back to Pod Save the World. I'm Tommy Vitor. I'm Ben Rhodes. How was spring break? So far so good. Were we doing jello shots and senior frogs? Yeah, we were down in Cancun and Cabo.

With the kids, you know. It's a little different. It's a little different with kids. Yeah. Got some skiing in. That was good. Do you want to disclose your location? I went to Jackson Hole, Wyoming. Which is funny because I was there a couple weeks ago, and it is one of the more beautiful places I've ever been. It's absolutely spectacular. It's absolutely spectacular. It really is.

There's an earth too where right after college, all my friends went to Jackson Hole to be like whitewater, river rafting guys, or really the van driver that picks up the people. And I went to D.C. And I was a little sad that I missed out on that trip because it was so fun. Yeah, whenever I go to a place like that, which is not that often, I always think that that brief fantasy that I entertained after college of doing a year just living in a ski town, not doing that. It was one of the dumber things.

Absolutely. Yeah. If you are in your early 20s or late teens listening to this show and you have a chance to do something stupid and frivolous for a year between school or after school or before work, do it. And by the way, you know, between jobs. Yeah, you can work. You know, there's all kinds of people. I love talking to people, you know, Tom Friedman-esque. and, you know, there's people, there's ski instructors, there's all this hospitality, you know, could have been fun.

Could have been amazing. I think my dad did that. He got asked to leave school for a semester by the administration, and he went out and worked on a mountain somewhere. A request that you can follow. But it's also good for you because I think you have a real job and you realize how good you have it at school. Yeah. And all of a sudden, he got back to college and he was like, all right, now I'm treating this like a 9-to-5. Yeah.

Ace my way through your college. Anyway, we got a great show for you guys today. We're going to lead the show talking about the verdict against a far-right French leader named Marine Le Pen in fear that it might help her party win the French presidency in 2027. There's the international reaction to Trump's Liberation Day tariffs. Can't wait to see those. Ben the package here. The latest on Signalgate and the administration's reckless sharing of classified information. I'm going to talk about Elise Stefanik, who just got the rug pulled out from under her as she was hoping to get confirmed to be the U.S. ambassador to the U.N.

It's going to be my favorite story of the day. It's going to be fun. This is our light segment. Yes, our light segment. We'll also talk about who may come next in that gig. The latest in the Trump administration, deporting innocent people with tattoos and rounding up people who protest policies they don't like on college campuses because free speech. We'll talk about a major return in the corruption case against Israeli Prime Minister, Bibi Net and Yahoo, his aides, I mean.

And then the latest on peace talks between Russia and Ukraine and this Trump mineral deal extortion bill with Ukraine. never seems to go away or get signed. And then, Ben, you just did our interview. Who did you talk to? I talked to David Miliband, the head of the International Rescue Committee. We talked about the overall impact on the humanitarian sector from the dismantling of USAID by ketamine-addled billionaire. My words, not David's.

Then we talked about the earthquake in Myanmar, where they're responding, what the needs are there, why it's like to operate, given that there's a conflict zone, given the USAID is not there. We talked about the enormous needs in Sudan, where we've had, obviously, political and military developments, but the humanitarian concerns are only growing more acute, especially because of the withdrawal of USID, a bit about the spread of disease and the risk of vaccinations going away that are supported by the United States. I mean, in general, we just kind of wanted to give people a snapshot of what it's like to be one of the largest humanitarian NGOs in the world that relies a lot on USAID funding infrastructure in the

this new reality with these individual issues obviously illustrative of that. So people should check it out and people should consider supporting groups like IRC in the new world that we're in. Yeah. I mean, look, IRC is an amazing group. They're doing the Lord's work in a lot of places and their job just got exponentially harder because of Elon Musk and the doge bags. And like a lot of the problems you're talking about, Ben, I mean, very few of them are trending

better. I mean, we're not going to get to it this week. I think we'll get to it next week. But there's a lot of concern that in addition to the Civil War in Sudan, which has been raging for two years, basically, there might be conflict brewing in South Sudan. And, of course, those tensions don't remain within borders. They cross them, and it'll probably make things worse. And, yeah, David mentioned that. And, you know, the one number I'd just preview for people is that there are 8 million people in Sudan who are on the precipice of famine.

And that doesn't go away because Doge would like to pretend it doesn't exist. this to gets worse. No, or Elon's feelings are hurt. Because some people are, you know, being mean to Tesla. Yeah, because you don't want to buy Teslas anymore. Okay, we'll definitely stick around for that. Please don't buy Teslas. Yeah, they're late. Please boycott all Elon Musk's businesses. I'm just going to say that as much as we get. Yeah, don't launch anything to space. Yeah. All right, let's start with this major news out of France, Ben, because on Monday, a far right-wing leader named Marine Le Pen was found guilty of embezzling European Union funds, and she was banned from running for political office for five years.

years, which will keep her out of France's 2027 presidential campaign. Le Pen in her national rally party, they're going to pay fines. I think she was sentenced to two years under house arrest. But the political impact of this ruling is by far the most consequential part, as she was the clear frontrunner in this upcoming presidential election. Trump got asked about the verdict, I think on Monday. He, of course, made it about himself, saying the conviction was, quote, a very big deal, and that the case, quote, sounds like this country, meaning the U.S. Jordan Bardella, Le Pen's protege and the National Rally party, is trying to use the verdict to drum up support for national rally

while also claiming that French democracy, quote, is being executed. Now, that sounds a bit hyperbolic to me, but we've also seen officials in Aminou Macron's party in from the French far left voice concern about this verdict going too far by banning Le Pen from running for office. Le Pen says she will appeal, but legal analysts think the odds of the case being resolved. in time for her to run are quite low. So Ben, there's a lot of anxiety about this verdict, which was sort of the harshest verdict available, I think, to this judge. I've heard analysts and

journalists argue that there's actually many members of the European Parliament who use EU funds for domestic political work like Lepin did, but only she is being prosecuted because of her political view. So it seems like she's being singled out. Others are pointing to Romania, annulling its recent election. And they're arguing this is part of a broad. anti-democratic trend in Europe. You could also point to Germany where the main political parties there have refused to work with the far-right AFD party to keep them out of power, even when they get like 20% in some of these elections. So there's a broader set of questions, right, about how to deal with far-right populism. And there's concern now that national rally

will run solely on judicial bias, elites trying to stop them from gaining power, and that this verdict might ultimately help the party get more support than they otherwise would have, of course, the flip side, as we've discussed here in the Trump context is that no one is above the law. And how do you sort of marry up those two things? So what's your level of anxiety about this verdict, potentially helping Le Pen and national rally? I think that there's a possibility. They'll certainly try to stir that up. At the same time, you know, there's no perfect formula for how you deal with the far right. And I do think it's not wrong for Europeans to, particularly in this case, right, if the law was broken, you know, you hold people accountable. But also just the idea of

taking this seriously as kind of a threat to the body politic to democracies. I think there's, that's okay. But the challenge is, you also have to beat these people in the court of, you know, public opinion. And so what you don't want to see is this idea that a bunch of, you know, while this, you know, flipped a switch and it sidelined her, she's got this guy, this protégé, Jordan Bardella, who's 29 years old. He's pretty young. Yeah, just a little young.

And look, the challenge that the national front has always faced in the presidency is the French system actually makes it harder for them to win because you have two rounds, right? And so in the first round, a bunch of people run. and the top two people then head to a runoff. And so it really becomes a kind of 50% election. And it's been hard. And even I think with the momentum they have, it was going to be hard for them to get over that 50% mark.

I think part of what we've seen, though, what worries me generally in France is that there have been a number of cases in which it felt like a kind of mushy centrist elite was trying to keep not just the right, but the left out too, right? And so people may remember that after the national rally did very well in European parliamentary elections. There was this kind of big tent coalition

really helped by the left merging with the center to kind of keep them out of power in parliament. But then the left got sidelined. And so there's this pattern in France of particularly Macron and people like that, just kind of pushing down both the far right but also the left. And I think that whoever wants to make the case that they can beat the national rally, make the case that they should be the successor to Emmanuel Macron in a couple of years is going to have to counteract that impression. You know, they're going to have to show that it's not just a bunch of French elites trying to hold on to the power that they have, but there's a different kind of politics that ironically, Macron tried to model, like, the first time around when he built a movement,

but that's missing. And so I don't necessarily, I'm not an expert on this law, so I can't necessarily evaluate, you know, clearly there's no Merrick Garland issues in France. Like, they just kind of went for it. But I do think that this, you know, take, yes, take that seriously. Yes, don't be afraid to prosecute people, but also don't think that that's enough. You need to show that there's a new kind of politics that can beat the far right, not just using legal mechanisms or canceling elections like in Romania. Yeah, just if folks were wondering, I mean, the actual charts was using four million euros worth of European Parliament funds over the course of 11 years to pay staff who in reality were working on domestic political issues for a national rally back in France when they're supposed to be doing European Parliament stuff.

20 people were actually convicted, but the judge gave Le Pen this sort of maximum sentence. And the corruption unit that charged this case and the charges, I think, go back to like the Francois Hollande era. Socialist president was like 2011 memorable because he left office with the lowest approval rating. I can ever imagine. It was like 8% or something. Yeah. But yeah, you mentioned Ben Jordan Bardella. Marine Le Pen, she has these historic ties to the founding of the party, which is founded by her father.

She is well known. He is very young. He's green. He's good on social media. And we've seen a lot of like little TikTok fascist, but I think it's a big question about whether he can really fill her shoes. I also noted the international reaction. Victor Orban, your friend over in Hungary, tweeted, Jusui Marine. The Kremlin said the conviction showed Europe was, quote, trampling on democratic norms.

far-right leaders in places like Italy also weighed in supporting her. So the usual suspects are getting Marine Le Pen's back. But I do worry that, you know, this really harsh verdict that includes the political element kind of feeds into their narrative. I mean, obviously it does. Well, yeah, I mean, Bardell is kind of like a, you know, if Charlie Kirk was regenerated as like a French guy, you know, like, but, you know, watching all these, you know, various Vichy-type politicians circle the wagons around each other. I mean, Victor Orrubran with the Jiswis-Sui-Marine. Do you think he was trying to do a Charlie Hebdo comparison to I think he is, but like it kind of counteracts his gender, you know, discriminatory policies

for him to now be claiming a different gender. But I just think it's this constant victimhood, you know, at a certain point, call bullshit on it through a different popular mobilization, a populism that is not of the right. These people are kind of full of shit, you know, like, Victor Orban is corrupt. Like he, like he's, he's, you know, violated all kinds of laws and norms under the EU. And, and so for him to kind of be playing this victim card, you know, in solidarity with like Marine Le Pen. I mean, I mean, it's, it's hard to take that seriously. But I know we've seen in this country there's a political effectiveness to it. You just have to kind of get out and make your case and not just kind of sit back

and think you can pull the norm machine, you know. Yeah, I mean, it's hard. It's hard for us broken-brained Americans in the Trump era not to apply our political context to France. But then I was reading a New York Times story where they were quoting some random guy in a bar in her district who said, she must offend herself and go right into the end. If they want us to take the capital like they did in Washington, I will go to the Elise. Yeah. There's this globalization of, you know, it's a hoax or, you know, this is kind of the full consolidation of this right-wing trend as far-right trend. But look, the reality here is there's nothing

inevitable about these people winning. In fact, we know that who the government's going to be probably in Germany, in the UK, even in Italy where they have Maloney, like she's not gone as far right. And so France is like the one big European country that you would like to see kind of hold the line. And if they do in that election, obviously, that gets you through the Trump administration with unless something strange happens. The five-year term, yeah. The big European governments, you know, not being far right. And let's hope that that's the case, because France would be a huge domino to fall in the direction of the Trump-orban authoritarian place. With a really strong presidency. And just a little history. I mean, the National Rally Party was

founded in 1972. It was called National Front until 2018. It was founded by Marine Le Pen's father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, who is a truly vile person. He's best. known for being an anti-Semite in publicly minimizing the Holocaust. In 2009, he referred to the Nazi gas chambers as, quote, a detail of the history of the Second World War. Pretty important detail, buddy. So Marine Le Penz, her project has been trying to moderate the party's public image, distance herself from her father. But she has also done things like minimize France's role in the Holocaust and the Vichy government's collaborations with the Germans and rounding up Jews and sending them to die.

She also has extreme views on immigration, for example. So Le Pen, you know, she's a perennial candidate. She ran in 2012, 2017, 2022, when she got nearly 40% of the vote in a runoff. She was leading in the most recent poll. There was a poll, I think, out on Sunday that showed her at 37%, which is, you know, not victory, like you said, in the runoff system. But it's pretty high. It's pretty high.

But I think it can be overcome. but not with complacency. POTS of the World is brought to you by Faddy15. Have you heard about C-15? It's an essential fatty acid that's naturally found in whole-fat dairy products. But over time, our intake of these foods has decreased. Combined with the natural decline of C-15 as we age,

many of us aren't getting enough of this important nutrient. Introducing Fatty-15 C-15 supplement, a simple way to replenish your body with this essential fatty acid. Co-founder Stephanie Van Watson discovered the benefits of C-15 while working with the U.S. Navy, backed by science and supported by over 100 studies, C-15 helps support cell function and resiliency and can be a valuable part of your long-term health strategy. Fatty-15 is vegan, 100% pure and free from flavors, fillers, allergens, or preservatives.

Best of all, fatty-15 comes in a generous, usable glass or bamboo jar, and refills are shipped right to your door. So do yourself a favor, replenish your C-15, restore your health, and let your cells do the heavy lifting with fatty-15. I've been taking fatty-15 for weeks now. It's a super easy part of your routine. You pop a pill in the morning. go and now it can bend for us 400 pounds. And notice your C-15 is really, it's looking good. Through the roof.

Faddy-15 is on a mission to optimize your C-15 levels and help you live healthier longer. You can get an additional 15% off their 90-day subscription starter kit that go into Fatty15.com slash world and using code world at checkout. That's fatty-15.com slash world. Use the code world at checkout. All right, Ben, so we're recording this on Tuesday, April 1st, which is April Fool's Day and a good time to remind everyone that their April Fool's

gags are lame. Yeah. I saw some pretty bad ones. Some bad tweets. Tiger Woods saying he was going to play in the Masters or something. Oh, I saw that. You know, I'm just so gullible. I just take people at face value. Yeah. That guy, you know, I was really excited about him. Trump ex-wife? Yeah, he's marrying a Trump and I don't think Tiger's the guy we thought he was. Tough. I mean, we've been learning that for about 15 years. I was going to say, yeah, New York Post thought us that a while ago. Anyway, so tomorrow's April 2nd. Uh, on that day. on Wednesday, we're going to see if Trump is joking about his plan to upend the global economy with all these tariffs. The White House has been calling this Liberation Day, I assume because

Independence Day was taken in, Will Smith will slap the shit out of you if you step on his IP. But here's how White House Press Secretary Carolyn Levitt teased the announcement. Looking ahead to tomorrow, April 2nd, 2025, will go down as one of the most important days in modern American history. Why? Expectations management is not their thing. I mean, why? I mean, nobody even knows what he's going to do and why he's going to do it. Yeah. And so the suspense is, is Trump going to impose a 20% tariff across the board or is it going to be more targeted country by country with, like, reciprocal tariffs that allow for negotiations bilaterally with, you know, either the EU or individual countries. Regardless, we just wanted to take a look at how these tariff threats are being perceived internationally.

So let's start in Canada, Ben, where Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has basically said that the old U.S. Canada relationship is, is dead. Here's a clip from a speech Carney delivered last week. I reject any attempts to weaken Canada to wear us down, to break us so that America can own us. That will never happen. The old relationship we had with the United States based on deepening integration of our economies and tight security and military cooperations is over. I mean, that's intense. So that's Mark Carney and Canada across the Atlantic, the head of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, said that Europe had a strong plan to retaliate against tariffs from the U.S. In Asia, we got China, South Korea, and Japan

getting together for their first economic dialogue in five years. Following that meeting, the Chinese state media said that the three countries will work together to respond jointly to U.S. tariffs. I should note that the Japanese and South Korea spokespeople kind of disputed that characterization, saying it was either exaggerated or not really what was discussed, but the meeting still happened. Yeah. And then finally, Ben, China and Brazil cut a deal to trade in their own currencies and no longer use the U.S. dollar, which is not an insignificant hit to the dollar's role as a world's reserve currency.

I mean, Brazil is the biggest economy in the region. So just to add this all up, like the Canadians hate us. Europe is ready to punch us in the face. South Korea and Japan are coordinating with the Chinese. And this tariff threat seems to have pushed the Chinese and the Brazilians even closer. Like, wasn't China the big threat that Trump ran on? Like, what are we doing here? Nobody can articulate what is happening and why it's happening.

Even when they say this is going to be the historic liberation day, they don't say why. Right. They don't say what this is achieving. Is it to somehow bring back manufacturing in the United States? Nobody credible thinks that's going to happen. Is it to compel some action? Well, you could see it kind of with like the fentanyl from Mexico, but you can't see it in all these other countries. What are the demands that are even in play?

I think what's important, Tommy, is there's what has already happened and what is likely to happen. In terms of what's already happened, a lot of the Trump stuff in the first term, you know, or even in the campaign against Trump the last time around, it was like forecasting all these bad things that might happen if he does X and Y follows. This is already happening. This is not like a hypothetical exercise. Like the stock market has already taken a hit, like futures are taking a hit. the dollar, you know, is facing these challenges. Prices are going up. Like, these are things that

are happening now. This is not some warning from Democrats or elites about what might happen in the future. It's already impacting Americans. And Americans understand that. I think the more important thing, though, is that I don't, if you look at what countries are already doing, it's not like that hypothetical to say you're going to see a total reordering of the global economy away from the United States as being at the center of that global economy. You know, everything from the functioning of the dollar is a reserve currency, transactions being made in the dollar, to this kind of deeper integration of economies between the U.S. and our allies in particular, shared approaches to regulation and trying

to expand cross-border trade. Like, not only is that unraveling, but you're beginning to see what the different economic and trade order might look like. you're going to have developing countries, resource-rich developing countries. You mentioned Brazil, but this could spread other parts of South America, it could spread to Southeast Asia, where countries that tried to diversify and essentially balance between the U.S. and China and Europe and other trading partners will be much more likely to just kind of put their eggs in the Chinese basket because that's predictable. They know what they're getting.

They may not love the terms that they get from China, but they don't involve crazy announcements of tariffs going up and down. So you're going to see that kind of reorientation. The Japan, South Korea, China thing, even if it's still nascent, is extraordinary. These countries hate each other. You know, we've talked about it was hard to get the Japanese and South Greens in the same room because of the World War II legacy. The Chinese have built a whole industry in their politics and media around demagoguing Japan in the history of World War II.

The fact that Trump is driven in just less than three months, even the dialogue among those three countries is a sign of rapid. rapidly diminishing U.S. influence. What strategy is going to work if our main quote-unquote adversary in the global economic space is China, how is that strategy going to work if all you're doing is pushing all these countries, including traditional U.S. allies, closer to China? And then the other thing to watch is when you see Mark Carney saying that about this friendship is essentially over as it was, not only is that can impact trade and travel and tourism, but, you know, does Canada stay in like the Five Eyes cooperation on intelligence? That's the U.S. Which has been apparently Peter Navarro

was floated kicking them out. I mean, what... A trade advisor. What are we accomplishing? I don't know. Like what I don't get... This is not just sitting around, bringing our hands because we like allies, although we do.

It's also just like, I don't understand what interest is served by this. And again, it just ratchets up tension and creates conflict that could lead to other conflict. It's spirals. Yeah, nothing about it makes sense. And like, I think ultimately, if you got like 100 CEOs in a room and you ask them, what is the thing they wanted more than anything else, it would just be certainty. And this, like, hemming and,

hauling and it's on again, off again, tariff war and reciprocal tariffs and announcing huge numbers and then walking it back. It's just driving everyone crazy. And what we're seeing is like the danger of the kind of short-term profit-driven mindset of American capitalism today, not to get into that space too much. But essentially, these companies are so hot for like deregulation and tax cuts that they kind of look the other way at Trump. Some of them supported them outright. And then now they're so afraid of Trump that they kind of capitulate and everything he says and does. They're watching the legal sector get dismantled or intimidated and cowed in this country. But this sucks for them.

These tariffs are bad for American business. It's bad for the American private sector. At a certain point, these companies need to speak up. I mean, in the Obama years, Tommy, you remember well. Like, if Obama did one thing that they didn't like in the private space. The Wall Street CEOs. Yeah. The Chamber of Commerce would freak out.

Or if he said one thing in an interview about, like, you know, fat cats on Wall Street, they'd all go bring their hands together at some investment conference. Cry on CNBC. This guy's fucking trashing their margins, trashing their stock prices over these insane tariff things. And we barely hear a peep out of the private sector in this country. Morgan Stanley thinks tariffs could raise car prices by up to 12%. There are, according to, I think, the counts on foreign relations,

14 million Americans are employed in jobs tied to trade with the United States. North American trading partners. The impacts of these tariffs or the fights we're picking will be massive and not just on them. Like we might send the Canadian economy into a depression. That will impact our economy too in a meaningful way. Yeah. It's just I'm with you in that like I can't make sense of this other than Trump trying to execute some sort of madman theory approach where he thinks he can intimidate all these countries into, you know, cutting advantageous deals with him, but that seems to have already failed because they're already announcing their reciprocal tariffs and punching back. And I think unlike the U.S. legal community, the U.S.

academic community, the U.S. private sector, these other countries are on to this. They know that Trump is operating global trade like a protection racket, you know, you pay me a pound of flesh and maybe I'll leave you loan for a little bit. But then what they know is he'll come back for more. And so they're beginning to form a line. against the United States, we are only two and a half months in, and that's already happening. And the other thing is, if he comes out and, like, says he won't do some of the tariffs and then the market recovers a little bit and he acts like he did something great, no, this is all like a self-created crisis that doesn't need to be happening.

Yeah, and prices are just going to go out for everybody. It's nuts. But part of this might be that the best and the brightest are not working in the U.S. government, Ben, and I mean that in a literal sense, not in the book sense. So last week we talked in some detail about the Signalgate scandal in case folks missed it. That was when Trump's national security staff talked about their plans to bomb the Houthy rebels in Yemen on Signal. Signal is a commercially available communications app that is not an appropriate place to discuss this kind of material. The conversation that these guys had on Signal absolutely included classified information, even though Pete Heggseth and others are lying about it since.

So after we discussed this scandal last week, Ben, Mike Waltz, Trump's National Security Advisor, who seems very dumb, just stone cold stupid. Not the smartest guy, yeah. Yeah, he went on Fox News to suggest that Jeffrey Goldberg, the Atlantic editor-in-chief, who Waltz looped in on this signal chat about bombing the Houthi rebels, might have actually hacked his phone. Here's a clip. Have you ever had somebody's contact that shows their name? And then you have somebody else's number of.

make those mistakes right you've got somebody else's number on someone else's contact so of course i didn't see this loser in the group it looked like someone else now whether he did it deliberately or it happened in some other technical mean is something we're trying to figure out how's the number on your phone well if you have somebody else's contact and then it and then somehow it's someone sent you that it gets sucked in that was uh laura ingram interviewing mike waltz there who was like one of the more you know she's the as maga as maga gets even she was like do i have have to go along with this bullshit. Like, you're really going with this line?

Well, you know Jeffrey Goldberg. Is he the most tech savvy guy? Does he just like you as a real hacker? No, no. No. He's still like an emailer. You know, like he's probably a relative newcomer to see. I bet he types with like two fingers.

Yeah. Look, there's so much about this. It's dumb. Let's start with the media part. There is this, you know, in the authoritarian playbook watch, right, that we are living through. And we've talked about obviously the intimidation of these different sectors of society.

But the state media part of it is getting really Like during the beginning of the war in Ukraine, there was like this habit in the U.S. sometimes to show some crazy Russian talk show where a bunch of people are yelling each other about. It's always that same guy. Yeah, it's always that guy. And they're talking about like how smart Putin is and they're bending reality. That we're there.

Like Fox News is not some independent like news source. This guy's going on and in talking about phone numbers being sucked into his contacts. Sucked into his contacts. He's trying to like show Trump who is his. audience mainly that he's tough by calling like Jeff Goldberg a loser like what does that mean or achieve obviously they want to get off the story of not just why was Jeff Goldberg in this chat but why were they having these incredibly sensitive conversations on signal to begin with right and so to me that of all the many questions it should continue to be asked about this

one is just the focus is on Waltz I think the focus should be on Heggseth more he clearly shared classifying it for me yeah Because Waltz is the idiot who said the signal chat. Heg Seth is the idiot who is trying to impress his friends by sharing the most classified information possible, which is upcoming strikes on Signal. But don't let Waltz off that easy because he talks about having, quote, positive ID of a hootie leader walking into his girlfriend's apartment, which according to a bunch of reporting since is a reference to Israeli surveillance capabilities that are highly, highly classified

that he just blew into the public domain by discussing it with Jeff. Jeffrey Goldberg on Signal. Jeffrey Goldberg, who clearly hacked his phone. And again, the people whose phones are more likely to be hacked are, well, first of all, by the way, possible Jeffrey Goldberg's phone is hacked, right? He's certainly an intelligence target for people because people know he talks to powerful people. But again, as I think some people may have heard, but it's worth repeating, it's not that signal

is not secure. It's that if your phone is hacked, it doesn't matter if signal is secure. Like if they're in your phone and can watch what's happening in your phone, they can see this kind of activity. And that can be incredibly dangerous. But the other thing I want to know, Tommy, is like, I refuse to believe that the only signal chat that they had about a sensitive matter was this Houthi strike. Oh, no. This is probably how they're doing business.

Yeah. So a little more on that. I mean, just real quick on this, this Fox News clip from Mike Walt. So, like, if we take him literally there, he is suggesting that Jeffrey Goldberg, like, conducted espionage on him. I don't like. So huge deal, right? Like take him literally. There are going to be an investigation? Are we going to prosecute some people? They were talking about getting Elon Musk involves because he's their tech guy. He's their IT dude, I guess, to do some research.

And so, Ben, I just wanted to update you that after this extensive investigation into the hacking by Jeffrey Goldberg of the Mike Walt's phone, here is Caroline Levitt, the White House press secretary announcing what they found. As you said last week, Caroline, you said there would be an investigation or a review into how Jeffrey Goldberg's number got on that group chat. What's the status of that review? And what is the status of National Security Advisor Mike Walz? As the president has made it very clear, Mike Waltz continues to be an important part of his national security team. And this case has been closed here at the White House as far as we are concerned.

There have been steps made to ensure that something like that can obviously never happen again. And we're moving forward. And the president and Mike Walts and his entire national security team have been working together very well. if you look at how much safer the United States of America is because of the leadership of this team. So she, Waltz accuses Jeff of hacking the phone and they just pretend to conduct an investigation. It's all over. But Ben, I mean, according to a bunch of reports, Waltz was almost fired, not because of the security lapse. It was because of what you referenced, which was that Trump is mad.

He's talking to Jeff Goldberg. The Wall Street Journal reported that this was not the only single group chat created by Waltz. So I'm sure the Russians and the Chinese are enjoying that content in their encrypted chat apps. And just before we started recording, the Washington Post reported that Waltz and his team have been conducting government business on their Gmail accounts. You see this story? According to the Washington Post, quote, a senior Waltz aide used the commercial email service for highly technical conversations with colleagues at other government agencies involving sensitive military positions and powerful weapons systems relating to an ongoing conflict, according to emails reviewed by the post. And the Wall Street Journal reported that Pete Hegseth, your favorite in this story, who shared classified information with the group, has been bringing his wife to his meetings

with his, like, Secretary of Defense counterparts. So, like, we got Pete bringing a plus one to, like, the highly technical defense policy meeting with, like, the NATO guy. Like, what is happening here? Well, again, first of all, these are not hypothetical exercises. We know that the Chinese hacked J.D. Vance's phone, for instance. who was on the signal threat. If you think that somehow you can have Gmail and commercial messaging apps as a venue to talk about military operations or sensitive foreign policy

and not end up in the hands of the Chinese or Russians, like you are not paying any attention to how things work today, right? That's the first thing. The Pete Heggsett thing, I can't get my mind around the fact that he's bringing his brother and some job. This is the guy who said he was restoring meritocracy to the Department of Defense. I've been in these meetings. There are not like friends, relatives, and spouses. No. Like occasionally there'll be like a dinner, right?

That's a social event. But they're talking about like by definition military matters, sensitive matters, classified matters. And how do you think the people on the other side of the table look at that? They don't take us seriously. Like amateurs. We're forced in this country to take Pete Higgs as seriously because he runs the Pentagon And even though you listen to the press,

like there's this kind of veneer of how you talk to it. If I'm the Minister of Defense for some other country and I'm showing up and this guy's got his wife or his brother hanging out with him, I'm going to act differently in that meeting. I'm not going to share certain things. That's just the reality of this thing because other countries can't afford to pretend like gravity doesn't apply to them.

You're trying to talk about where to put some missile defense radar in Poland. Yeah, yeah, this white, like me, Jenny. It's great to be here. Also, I don't know if you saw this, Ben, Marco Rubio, like, threw all these guys under the butts and was talking about, like, how he only contributed to the signal chat twice and he identified his point of contact and then said congratulations. It's like, hey, Marco, you don't get to like tattletail on everybody else. You were the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Your role here should have been saying, hey, guys, let's take this to the high side. Let's not talk about this here. Let's talk about this in our classified email, which is also on at a computer at our death. readily available to us. And you know, that Americans spend a lot of money paying for these encrypted systems. I'm sure it tallies up to billions of dollars

to have the degree of encryption we need to conduct foreign policy and national security conversations. And these people just clearly don't give a shit if it puts a risk, you know? The worst. We're gonna take a quick break, but if you're enjoying the show and you wanna support everything we're doing here at Crooked Media,

subscribe to the Friends of the Pod. We just made the subscription better than ever been. You can now enjoy off. offline and love it or leave it ad free. And for the month of April, we're offering a 30-day free trial with no commitment, just pure ad-free joy. Also, in this very episode, Ben and I just answered a bunch of Discord questions for our subscribers from some very smart, thoughtful people who ask smart things every week.

I mean, really good questions. We take seriously. Very joyful. Joyful, smart, thoughtful questions. So when you subscribe, you unlock ad-free Pod Save America, ad-free pod save the world, exclusive content like Polarcoaster with Dan Pfeiffer. and you'll be ushered into our amazing Discord community where you can process the news

with other anxious yet civically minded people like yourself and your subscription helps power everything we do here at Crooked. Sign up today at crooked.com slash friends to start your 30-day free trial. POTSafe the World is brought to you by SimplySafe. With longer daylight hours, you may be spending more time away from the house and giving burglars more opportunities to strike.

FBI crime data shows break-ins are more likely during daylight hours and under the cloak of night. Protect your home with Simply Safe, proactive security, that help stop threats before they happen. We simply say if millions of Americans enjoy the new standard in home security in greater peace of mind every time they arm their system, when heading out in the morning or when locking up each night, traditional security systems only take action after someone has already broken in,

and that is too late. SimplySafe's active guard, outdoor protection can help prevent break-ins before they happen. If someone's lurking around or acting suspicious, those agents see and talk to them in real time. They can activate spotlights. They can even contact the police all before the burglars have a chance to get inside your home. There's no long-term contracts or cancellation fees. Monitoring plans start affordably at around $1 a day,

and there's a 60-day satisfaction guarantee or your money back. As you guys know by now, John Lovett, a Simply Safe system. You set it up himself. Top of the line, sensors and monitors. It was easy to turn on and off from your phone and kept everyone involved safe, so it's a great company and worth considering. Visit simplysafe.com slash Crooked World to get 50% off a new system with a professional monitoring plan and get your first month free.

That's simplysafe.com slash crooked world. world. There's no safe like simply safe. All right, let's talk about another piece of national security staffing here. So it's been a rough couple of days for a congresswoman Elise Stefanik Ben, whose nomination to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations was pulled last week because Republicans are scared that they will not be able to hold her seat in a special election to replace her. Just to be petty for a little bit, Ben. This story made me so happy because there were these reports that she had already sat through like hours of probably mind-numbing briefings about how, the UN works. I'm sure she did like logistical garbage, you know, moving, hired movers,

like did whatever to prepare to go to New York. And now she goes back to Congress where she's given up her leadership position. They might make up a new one for her in Congress, but she's basically just like one of many Trump stooges. So Politico took a stab at figuring out who might replace her. And what they found is that lots of people are saying no thanks to the job. So that list includes David Friedman, Trump's ambassador to Israel in the first term. That guy's real gem. There was someone I'd never heard of named Eli Kohanim, who was the deputy special envoy for fighting anti-Semitism in the first term. Like both of those give you a pretty good window into how they view this job. A friend of the pod and human Twitter troll, Rick Ronell,

told Newsmax that he's a hard no, getting a little big for your britches there, Rick. And then former State Department spokeswoman Morgan Ortegis said no to the job as well. So Ben, I'm sure they will end up picking someone who's like exponentially worse than Stefanic and we will, you know, look back on this conversation and have regrets. But I guess I can kind of get saying no to this. Like you are going to be sent to the UN to try to destroy the UN from within or run interference for the Israeli government. Like it doesn't seem like the best gig, but I don't know. It's still a big deal. You're in the cabinet. I mean, there's the question of why these people want these job so because Waltz, for instance, I don't think Waltz is long for this. I don't know it.

I don't know. In terms of his role. You know, Trump went through, what, for National Security Advisers' first time. Yeah, Flynn was like a cup of coffee up there. John Bolton, E.R. McMaster, Robert O'Brien. And so clearly they don't like Waltz. You see people like putting out that he's a dumb ass or something. You know, they hate Jeffrey Goldberg. And so they'll wait. They didn't want to make it look like he got dumped overboard because of signal. But I would be willing to wager that that guy is not around. June or something. Yeah, yeah.

And same thing with, like, Stefanic, like these people sell their souls, right? So Waltz gave up a comfy congressional seat. Could have sat there for 20 years. And now he'll just be some out of work guy on like the right wing speaking circuit in like six months. Have we heard from Mike Pompeo other than his,

security clearance getting yanked, you know, these people. Yeah, good question. These people just disappear. And Stefanik, too, like she gave up this rising leadership job to be in this UN role. and she gets fucked.

I mean, the message to all these Republicans who go along and enable all this is you're going to get thrown off the bus at the first sign of trouble. The purpose of this role should be, it's actually an important job. You're both a diplomat representing the United States at the United Nations,

where in normal times, you might try to build coalitions, you might try to pass resolutions, you might try to mobilize resources to do something. Respond to a crisis. We responded to a blo there. We did all the Iran sanctions there, on and on and on.

You're also importantly at the principals committee table, right? So you're in the cabinet. You're sitting in the situation. You're on the signal chat. You're on the signal chat. You're in these debates. What a normal UN rep is supposed to do is kind of bring the perspective of the world into those conversations. Like in some ways, even more so than the Secretary of State who's episodically engaging different governments. Like you're just sitting there at the General Assembly, the Security Council, like with your finger on the pulse of what's happening in the international system. And that perspective is totally. absent in the Trump administration right now, but it's absent because they don't give a shit. They don't want someone to be a diplomat to represent the U.S. They don't want someone who can be like an early warning system about what's happening in the world. They want someone, and the David Freeman and all these other names have been floated suggests, all they see this job as is someone standing there and running interference for Bibi Nanyahu and telling the rest of the world that if you criticize Israel, you're anti-Semites.

It's an extension of deporting kids who wrote op-eds that are critical of Israel. It's an extension of the kind of show that Elise Stefanik put on when they had Ivy League presidents testify before a committee in the House. It is so fundamentally unsurious and narrow of a conception of what is an iconic job. I mean, Adelae Stevenson, like, revealed nuclear missiles going to Cuba as the permanent representative of the UN. I mean, how far we have fallen from, you know, dealing with the biggest crisis is imaginable with very prominent prestigious Americans to this crazy fucking, you know, Rick Rinell's giving up the job because he is more important business of doing real estate deals in the Balkans and making sure like Kid Rock gets the next Kennedy Center honor.

He's making money in Serbia. He's running the Kennedy Center too. Oh, yeah. From Stevenson to Stefanik. Is that your next book on the U.N., the history of the, the destruction of the U.N.? It sounds like a good title for a foreign affairs article. There we go. Yeah, we'll call your editor.

Well, you mentioned these protesters. So there has been this ongoing assault on people with visas or even legal residency because they protested the war in Gaza. So a few weeks ago, we talked about Mukul Khalil, this Columbia student who was a green card holder who was picked up and sent to Louisiana. Since then, there have been a bunch of more cases of people with legal status getting detained. There was a Russian scientist who was working at Harvard's medical school who was put in detention for some reason. She originally fled Russia because of her anti-war stance. But there's concerns if she

gets sent back. She will be put in prison or tortured. Last week, there was this awful video of a Turkish PhD student who was here on a student visa and got snatched up on the street by like a bunch of masked ice officers. Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters that they've revoked at least 300 student visas at this point. And what is so scary about this, Ben, is you're just seeing school after school after school cave. And there's some schools like Columbia that caved because the Trump administration threatened to take away hundreds of millions of dollars with the funding for them. But then there's stories like this one from The Guardian that reported that NYU canceled a speech by the former head of Doctors Without Borders because her presentation included mentions of casualties in Gaza and the impact of cuts to USAID. Like that's it.

And apparently she offered to edit the slides and, and, clean it up for them or whatever they wanted. And they still said, no, they canceled on her when she'd already traveled to New York. So it's just, it's remarkable how fast we went from Republicans complaining about free speech, whining about cancel culture, to like, whatever this is. I mean, it's not surprising because they were always being cynical, but it is infuriating. It's infuriating. And everything about it, there are these layers to it that are infuriating. Like, first of all, it is like uncomfortable for some people, as we've talked about before, to acknowledge that that the complete and utter pile on and delegitimization of Gaza protesters plowed some ground for Trump

to do this. The reason they're starting with this issue is because everybody from Joe Biden on down cast every college protester who didn't like the killing of tens of thousands of civilians in Gaza as anti-Semitic or as contributing to like an unsafe atmosphere for Jewish students. And now that has led to them just picking up and disappearing people on the street. And, and, and, And I would ask, number one, is that making things safer on campuses? That doesn't look that, you know, like the idea that plainclosed people are just basically rendering people in the middle of the street. That's pretty terrifying.

That would not make me feel safe. And it certainly is not conducive to free speech. But the other thing that the NYU example is so important is it shows if you believe, let's say you disagree with me. And you're like, you know what, fuck these people. Like they, you know, I want to support Israel and I don't want to see people with signs at say things that I don't like River to Sea. If you think they're going to stop with this, like what planet have you been living on for a decade? The head of Doctors Without Borders can't

give a speech? They will start with Gaza because that's the lowest hanging fruit in our political media environment. And now it's already creeping into like, oh wait, we don't want to be critical of closing USAID. And the next thing will start to be like criticisms of the U.S. government policy, not just the Israeli government policy. They're starting here. We're two and a half months in and think about what's already happening. Six months from now, what kind of people are they going to be kicking out of the country? Or importantly, Tommy, and you and I were talking about this before, I know so many people who won't come here. They're afraid. Maybe they posted something on social media, critical of the United States or critical of the Israeli government.

That's a loss to this country. Like, we're accomplished people like that of Doctors Without Borders or younger people or scientists. The drying up of the intellectual capital and human capital, of people just coming here, whether it's to participate in conferences or to do work or to work here temporarily, like people are, there's going to have a chilling effect here and it's going to, all that brain power is going to go out of their places. And it's it's green card holders or people legally in the U.S. who are scared to leave the country or travel or any way bump up against law enforcement or the system because they're seeing these stories about innocent people getting swept into this Kafka-esque nightmare of bureaucracy that you just can't get out of. And it's an unrelated issue, Ben, but there's, um, there's a lot of. There's also all these reports about Canadians canceling trips to the United States, especially the states like Maine, that rely on those visits, those tourism dollars for the local economies. Like the entirety of this is doing so much harm to us as a country, both economically, to our values, to like everything we stand for.

The ripple effects of this are going to be so enormous. I mean, for decades, one of the most powerful instruments the United States had was higher education. We had lots of prime ministers, presidents, farm ministers. ministers, CEOs from countries around the world, were educated in American universities. Far, far fewer of those people are going to come here. Because why would anyone who's a foreign student want to come here?

If you say the wrong thing, you'd end up in fucking El Salvador. With no way out. Yeah, with no way out. And I don't think we can get our heads around, like this is going to have an immediate impact on universities, and has an immediate chilling effect on free speech. It immediately makes this country feel less safe, but it's going to have real medium and long-term effects

in terms of tourism dollars, in terms of research that can happen. in here in terms of the human capital. It's required to power the tech industry, which requires legal immigration from these places. Universities make a lot of money off of foreign students who play full ride. This is going to have so many other impacts. Yes, absolutely. Well, let's talk about some of these deportations, because there have been all these awful stories of the Trump administration is rounding people up and sending them to like a transnational gulog in El Salvador because they have tattoos. I mean, that seems to be the through line here, or it's just tattoos. So last week,

Homeland Security Secretary Christy Noem. She did this photo op from this mega prison in El Salvador. Listeners might have seen this video she recorded standing in front of a cell filled with human beings who I think were forced to take their shirts off so that you could see their tattoos and just like stand there as human props. And I think she did it while wearing a $50,000 Rolex watch. Perfect. Might have been $60,000, depending on which Twitter source you believe.

Here's what Christy Noem said to Brett Baer on Fox News on Monday about why she took this trip to El Salvador. The image alone was that sending a message. Yes, people need to see that image. They need to see that the United States is going to use every tool that we have to make our communities safer. That that is a consequence of someone who is a terrorist. The president has declared Trende Aragua and MS-13 as terrorist organizations and the president of El Salvador has as well. The only people allowed in that prison are terrorists. And to tour that and to look at that was giving the American people the transparency that they

want out of their government. They were able to see exactly where we're sending these people who have murdered and raped Americans that have decimated communities. And there's going to be consequences for individuals who continue to do that. My conversation with that president was, will you take more of these terrorists? And he said, absolutely we will. We will take the worst of the worst and make sure that they're facing consequences. consequences for what they've done to your country.

Bullshit. Yeah, that's a lie. The image you should think of is the gay makeup artist who's deported because he had tattoos that said mom and dad over crowns on his wrist, the guy with the autism awareness tattoo. And then finally, the administration has admitted that it made a mistake when it deported a Maryland man because of some administrative error. And now the White House, the lawyers for the government are saying they have no way to get this guy back.

Like, Rubio could make one phone call. Kristino could make one phone call to Nia Bukkah. Kaylee and say like, hey, do me a solid, get this guy out, put him on a plane, and it would be done, Ben. But like, these guys just don't care of that innocent people are rotting in hell. And I think that's part of the point. I mean, part of the point is, yes, to look kind of tough and fascist for your, you know, Brett Bear's viewing audience. I'll talk about a guy who's become the mouthpiece of state media.

But, you know, it's hard to watch a video and not feel the racialized component, you know? Oh, yeah. Here you've got this white lady with a Rolex standing in front of a bear. bunch of brown people who look like they're almost starving in this prison in El Salvador. Yeah, they do look through their starving. Yeah, let's just be very clear like what that looked like. And it's, again, I just want to keep coming back to the fact that we're two and a half months in here, you know, where is this going? Because they have no interest in getting innocent people out of that prison, you know? Nor do they necessarily have the ability to. I mean, like,

look, if a judge says you have to get them back, Buckele will say, pounce and I'm not going to do it. And the Trump administration will not help with any kind of diplomacy unless they decide to. Yeah. And how much do you think we're paying Bukele to operate that gulag, you know? A lot of money. So the only silver lining I've seen just in the news is that a judge blocked the Trump administration's move to end temporary protected status for about 600,000 Venezuelan migrants who are already in the U.S. The judge said what you just said, which is that it's smacked of racism. And then I did notice, Ben, that the details of one of these cases made it to Joe Rogan, who talked about it on his show. And like, some people might laugh at that. But,

I don't know. He's not a guy who always gets good information. And he's also a guy who like kind of speaks to the young Trump male zeitgeist. And if he's worried about the lack of due process here, like, I don't know, maybe people in the White House will listen and view this as a political risk and do something. I thought so. I mean, there is a true faction of Trump voters who are kind of extreme libertarian or anti-government or anti-cancel culture or get off my back. And the combination of people getting snatched off the street by Planko's officers, people getting sent mistakenly to gulags in El Salvador, the wait a second, you really can't say what you want on campus.

I do think that there's an argument that Democrats or just anti-Trump people need to mount, that these people are literally the threat you've been worried about. Yeah. It turns out that it wasn't like, you know, liberals shaming people on online platforms that was the risk to free speech and just freedom in this country. This is an assault on freedom in this country.

Yeah. All right. Well, a couple more things before we get the interview. So last week we talked about Israeli Prime Minister B.B. Netanyahu's efforts to fire Ronan Barr, the head of the shin bet, which is Israel's domestic intelligence service. The allegations, there's allegations that Netanyahu's vendetta against Ronan Bar is tied to a shin bet investigation into connections between two Netanyahu aides and the government of Qatar. Things escalated very dramatically on this front on Monday.

after two of Netanyahu's aides were arrested. So the details of the case are under a court gag order. But the Washington Post reported that one aide, Eli Feldstein, is suspected of doing public relations for Qatar while he was working in Netanyahu's office, which is crazy. And then last year, Feldstein was charged for leaking classified intelligence to a German news outlet. Ha Ars reported that the charges against these two include suspicion of contact with a foreign agent, bribery, fraud, breach of trust, and money laundering.

seems pretty bad. Netanyahu obviously said this was a witch hunt, blah, blah, blah, but he was forced to testify as a witness in the case on Monday. So it's pretty significant. The bigger question is, what was the Netanyahu government's role in facilitating payments from Qatar to Hamas? The opposition leader, Yai Lepid, noted on Twitter that Netanyahu's office has not denied the specific allegations of somehow facilitating these transfers of money to Qatar. So there's a lot we're going to learn here. A Qatari spokesman, called the charges of smear campaign. So Netanyahu's also trying to push out

the Israeli Attorney General for slowing down his efforts to fire Ronan Barr. Ben, you read all this stuff and you feel like, wow, man, the walls are finally closing in on Vibinen Yahoo. And then you wonder, does he live in a house with infinite walls? Because we've been in this place for a decade.

But I don't know, what's your read on this latest round? I've had the same reaction you did, which is, you know, we've been here before like many, many times with Nanjawa, where he kind of wiggles out of things. He manages to kind of push the blame down on other people. But he's clearly sitting atop of an increasingly corrupted structure. I mean, I think that's how you have to think about this.

Like, there's been this creeping level of corruption over the last decade, essentially. Allegations mounting, investigations spreading. And all of it kind of seems to revolve around the sense. And Netanyahu thinks he can operate with impunity. He can get his way out of anything. if he keeps the far right on side, he has enough votes to survive in his coalition. But like this, at a minimum, at least this is kind of getting,

I don't think there's anybody that doesn't believe this cutter thing. Oh, yeah. Like, you don't really hear people, you know, yeah, they deny. I thought it was just a known fact. Yeah, yeah, this has been out there a lot. And I think it's important to establish like the, when you're living through such a fucked up time as we are, I do think it's like a huge amount of value and just like establishing the record

of what happened here. This is what happened. Like they were like literally funneling money to prop up Hamas and Gaza because it surded their interest to keep the Palestinians divided and have Hamas be a reason that there can't be a Palestinian state. And there were guys that were enabling that for Nanyahu. There's all this cynicism involved. Like they're, you know, they attack Qatar out of one side of their mouth as these kind of Islamist zealots at the same time that they're like taking money. I mean, part of what this shows you is just how corrupt everything is like this money washing around politics. where like not a ton of money, like can buy you a lot, you know?

Yeah. And that's kind of that pervasive corruption is what jumps out. Yeah, hopefully some of these corruption cases will stick. I mean, Netanyahu is currently in trial for various corruption charges, so we'll see. And then finally, Ben, let's just do a quick update on Russia and Ukraine because there was lots of coverage of Trump saying he was, quote, pissed off and, quote, angry at Putin. And then threatening to put secondary tariffs on Russian oil. this all came after Putin called for a transitional government in Ukraine run by the UN. But like I saw that.

And I was like, yeah, sure. Like, sure you will, buddy. Also, like, I don't know that Putin's all that worried about sanctions at this point. But moreover, I found these comments Trump made Sunday about Zelensky to be far more relevant and consequential. So this came from Trump's gaggle on Air Force One. Let's hear a clip. Zelensky, by the way, I see he's trying to back out of the rare earth deal. and if he does that, he's got some problems, big, big problems.

We made a deal on Rare Earth, and now he's saying, well, you know, I want to renegotiate the deal. He wants to be a member of NATO. Well, he was never going to be a member of NATO. He understands that. So if he's looking to renegotiate the deal, he's got big problems. Go ahead. So the context here for that very overt threat is that last Friday, the U.S. sent over a new draft this minerals deal that we've been talking about for months with Ukraine, which according to the

Financial Times goes way beyond the agreement that was agreed to by the U.S. and the Ukrainians last month. The FT says the new deal would apply to, quote, all mineral resources, including oil and gas, and that Trump wants to set up a joint investment fund to split the income from Ukraine's oil, gas, and mineral industries. And they would create a board to oversee it. And the U.S. would get to appoint three out of five board members. So we have a veto over everything. And previous U.S. assistance to Ukraine would get counted as our contribution to the fund. So they would just be paying us for hundreds of billions of dollars before they could get anything out. So Ben, it's been weird talking about this minerals deal because it went from like the early versions we read about were like outrageous and exploitative.

Then it was sort of meaningless around the Zelensky visit to Washington. Now it's back to even more exploitative. And Zelensky has also complained that the U.S. keeps changing the terms of the ceasefire. proposal that's been on the table. And Zelensky says he's trying to hold off the deal. I think he's saying like he wants to ensure that it doesn't prevent them from getting into the EU, which I think in that clip, Trump confuses with him wanting NATO membership, although obviously he's talked about both in the past.

But it just seems like we're back to extorting these guys. We are. And it's pretty dark because, I mean, first of all, it's a protection racket without any protection, right? So it's essentially saying the Ukrainians, like, you have to give us. all of your resources and we won't protect you. You don't get to be NATO. Maybe we don't get a veto over the EU, but now we're maybe we're going to do that. And we're going to probably sign on to like Putin's desires for, you know, some minimal Ukrainian military and we're going to

like, you know, probably not backstop the European force that might be put there. And so it's demanding all these things in Ukrainians and we're not providing them with anything in return. at a certain point, I don't know why the Ukrainians would do this. I don't either. I think an underappreciated part of this story, Tommy, like just to find a new angle to it. Yeah. Can you imagine the potential scale of corruption from Trump cronies? Because you know that this board and these deals, it'll be people like Jared Kushner or Eric Prince or maybe Steve Whitkoff leaves his envoy role to do this or Paul Manafort, who's been involved in Ukrainian politics returns on scene.

for all their complaints about, you know, they called Ukrainians corrupt, they're clearly trying to set up something that will probably be like the most corrupt enterprise. It will make Hunter Biden's work for charisma look like fucking pro bono work for kids. You know, like, oh, you're hitting it something that's driving me crazy too. Like, I obviously think that the way Hunter Biden used his last name and connections was gross and offensive and it shouldn't have happened. There was no evidence ever provided that Joe Biden personally benefited. However, the Trump kids, as long with Jared Kushner, not only are like, Jared Kushner got $2 billion from the Saudis. We've talked about that a lot.

But the Trump, Don Jr. just went to some venture capitalism firm that is like essentially investing in anti-woke whatever products. And he's getting glossy spreads in like Bloomberg Business Week for doing exactly the same influence peddling. Now, obviously, Hunter Biden had an associated like addiction challenges that were very tawdry and the photos are bad and that led to a bunch of stories. But like the corruption piece on the Trump end is exponentially worse. And we haven't even talked about the crypto piece.

And it is like fundamental to kind of U.S. interest, right? So in the sense that like Hunter Biden may have leveraged his name. And the only thing remember they'd ever tried to find on what that might have led to is like some prosecutor was fired in Ukraine, which never made sense because that prosecutor was actually corrupt. Right. But this is like, this isn't just influence peddling. This is taking the most important geopolitical issues in the world, like the war in Ukraine, and setting up a profit mechanism that you can get out of it.

You know, this isn't like just like Trump crime family stuff. This is like crime country. Yeah, this is Putin stuff. Yeah, this is Putin stuff. This is making the state the instrument of your own corrupt interest. And that's what's happening. You know, like we just have to keep calling this out. Like they are monetizing the power of the United States on top of everything else they're doing.

Yeah. Well, another light fun show for us here. Well, but good luck. I mean, we'll get some Ukrainian minerals out of the deal right now. I'm excited for some lithium. I'm sure that, I'm sure the profits from those minerals will reach your pockets. Yeah, we'll go just Trump cronies. Splitsies on some cobalt.

Okay, we're going to take a quick break. When we come back, you're going to hear Ben's conversation with David Miliband about his work, trying to fill the gap everywhere around the world that has been left by the destruction of USAID. So stick around for that. This podcast is brought to you by Wise, the app for doing. things in other currencies. Wise believes that sending and spending money abroad should be fast, easy, and affordable. Wondering why you're still putting up with the hidden fees from your major bank, we are too. Whether you're sending money internationally to loved ones, paying bills

abroad, or finally purchasing your dream snorkeling excursion overseas, wise makes managing your money across borders simple so you can save time, money, and stress. What makes Wise different? They have one app offering up to 40 currencies and you'll never deal with hidden fees. With Wise, you can tap to pay in euros, seamlessly send pesos across borders, or quickly receive rupees from around the globe. You'll always get the real mid-market exchange rate like the one you usually see on Google, which means you always know what you're paying. You'll spend less on fees and more of your money gets where you need it to be. We know lots of people that have used Wise. It is super easy. Give it a shot. That's why millions of customers around the world trust Wise.

Download the Wise app today or visit Wise.com. Terms and conditions apply. Okay, I'm very pleased to welcome back, David Miliband, the president of the International Rescue Committee. David, thanks so much you're joining us. Yeah, Ben, good to be with you. Okay, I wanted to begin with the story that with everything going on the world has not gotten a ton of attention, which is the enormous 7.7 magnitude earthquake in Myanmar and with effects felt in Thailand last Friday. And after talking about that, we can discuss how the USAID dismantling interacts with crises like this. But just to begin with, what is your sense, given IRC's work on the ground of what the impact is, of the earthquake in Myanmar and what the humanitarian needs are right now.

Yeah, the world hasn't stopped because of tariffs and all the other things going on in Washington, D.C. And the terrible earthquake in Myanmar, what used to be Burma, exposes not just the financial gaps, but the organizational and operational gaps that are left when America is not on the field in the way that it used to be. I mean, I spoke to our someone who's overseeing our response. We were one of the larger health providers in Myanmar until January the 20th. It's a monumental scale of damage. I mean, the pictures, I hope people have seen some of them that show, I mean, 80% of one of the mostly affected cities, 80% of the buildings are down. It's as if it's been through a pulverizing war. Obviously, the numbers

dead is in the single digit thousands. It's still two, three thousand, which is enough, but the numbers affected is millions, not just thousands. And there's real risk at precisely this moment. I mean, the earthquake happened on Friday. We're now day four, day five. It's precisely this moment when the breakdown of water and sanitation systems leads to a public health emergency. It's precisely at this moment when injuries that are not treated turn septic and become life-threatening dangerous. It's precisely at this moment. Then people who've generally had access to medicines when that's interrupted, after four or five days you get into trouble.

It's also when food can become a problem. And we're seeing that on the ground. We're focusing our work on mobile health at the moment, some cash distribution. We've deployed some of our own resources. We're appealing for resources from the public. But it is undoubtedly a grade one emergency piled upon, and this is a critical point, piled upon a conflict in which the majority of the country isn't in the hands of the government. So it's a civil war situation where we know from other contexts that there's enormous vulnerability. Well, yeah, it feels like a perfect storm between the fact that there's already a civil war that was on top of a government that couldn't meet a lot of basic needs at a time when.

you know, USAID has been shuttered, and so it's not like the U.S. is going to have teams on the ground. I saw China pledged $13 million, which is a lot more than the U.S. has pledged, but it's not exactly going to fill this hole. I mean, how do you even begin to think about being able to get assistance in to make choices about what assistance to prioritize when you have such a perfect storm of both natural and political disasters in one place? Well, the good thing is that we've got people on the ground. We're not just, we are actually flying some people in some expert support, but we've got people on the ground, we've got teams on the ground. And one part of our model is to train local people, whether they're working in finance or education, to be ready for an emergency and to become emergency workers. I mean, there's two aspects to our response, and that's what I can speak to. One is our own staff who are mobilising to do mobile health care. and also to do cash assistance so that people can buy food. There's then in the non-governmental held areas, there's work through partners. And so there's stories about where there's access, where isn't there access, but the partners that we've got, these are local organizations who we work with

and who are trusted by us and by the local population. So it's a two-headed response. Just to give you a sense of the scale, though, and the link back to the US, we were supporting 100 healthcare centers in Myanmar through support from USAID. That's been lost. So it wasn't considered that, quote unquote, life-saving because it was just more generic support. The kind of gap that's left is very, very substantial, especially in a situation where

only about 5% of the UN assessed funding needs were being met before this earthquake. As you say, there's Chinese money, there's suggestions. the Russians are there. And you'll know this as well, that one of the things that the American government did very well through USAID was these disaster assistance response teams, DART teams. You must have done a lot of this. Not only are they first on the ground 24-hour response, but they had really good organizational and assessment capacities that would make sure that resources were being channeled in the right way. So I just want to start to pull back the lens here a little bit on the USAID piece of this. And one question,

I have, when you mentioned something like 100 healthcare facilities that are supported with USAID funding that goes through a partner organization like IRC, and I think this is something that people don't often understand is it, it's both what USAID is doing directly on the ground, but also the kind of grants and support they provide to organizations like the IRC. What happens to those health care centers? Like, do they close? Are people still going to work there and there's just not money coming in? Like, what is the impact in a place like Myanmar when that money is.

is pulled. Well, unless the government takes them on, they get closed. I mean, it's pretty simple. Really, in Thailand, we've come to an agreement that the Thai government has picked up some of the health centers that we've been operating on the Thai side of the border. You'll know that many people from Myanmar crossed the border as refugees. We were running nine healthcare centers on the Thai side of the border. They've been handed over to the Thai government. But in the Myanmar case, it's still very unclear, obviously, and you've got this division between government-held areas and non-government-held areas. But if there's no funding for the medicines, for the doctors, for the nurses, you can't run

the centre. And so literally, there are around the world what are considered to be non-essential US-funded facilities being closed. That might be in health. It might be in education. It might be in climate resilience and livelihoods. So it's a dramatic and pretty instantaneous impact beyond what are called the life-saving areas or life-saving intervention.

which have been given a waiver from the suspension of U.S. for an aid. And so when you look at the macro picture for people that have followed what's happened to USAID, followed some of these different crises around the world and we'll get to a couple of them. But just pulling back and looking at the whole picture, you know, you, IRC is active in all these different areas, you know, from famine relief and nutritional assistance to health assistance to refugee resettlement. What is your initial assessment of the impact of the U.S. essentially withdraw from the humanitarian space globally on your operations and on collective efforts to deal with these problems? I think the way to think about it, let me use a metaphor.

I mean, the U.S. was the anchor of the global system. In the humanitarian sector, it provided more or less four in ten dollars. European countries plus the European Union, also more or less four in ten dollars in the humanitarian space. There's a whole argument shouldn't newly wealthy countries in the Gulf and elsewhere be paying more. Probably the answer to that is yes, but the anchor of the global system was the US because it was everywhere and because it was relatively speaking generous on the humanitarian front. Now, I'm not a sailing person, but when you pull up the anchor on a boat and the seas are choppy, then the boat starts rocking and the passengers get seasick. I mean, that's essentially what's happening at the moment. The anchor of the system is no longer there. And so you've got a

lot more instability. You've got a lot more need not being met. Some of that is short-term harm, but others of it, it takes time for it to play through. So for non-communicable diseases, it's a longer-term hit to health and to livelihoods. But it's very, very serious. Obviously, there's a government review taking place. The new administration announced a review on January 20th. That's not January 24th. That's not unusual. But we don't know where that review is going to take things. What is unusual is to close services while a review is going on. Yeah. And that's what's happening at the moment. And when you look at a specific crisis, let's talk about Sudan, where I know you've been very active. We've talked about this in the past. There have been some changes in the

conflict there. The Sudanese armed forces have the upper hand in Khartoum. But we also know there's enormous humanitarian needs, displacement, famine risks. And usually USAID would kind of fill a lot of that space in a conflict zone like Sudan. That's where a lot of the support can go. What is the humanitarian situation in Sudan and what kinds of needs are going unmet that would normally compel resources from USAID? Well, I think that the word I would use about Sudan is it's just crushing. It's crushing for the people in that country. It's crushing for the neighbors. And remember, there's very worrying suggestions of instability spreading south to South Sudan. We always say, untended humanitarian crisis is a source of political instability. And we're seeing that

spreading from Sudan beyond. The conflict lines are shifting. So that's crushing for people who thought they were safe. Now they're in a different area. We don't know where, I mean, Khartoum has been retaken significantly by the Sudan armed forces. What we do know is that malnutrition, famine, which is the apex of the humanitarian pyramid, when you've got a famine situation, you can guarantee everything else is wrong. The economy is not working, the health service is not working, violence against women is out of control. I've got the figures here, actually. In the latest report, 8 million people, 17% of the population, population around 45 million, are in phase four out of five. That means emergency classification. The only thing north of phase

four is famine, which is phase five in the emergency classification index. And this is a very small C conservative set of indices. It takes a lot of proof to get to level four or level five. This independent assessment found famine in five areas, predicted famine in five additional localities in North Darfur, highlighted the risk of famine in 17 other areas. This is not because there isn't enough food, but it's because the conflict is blocking the passage of food, the passage of aid workers, the delivery of humanitarian aid. So it's a fundamental issue of politics as well as of humanitarian need. And sorry, you asked me also, I should have mentioned this, where does the US fit into this? It's an interesting case study of the four in 10 and the loss

of the anchor. The US was nearly 50% of total support for humanitarian work in Sudan, actually 46%. So you can see how significant the US is. Now, even with the waiver that Secretary Rubio has given for life-saving activity, remember, life-saving activity means that we can carry on doing an emergency operating theater, but we can't run the primary health care center in which is located. So there's a bit of artificiality in there. But even with that, there's a desperate need for others to step up. Otherwise, this crushing burden is going to expand. Well, and just on that point about the emergency operations center piece of it, you might have a waiver where literally someone at a, you know, what we would call like a soup kitchen might be authorized to hand food out. But if there's not, is the case that the absence of distribution centers, the absence of logistics chains, I remember a lot of USCID's comparative advantage in the development space when I was in government was that logistics chain. right, the ability to move large amounts of aid someplace, set up a staging ground, then get it out. Is it the sense that even with the life-saving waiver, maybe at the far end of that chain, that the whole system will kind of break down if you don't have the... Well, most of the humanitarian aid sector is not short-term emergency response reactive. But one of the things about these DART teams, this disaster assistance response teams,

is that they were very good at then accessing, once they've done an assessment, pre-positioned U.S. goods. So there was real speed. Now, you know, 305 million people in humanitarian need around the world, 84% of them in just 20 countries that are on our emergency watch list. We know where a lot of the crisis is. So it's not short-term response. The earthquake that's going on that went on Friday in Myanmar demands emergency reaction. But as you intimated earlier, direct delivery was not what USAID or the PRM Bureau, Populations, Refugees, and Migration Bureau of the State Department did.

They were about assessment, organization, and then support for other organizations to deliver. And then they use the technical and logistical capacity of organizations like IRC to then reach people in the greatest need. Because it wasn't U.S. Foreign Service officers delivering healthcare. It was done through governments or where governments, don't exist through independent NGOs like ours. So it's another part of the anchor of the system being lost. So Chinese and Russians can arrive, but they don't have the same sort of protocols. They don't have the same sort of legitimacy. You have got the UN there, but obviously there's a 180-day review of the UN as well whose outcome we don't know. And just we've talked about

Myanmar and Sudan, two places that are kind of urgent. One is a natural disaster on top of a conflict. One is a conflict. Then there are these kind of longer-term needs. that, you know, you also interact with, like, health. And let's just take, you know, where the U.S. is a huge player, when you look at things like immunization, you know, getting vaccines around the world, trying to stop the spread of potentially epidemic disease, what are you seeing as the impact of the U.S. withdrawal from that space? Does this mean that we could see a regeneration of certain diseases? It can be managed with vaccines. Does it pose a threat from the spread? of particularly dangerous diseases like Ebola, for instance.

How are you assessing that space? Well, I wish we could vaccinate against Ebola, but we can't. But you raise a really important point, because you and I would, I'm sure, agree there's a moral case for humanitarian aid. But if you want to make the strategic case that America is safer, stronger, and more prosperous, the best place to do it is actually around immunization

because it's precisely disease spread that is the most tangible way, I think, of explaining to people why in a connected world, you're better off sponsoring immunization across the world, not just in parts of the world, because part immunization doesn't do the trick for you. We've got a very interesting example of this, which you and I have discussed in person when we were together. In four countries in East Africa, we've delivered 10 million doses of vaccine to zero-dose kids, kids who had no immunization at all, 2 million kids, 10 million doses in total, in war-torn areas where government systems weren't reaching.

The government immunization drives around the world have reached about 85%, not because of vaccine hesitancy, by the way, but because people weren't being reached. We've reached those people, and there's no doubt that that is a benefit direct to those people and the rest of their lives, they're immunized, but also there's, some sort of protection against the spread of disease more generally. Now, people are often unsure about, well, how do those connections go? Are you sure that people move? But actually, there's enough movement around the world into capital cities, from capital cities on planes, that it can move pretty fast. And so the immunization drive, I think, is a very interesting one.

There was a report last week that the US was going to pull out of a global alliance, the global alliance on vaccines and immunizations. It's not clear if that's going to take place because there's this review happening. The CEO of Gavi rightly said that she wanted to try and persuade the U.S. that this was really in the U.S. interest, not separate from it. And I think it makes the strategic case for foreign aid very, very tangible. And do you see anybody filling the space? I mean, if this anchor is pulled up and potentially, you know, four out of ten development dollars, humanitarian assistance dollars might go away, including the kind of fortifying presence and sustaining presence of U.S. assistance. Do you see China, Russia,

Gulf countries, philanthropies filling any of that space in a meaningful way? Well, short term, we've had a good response. We can't fill all the gaps that are left by any withdrawal of U.S. funding. It's just too big. But we've had a good response from people saying, hang on, while this review is going on, we want you to help you get over the hump. You've got to be able to stabilize and protect the most vulnerable. We're trying to, we've set out, one, our most vulnerable clients will protect, two, we'll optimize our use of resources, three, will continue to re-envision an aid system of the future, which is where we've been offering some thought leadership, both in terms of the products and the

processes. But the short answer to your question is, no, that the system's still in shock. The anchor's being pulled up. Some passengers are getting seasick, but the other people on the boat are trying to figure out, well, how do we live in this new situation? What kind of buoys can we put out there to try to stabilize? The EU's got seven-year budget. The good side of that is it's not going to be cutting until 2027. The bad side is it's not yet in a position to step up. You know that France aid budget going down, Germany, coalition negotiations. UK, sadly, has announced that in a year's time it's going to start reducing its aid budget. We don't know about that. We don't know about the Gulf countries, and although the Chinese have reportedly responded to this earthquake,

we don't know, we've seen no signal that they want to get into the humanitarian aid space. The truth is, we need a much bigger conversation about the balance of responsibility for humanitarian aid and development aid. Because in the last 30 years, it's increasingly evident that development takes place through indigenous, stable government, markets that work. that's how people have been brought out of poverty. In extreme cases where you've got conflict, humanitarian aid is much more essential and it's grant-based. And we've got a situation where there's about $200 billion

of so-called overseas assistance. Only a quarter of that goes on humanitarian aid at the moment. And the big conversation that needs to happen is what's the balance of responsibility between international aid and domestic resource mobilization in countries that are, lower middle income or even poor, but not consumed by conflict. Yeah.

And that's a very difficult, big political, geopolitical conversation that needs to happen. And one last thing I wanted to ask you, which is, you know, in addition to your leadership in the humanitarian space, you know, you were Foreign Secretary for the United Kingdom. It's early days, but what is a potential geopolitical shift? I mean, obviously the main focus is humanitarian is kind of human and moral in making the case for this type of assistance. But what geopolitical shifts do you see from the kind of U.S. withdrawals? from this space, who might gain influence, who might lose influence, how might that impact geopolitics? And that's a big question, but what's your initial impression? Well, I'm glad you've devoting the next 45 minutes to my answer to your question.

Look, I think that the best thing for me to do is to use the words that you've seen reported elsewhere. Every country in the world has to ask itself, well, what do we do if the Americans aren't there? That's the question on everybody's lips. And it's a question that's being asked in stark terms in countries that depend on USAID, but it's also being asked in powerful countries who are thinking, well, where do we position ourselves? And it's not just China and India, the emerging billion person plus powers of the new world order. It's also the middling powers. It's also Turkey.

It's also Indonesia. It's also United Arab Emirates. they're all asking themselves, well, the Americans might not be there. What responsibility, what opportunity, what dependency does that create? And I'm very taken with the idea that this isn't a stable, multipolar world. It's a much more unstable, multi-aligned world with a set of different coalitions on different issues. Sometimes those coalitions can put out fires. Sometimes they don't. Sometimes they're actually part of the story. So I think it's a very much more unstable environment, whether you're a donie, whether you receive USAID, or whether you're thinking, do I move in

because USAID is in retreat? Well, we are definitely in Rocky Waters. If people wanted to donate to IRC or to specifically support IRC's efforts in a place like Myanmar or Sudan, then where can we direct them? Yeah, please go to www.rescue.org. They can find a lot about what we're doing. They'll see the stories of our clients, because we're very focused on, don't believe the idea that foreign aid doesn't work.

That excuse is not an excuse for inaction. And what they'll find on our website is not just how to donate, but actually how their donation makes a difference because there are solutions out there. Great. Well, people should remember, you do have some agency and we hope that you make up some of the support. I know you can't make up all of it that you're losing from USAD. David, thanks so much for joining us. Ben, thank you

so much. Thanks again to David Miliband for doing the show and we'll talk to you guys next week. Pod Save World is a crooked media production. Our senior producer is Alona Mikovsky. Our associate producer is Michael Goldspin. Our executive producers are me, Tommy Vitor, and Ben Rhodes. Say hi, Ben. Hi. The show is mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick. Jordan Kanner is our audio engineer. support by Kyle Segglin and Charlotte Landis. Thanks to our digital team, Ben Heffcote, Mia Kelman, William Jones, David Tolls,

and Molly LaBelle. Natalie Heringer is our head of news and programming. Matt DeGroote is our head of production. If you want to get ad-free episodes, exclusive content, and more, consider joining our friends of the pod subscription community at cricket.com slash friends. Don't forget to follow us at Crooked Media on Instagram,

TikTok, and Twitter for more original content, host takeovers and other community events. Plus find Pod Save the World on YouTube for access to full episodes, bonus content, and more. If you're as opinionated as we are, please consider dropping us a review. Our production staff is proudly unionized with the Writers Guild of America East.