Raging Moderates with Scott Galloway and Jessica Tarlov - Did Trump Ruin the American Experiment? (ft. Sharon McMahon)

Episode Date: June 23, 2026

Get your tickets now for our live show at 92NY: https://www.92ny.org/event/scott-galloway-and-jessica-tarlov Jessica Tarlov is joined by America’s government teacher Sharon McMahon (https://instagram.com/sharonsaysso) — author of We Are Mighty and the woman behind the The Preamble on Substack— for a check-in on the American experiment. First, the Trump administration says progress is being made in negotiations with Iran, but Tehran is already pushing back on key claims made by Vice President JD Vance. After tensions flared again in the Strait of Hormuz, questions persist about whether the Trump administration secured a lasting agreement, or simply handed Iran new leverage. Jessica and Sharon also discuss Zohran Mamdani's growing influence in New York politics, and the rise of democratic socialist candidates in major cities across America. In one Congressional race, Mayor Mamdani detached himself from the allies of Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, and from longtime incumbents, to endorse a controversial candidate whose past views have come under fire. Will this widen the divide within the Democratic Party? Plus: explosive new reporting has exposed former DNI Tulsi Gabbard’s affiliation with a strange religious group — which many former members have called a cult. Sharon and Jessica talk about the insidious influence of religious groups on our elected officials — such as the overt Christian nationalism of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. Finally, they discuss what America's 250th birthday celebration should really represent, and why Sharon believes that in order to come back from Trump, we all must decide that the era of "not knowing" is over. For ad-free episodes, exclusive livestreams, and to connect with Scott, Jessica, and the Raging Moderates community, join us at ProfG+ on Substack: https://ragingmoderates.profgmedia.com/ Get The Monday Rage newsletter: https://profgmedia.com/s/monday-rage/ Follow Raging Moderates on IG, Tiktok, and Facebook: https://www.instagram.com/ragingmoderatespod/ https://www.tiktok.com/@ragingmoderates https://www.facebook.com/ragingmoderates Follow Jessica Tarlov on Instagram, Substack, and Bluesky: https://instagram.com/jessicatarlov https://substack.com/@jessietarlov https://bsky.app/profile/jessicatarlov.bsky.social Follow Scott on Instagram, Substack, and Bluesky: https://instagram.com/profgalloway https://substack.com/@profgalloway https://bsky.app/profile/profgalloway.com Subscribe to our YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@RagingModerates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Support for this show comes from Fetch Pet Insurance. Do you have a pet? Every six seconds, a pet owner in the U.S. gets hit with a vet bill of over $1,000. And it's almost always an unwelcome surprise. That's where Fetch Pet Insurance comes in. Fetch is the most complete pet insurance. Get paid back up to 90% of vet bills. You can use any vet in the U.S. and Canada.

All vets are in network. Go to fetchpet.com slash save right now for your free quote. That's fetchpet.com slash save. Support for this show comes from Odu. Running a business is hard enough. So why make it harder with a dozen different apps that don't talk to each other? Introducing Odu. It's the only business software you'll ever need.

It's an all-in-one fully integrated platform that makes your work easier. CRM, accounting, inventory, e-copy, and more. And the best part, O-DU replaces multiple expensive platforms for a fraction of the cost. That's why over thousands of businesses have made the switch. So why not you? Try O-D-U for free at O-D-O-D-O-O-com. That's O-D-O-O-O-O-com. What happens when political appointees push charges that career prosecutors don't support? There is an element to this administration that wants to simply shout down reality. And I think shouting down reality and shouting, down justice, shouting down fairness, should be a deeply concerning thing to all Americans.

I'm Preet Barrara, and this week, longtime GOJ reporter Devlin Barrett, joins me to discuss his new book, The Department of Revenge, how Trump took control of American justice. The episode is out now. Search and follow. Stay tuned with Preet, wherever you get your podcasts. How is America doing? I would say that the experiment at this juncture is on shaky ground. I wouldn't say that it is irreparable. I wouldn't say that it's so far gone that we can't pull it back. But I would say that we need to be extremely cautious about the direction that we're heading in. You know, when George Washington left office, he cautioned Americans in this infant republic.

He cautioned them against cunning and ambitious men who would try to subvert the power of the people and usurp for themselves the reins of government. Here we are all of these, you know, more than almost 250 years later. It seems prophetic that they knew exactly what could happen. Before we get started, a couple of housekeeping things. Tomorrow, make sure to tune in to our weekly Substack Live show, Raging Perspective. That's me and Aaron Parnas, breaking down the biggest stories of the week, taking your questions live. Wednesdays at noon Eastern, you can subscribe now at ragingmoderates.

profgemedia.com. And also we're putting together a very fun summer mailbag episode. We want to hear your questions. Send a short voice recording with your question and send it to Raging Moderates at Profgeymedia.com. And we may feature it. All right, let's get into it. Welcome to Raging Moderates.

I'm Jessica Tarlove. Scott's off today. And that's sad. But I'm actually not that sad because I have America's government teacher, Sharon McMahon with me today. Bestselling author of The Small and the Mighty, creator of the preamble. Instagram, Sharon says. So huge following, just an enormous fan, and it's awesome to have you.

I'm so happy to be here. This is very exciting. Thanks for having me. Yeah, no, of course. I want to do some newsy stuff, and then I want to talk meta-America with you, since we are just a few weeks away from our 250th birthday. But let's jump in on what's going on with the Iran situation. The Trump administration has temporarily lifted oil sanctions, which is a huge gift to Iran. I was fighting with my colleagues on the Five about that yesterday, like 40 years of sanctions, just up in the air. Iran has responded to the claims from J.D. Vance, that they would allow nuclear inspectors into the country with a spokesperson saying that there are no detailed discussions on the nuclear issue.

Here's Trump responding to a reporter's question about whether Iran has the upper hand. Does that give them leverage, the Iranians leverage over you? Oh, you're so, leverage. You know, their Navy is gone. Their Air Force is gone. Their leaders are all dead. Their whole countries are mess. Their economy is shot.

Their anti-aircraft is gone. Their radar is gone. These guys love radar. Their radar is gone. The reason that I won in a landslide, even though I got 92% negative press, all fake press, is because nobody believes the press anymore. And they have to start believing. Did you catch that comment from Leslie Stahl,

about how Trump told her that his whole game is to discredit the press so that no one believes anything and no one trusts in any facts, which is so your jam that facts matter. But where do you want to start on the Iran front? Well, they love radar, Jesse. That's what's important to know is they love radar. And that's gone, apparently. They have no more radar, no more ability to get radar. No. You know, this is not in my view. This is not really a deal. This is not actually a deal. Iran is immediately walking back any claims the United States is making. Fundamentally, we are worse off than we were prior to beginning strikes in Iran. I mean, unless you, you know, yes, we can highly value like, okay, we've removed this bad guy from power. What's to keep another bad guy from coming into power? Nothing. We're not better off on the nuclear front. We're not better off. We're not better off. on the Strait of Hormuz,

we're not better off on disabling their oil industry. I fail, I really do, fail to see how this is a fundamentally better, air quotes, deal for the United States than the one we had in January. Plus, we have, you know, more than a dozen American service members dead

and hundreds injured as a result to this conflict. Yeah, we don't talk about that very much or the fact that actually they're either injured or dead because of American mistakes, not necessarily because of Iranian prowess. So I see the world similarly to you when it comes to this. You know, I think that tearing up the JCPOA in 2018 versus working to, if you think the deal isn't good enough, working for something better, but at least having that kind of backbone, right, for a renegotiation would have been the best way forward. What do you think happens over the next 60 or so days? And of course,

curious as to how you see this as part of Trump's general foreign policy plan, if you want to call it the Don Roe doctrine, which he has floated around, really put it in context of how he sees the world and American power. This is one of my biggest beefs with this, you know, again, deal, is that in 60 days, it gives Iran the ability to again begin controlling the straight, to begin charging fees for people to traverse it, to negotiate with Oman to say, hey, what kind of deal do you want to put together to control this body of water that was previously open? That is now apparently in 60 days. You're crazy if you think that in 60 days Iran's going to be like, you know what? Goodwill gesture, everyone goes free. That's not happening. So that is a serious concern, the idea that like 60

days from now they get to just decide what they want to do and we're supposed to just go along with it. The challenge here with Trump is that he's not a print. man, right? He doesn't have a Don Roe doctrine. He does not have a set of guiding viewpoints in which he's, you know, like you can point to say, you know, previous Republican administrations that did have a principled view. Now, you might disagree with what the principles are, but the idea that we're going to advance democracy on all fronts. And sometimes that means attacking countries and getting ourselves involved in protracted wars. But this idea that, you know, democracy should. And should be at the forefront of our foreign policy missions, whether that's through USAID, whether that's through military action, soft power, actual military hard power. We don't have a set of guiding principles. So the principles are going to be whatever the president feels like that day. And I think that's a creates a more dangerous world, right? I don't think that puts us in a better position from a foreign policy standpoint. It's very difficult to negotiate with somebody's feelings. I mean, I would love to

hear what your thoughts are about it, though. Do you agree that this is fundamentally, we're fundamentally in a worse place than we were? I do. I mean, I think that doing something about the situation in Iran in January, when we said help is on the way and there were hundreds of thousands of Iranians in the streets and the Ayatollah, the father, was seemingly on his soon-to-be last breath, right? Like, he was very sick. He was very weakened. And I think that we false advertised a level of support that the Iranians could have really used at that moment. And we waited too long for it. I think that there was like a shit or get off the pot moment that we then chose a 70-day ceasefire, which Iran used to strengthen themselves. Like they rearmed, they rebuilt.

They got their ducks in a proverbial row. And they also- They got new radar. They got more radars. They got all the radar. Yeah. Space lasers, I'm sure, coming soon. But they also, I don't want to say more so than any other country, but I think more so than any other enemy country have figured out Donald Trump.

Like they have figured out how he wields social media. They have, they've studied, you know, his cadence, the way that he speaks, the kind of declarations that they make. And I think that they have been the most forceful in calling his bluff, which is one of the more frustrating. things to him. I mean, putting aside those incredible Lego videos, which were great trolls of the administration, they basically have said since Bridge and Power Plant Day, we're not buying it, right? Like, we don't think that you're going to wipe our civilization off the map. There are 90 million people living here. And so day by day, we're just going to keep shoving this back in your face until we get to a place of negotiating power. And I think that they feel that, you know, in the last three or four days when the street of where moves is supposed to have been open, they've closed it

two or three times. So they don't even really need to wait for the tolling issue at 60 days. They can just say, no tankers today. Totally. And I totally agree with you that they are willing to meet Donald Trump where he is at. They are not playing by any of the rules of international diplomacy and neither is Trump. And so they're very much on board with a like, you want to do AI troll videos, bring it. Let's do AI troll videos. And of course, Trump loves to troll but hates to be trolled. So that is, you know, that was highly affected. The other thing that those, you know, AI trolling videos were really good at doing was garnering support from Americans who hate Donald Trump for their cause. It helped make Iran seem like this like, why are you attacking us? You know, like this sort of helpless

how dare you be the aggressor? We're just over here minding our business because the average American doesn't really have any idea how Iran operates behind the scenes. They don't understand how they are pulling all of the strings of Hamas, Hezbollah, all of these proxy organizations. So they were able to paint themselves as kind of this, like, funny little guy in this scenario.

And Donald Trump is the big meany. So they helped gain American support for their cause. And frankly, Iran is not the funny little guy. Iran is, these are not good actors, but they were successful at painting themselves as such. I mean, legit terrorists with a good sense of humor and a great marketing firm, I guess. I want to ask you about that because I think that's really important how external actors and even external bad actors can galvanize the support of Americans that are against a certain group.

I don't even want to say that it's just about Donald Trump because we've seen foreign influence work against Democrats in the past, right? Like we had that in the 2016 election. I mean, the Russians never stopped. The Iranians never stop. The Chinese never stop, et cetera. Like they want chaos here and they want us to hate each other. How do you think about fixing that problem?

And obviously there is a regulation aspect to it, right? And the government has to be better about interference and things like that. But the way that TikTok in particular works, and we saw this even, remember when, like, all the Gen Z kids were into Osama bin Laden? Yes. Yeah. Oh, he left this really moving letter that was just uncovered. Right. Like, the beauty of that or even what's going on a little bit.

And it links to what I wanted to talk about with the huge slate of primaries here today in New York City, like the beauty of socialism that I hear about all the time without any, like you would say, where are the facts? right, about what socialism is and the kind of life that it leads to for the average person living under it. So how do you think about that problem and fixing it? Well, it's certainly not an easy fix. And it's not going to be fixed. I do think government regulation is one component of it in terms of acting in the way that only government can, right? The average American is not able to regulate, you know, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. These are not things that the average American has power over. We have control over our own actions.

But humans are also not especially principled and not especially good at making amazing choices. We like to believe that we are. But ultimately, we eat Cheetos when we know they're bad for us, right? Like, ultimately, that's how humans are. They are extremely delicious. Extremely delicious, even like with a pair of chopsticks so you don't get the cheese all over your fingers. Can I get a two-year-old to use chopsticks because we are all orange over here? Cute little, you know, like the dinosaur chopsticks.

Yeah, humans are not particularly good at making principal decisions. So there are government actions that need to be taken on this front. There's no question. But can we government-governmentally regulate our way out of this situation? also no, not unless we want to become Iran, where we completely control the internet, where we completely, you know, shut down what people are allowed to see. That's also not freedom. So how do we balance, you know, liberty with protection? This is this is the age-old question in any democracy. If you give up your freedom for liberty, you deserve neither. That's the sort of,

you know, adage that has been present for hundreds of years in this country. But that's not to say we can do nothing. That's not to say there's no hope for the future. I do think there are ways to use the levers of government to make sure that we are at least, we at least are taking some steps towards mitigating against some of the negative effects. In the same way that seatbelts are a mitigating factor in car safety. They are not the be-all and end-all of car safety. That's not to say we shouldn't wear seatbelts and that's not to say the government shouldn't do something. It seems like both sides are just not brave enough. I mean, sometimes it's a votes issue, but a lot of times it's a special interest issue.

And also there's a lack of a lack of education, right? Yeah. Like some members of Congress are like asking the CEO of TikTok if TikTok is Wi-Fi. Yeah. Like that's the thing. Is TikTok Wi-Fi? And the CEO of TikTok is like congressman or senator, no. TikTok is not Wi-Fi.

Like that's something you could have found out before the camera's. started rolling, frankly. Support for the show comes from HomeServe. You want things to work, don't we all? But sometimes things just happen that are out of your control. And no one knows this better than homeowners, when something can go wrong in a moment's notice. And those costs can hit hard and fast.

That's where HomeServe comes in. Regular homeowners insurance usually doesn't cover a lot of the day-to-day wear and tear, the plumbing failures, HVAC breakdowns, or electrical issues. When those happen, you're often on your own. But HomeServe can let you get help fast. You simply choose a plan for your needs and budget, and when something on your plan goes wrong, you can just call their 24-7 hotline to start the repair process for as little as $4.99 per month. It's how HomeServe has helped homeowners like you for over 20 years with a trusted national network of 2,600 local contractors.

Join the millions of customers who trust HomeServe. For 50% less your first year, go to homeserve.com slash moderates. That's homeserv.com slash moderates for 50% less. Savings compared to renewal price, void in Florida. This spring, denim gets a softer, lighter update. Introducing Old Navy's drapey denim wide leg, a new fit that moves with you. It's everything you want denim to feel like for summer. Easy, breathable, and effortlessly cool.

With a fit that creates natural movement and a wide leg that feels modern, not overwhelming. Plus, that signature, wait, for this price, moment. Old Navy's drapey denim wide leg. One, two, day. I'm stand-up comedian, gentleman. Marco Seresi. And I'm actor-piness model Russell Daniels. The downside is our podcast where we bring on guests to talk about how miserable their lives are. Because let's face it, things are not getting better. Every episode we talk about what's wrong with our lives, our guest lives, the world,

but in a fun way. Bottom line is you're going to walk away feeling better about your life. We've had so many cool guests, Caleb Huron. Busy Phillips. Stavros Halkius. Laverne Cox. Hassan Piker. Alana Glazer. I promise you're going to have a good time. Now on the Vox Media Podcast Network, this is the downside. I want to check in, like I said, on what's going on in New York. I don't know how closely you're following this.

I live in Dan Goldman's district, so I'm hotly following it. Mom Donnie, our mayor, obviously has endorsed a slew of leftist candidates, hoping to take out incumbents in the New York primaries. I'm not sure how much you are thinking about like what's going on the ground in New York, but even more meta about this fight within the Democratic Party and the opposition to a government that, you know, is really overreaching in almost every area that I can think of. So it's a very important moment for those of us who don't like what's going on to be cohesive. And it feels a bit like we're at each other's throats. So, you know, how are you thinking about the DSA left versus the more establishment left on the Democratic? side. This is a really interesting question that I actually think about a lot is the fractures

within political parties. And of course, we've seen a huge fracture on the right with mega and establishment conservatives. And of course, the mega wing of the party is currently winning. And there has, you know, this fracture between establishment Dems and, you know, Democratic Socialists is not new. But this is really one of the first times that we've seen a Democratic Socialists gain this amount of prominence and power. You know, aside from a few congressional, candidates here and there, this, you know, being able to capture the entirety of the country's attention with a highly effective social media campaign, a really cute, charismatic candidate. So often the candidates in the, in the Democratic socialist space are not cute and charismatic

and young. And, you know, they're curmudgeonly old dudes from Vermont that wear mittens and hold manila envelopes at. at inaugurations, you know? And certainly people, you know, Bernie is beloved to some. But you cannot compare Bernie Sanders to Mom Johnny. These are not the same people. So to me, I do think a huge part of the appeal of the growth of Democratic Socialists are the underlying structural issues that are impacting the everyday lives of citizens, things like the cost of housing. Things like wage stagnation, inability to borrow enough money to attend college anymore. The designation of important degrees as not professional, you know, like so consequently you can't

borrow enough money to pay for this college program. These very real issues that are, you know, the cost of child care, lack of childcare access, I could keep going. Real issues that are impacting the lives of ordinary Americans, they feel like establishment Dems are not doing anything to address those issues. And so they are finding somebody who's willing to get out in front of kitchen table issues in a way that they view as counteracting the populist right. So, I mean, I hear your concern, and I'm not saying that they are, that, you know, you should get on board with Mom Donnie.

I'm just saying, like, this is where they are capturing the imagination of the public is with a promise to do something about issues that really impact their lives. I totally agree with you. And I was just talking yesterday with a more conservative Democrat, more moderate Democrat who is concerned about the future of the party and finding a smart way for us to work together where we can. And I think that there are certain areas where that makes more obvious sense. Like if the party shifts in general towards a Medicare for all model, for instance, like that's a big, you know, big point for the DSA left. People have been dug in about it and the more establishment. left, like maybe you compromise there and then you can push back on things like their kind of criminal justice reform, like one of the more dangerous candidates in the race today in New York's 13th. She is a prison abolitionist. This is Daryaliza Shevallier who's running in the 13th against Antonio Espelot. She had deleted a tweet that said, like, something like all deportations are wrong and she was

pushed about this. Well, what about someone who breaks American crime? criminal law and she stood by it. So you're talking about someone who, like the guy who killed Lake and Riley in Georgia or Kate Steinley in San Francisco, like that they shouldn't have been deported. And I want to get there with a lot of these issues because I think that it's important for people who have the kind of jobs that, you know, I have that you have, you have a huge audience, right, to understand what's going on in the lives of everyday people. Like, I have a very blessed life, and I'm hyper aware of that, right? Like, my health care costs a lot, but I can also

afford it because I am lucky. And when I hear this stuff, especially on criminal justice reform, it makes it very hard for me to, I guess, have an open heart and an open mind to a lot of the other points that the DSA is pushing. And I hear those kinds of policy positions, and I wonder why mom Donnie, someone who smartly kept Jessica Tish on as the NYPD police commissioner, would support someone like that. I mean, it's, this is, do you throw the baby out with the bathwater? That's what, that's what people in the DSA would say. Like, we have all these other good ideas. Get in the tent. You know, on the right leaning end of the spectrum, the attitude is get in the effing tent. We don't care if you're a Nazi. We don't care if you are, you know, if you are literally, you know, Joe Manchin, like, get in the tent. You can be somebody as center as possible or as far to the right as possible. Everyone is welcome. And I do think the left, if it wants to win elections, needs to be careful about overly policing its membership. And I'm not saying you're doing that.

I am saying that I do that. And I wish I could do it less. And I've struggled with that, especially with Graham Platner in Maine, because I really want that seat. I really, really want it. But I really also don't like Nazi tattoos. Like that's just... Understandable. Yeah. Who does?

Not my jam. Right. We should be like Nazi tattoos, no bueno. Like that's a very reasonable position to take to not have Nazi tattoos. And also what you're saying is also correct. like, and am I willing to tolerate a Nazi tattoo to gain control of the house, which has a bigger impact on the rest of the country than being the purity police on this man's tattoos? Now, I'm not mitigating the tattoos. I'm not saying those are fine. But that's the question

that people on the left are legitimately wrestling with right now. Yeah. And, I mean, it was the Trump question originally. And I'm not, I don't think I'm comparing Grand Platner to Donald Trump, really. But we have always thumbed our nose at anyone who didn't, like, fit in perfectly. And a big lesson of the last few years is people are imperfect and voters are also pretty chill with people that are imperfect if they think they're going to get the policy outcomes that they want. So I am trying my best to evolve. But I also, I know that Dan Goldman is going to lose today, maybe like 20, 30 points to Bradlander. But I'm not sure about the right. rest of Mom Donnie's endorsements.

Do you think Platner is going to win? Is Platner going to win in Maine? I mean, I don't know if you caught Susan Collins' interview yesterday with Martha McCallum. She came on Fox. I believe that the people of Maine want steady leadership. They want independence. And they want someone who cares deeply about the state and our country and has the character to serve. You voted with President Trump about 94% of the time, which might sound high.

but most people in your party have been with him 100% of the time. Like she's out there saying, you know, I'm an independent hot streak person. And it's like 94%. That's even more than Federman, right, who the left is having a total meltdown with because he's 92% or something like that. So I think Platner really can win. I think the environment is going to be very blue. I think, you know, Maine is something like D plus 14.

And when I look at Susan Collins and her record, you know, someone who always, came out and said, you know, I'm pro-choice. You know, I'm a pro-choice Republican and then has no regrets over Brett Kavanaugh and the Dobbs decision. Very hard for me to stomach. So I'm hopeful. I'm optimistic about me. You think he has a strong chance at least. I think he has a real shot. Yeah. I think there is also more to come out, which is going to be very hard to deal with. I mean, watching electeds, Democratic electives and interviews kind of squirm about these things. well, where's the line? Like, is it like a sexual assault?

Is it like more physical violence? And like, I don't know. The contortion is difficult for me. I'm not a very flexible person. I mean, Howard Dean ruined his political career with a weirdly placed whoop. Right. I mean, how quaint.

Right. Yes. He was a little too excited on stage one day and was like, woo! And then we're going to watch it in D.C. to take back the White House. Yeah! That's too weird.

That's the line. No whoops. Get off the stage. You know, like how times have changed? No. Now we can just grab her by the whatever. And everyone's like, uh, locker rooms.

You know how they be. I want to talk a little Tulsi Gabbard. I, that Washington Post piece about the cult that she was, wasn't, is still in. So she was the director of national intelligence, obviously. So apparently her entire political career was guided by this eccentric religious leader, Chris Butler. It is a breakaway subsection of the Hari Krishna sect. Some people say cult.

I say cult. The craziest part of it for me was that they had 25,000 emails, right? That had gone either to her or people close to her. And this Chris Butler, I mean, really deep in the weeds, right? Like on policy issues saying you should be saying this. but also the cruelty, like how abused she was by this person, and that he would email her parents calling her things like chicken shit. And, I mean, I guess first question,

how is this not come out before? That we had someone who got up to the level of having access to literally the most classified information that the United States has, and she's part of a cult. And two, is this more pervasive? than we think. Like, I mean, I guess all the attention has been on Scientology. And I can't imagine a Scientologist getting through a confirmation hearing.

But none of those electeds who think TikTok is Wi-Fi or whatever, you know, came up with any sort of questions about this. I mean, there were the foreign influence pieces of it. And I've talked about this on air. You know, Hillary Clinton vindicated every time when she said, oh, Tulsi Gabbard, she's a Russian asset. And then you look at these emails and you say like, oh, well, there's the evidence of that. But what do you make of all of it? You know, people are allowed to believe weird things. That's true.

You're allowed to have your weird religious beliefs. And I agree that these religious beliefs are weird. I don't get it. But you're allowed to do that if you want to. The question is not are you allowed to believe weird things? The question is, to what extent should the American public tolerate weird? religious influences at their highest levels of government. And in what way are, you know, people secretly controlling the strings? Those are the questions. Like, go ahead and believe weird

things all day long. Americans have a long history of that. The real question in my mind is not about her personal beliefs. It's about to what extent does a single individual have a tremendous this amount of sway over, you know, more than a dozen American intelligence organizations and all of the ways in which, you know, the Americans are kept safe or not kept safe. They're protected from foreign influence or not based on the impact of a single individual. That is a very, that's actually a very dangerous position for the country to be in, to have one person with this much sway over such a powerful leader. When you were talking, it made me think of all the Christian nationalism. that is in our government.

100%. So those are not necessarily as fringe as, you know, a Harri-Krishna sect. But it is wildly dangerous, right? And it's permeating every level of our government down to our social media accounts. So how are you thinking about that? I 100% agree that Christian nationalism, especially a la Doug Wilson, the person who is, you know, highly influential with Pete Hegseth. these very far-right Christian nationalist beliefs that, you know, sometimes, like, Doug Wilson doesn't believe that women should vote. This is, like, he's openly written about that multiple times.

He believes that, you know, people who were enslaved in the United States, it wasn't that bad. Like, it wasn't, like, they learned useful skills. Like, that's the camp that Doug Wilson is in. So, to me, this, you know, again, this goes way beyond the beliefs of a single individual and into a broader conversation. about to what extent should Americans tolerate people's weird religious beliefs. It's weird to think that women shouldn't vote. It's weird to think that we should, you know, have giant, you know, crusade tattoos on our chest and claim to be, you know, a devotee of the most high God.

And then simultaneously impregnate multiple mistresses have some kind of sexual. encounter at a conference, whether that was a sex assault or whether it was consensual, shortly after your mistress gave birth to your child while you're still married. Like, that is all weird. I don't like that. None of that is in alignment with the type of leadership that Americans deserve. And Americans deserve transparency. We deserve to understand what is animating somebody.

We deserve to understand who their primary influences are. We deserve to understand why somebody makes the decisions that they do. Doug Wilson's far more transparent about it. And so it's easier to spot when Pete Hegseth is inviting him to the Pentagon being like, let's do the prayers. That is different, although also weird, than this situation with Tulsi Gabbard, where it's secretive and the secretiveness is part of what makes it more concerning. If it was transparent, I wouldn't agree with.

with it either. But if it was transparent, it would at least seem less like things are being swept under the rug. Yes. Definitely, Pete is not hiding much. And I did love your recitation of the scandals. I was like, that's not even all of them, Jesse. No, no, no, no. It is some of my favorites, though. And it makes me think of the Totenkov and you brought up the Crusade tattoo, which he wasn't even allowed to be on a Secret Service detail because of it. And grandpa, will tell you that he was examined by the military and no one said anything about his tattoo. See, I'm still working through it. This is all very raw for me. Anyway, I used to work with Pete, obviously, as you know. So this is all just so strange to me.

Listen, if Pete Hengseth has no haters, I'm dead. Okay? Like, if he is no haters, I'm dead. I'm ashamed to say that he is from Minnesota. Yes. And I don't. Don't approve. Forest Lake, Minnesota does not approve of you, Pete. Your mom is disappointed in you, and so are the rest of us. And he has so many children with so many different women that sometimes he comes to the middle school basketball games here in Minnesota. Because again, his children live, you know, they're scattered like sand in the wind. I'm Seth Matlins. My new show, Creator Destroy Reimagining Marketing explores how every decision a company makes, not just the marketing ones. but the HR, IR, pricing, or design, and planning ones, the ones most don't consider marketing at all, contribute to either creating value or destroying it. Each week I sit down with CMOs, CEOs, founders, cultural thinkers,

the people building, breaking, and reimagining how businesses grow or don't for conversations about what creates value and what destroys it. It's a business show, it's a marketing show. The creator destroys the show that argues. They've always been the same thing from the Vox Media Podcast Network and the Wisdomus Company. New episodes drop weekly on YouTube and your favorite podcast app. ABC's The View has been in this huge battle with the FCC for months.

They are now airing these direct appeals to their audience during commercial breaks in an effort to gain the upper hand. You might remember the fight stems from whether the view counts as a bona fide news program, which would make it exempt from the equal time rules. The inquiry began after the U-hosted Texas Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico. Do you think that the FCC wins something? this one? Well, here's the thing, is that Brendan Carr, who is the head of the FCC, absolutely believes that he should be the person to determine whether or not somebody is in

alignment with, air quotes, American values. And if you're not in alignment with American values, as he defines them, as the president defines them, then you're going to have your broadcast license threatened. I mean, he's demonstrated that repeatedly. He said that overtly. That's not even like my interpretation of the situation. Now, define win it, you know, like, are they going to be successful in threatening ABC into submission the way that they were successful in threatening other news organizations into submission, paying money, adjust, you know, apologies. I mean, ABC's already paid for Stephanopoulos. Right, exactly. Whether they're going to be successful in threatening the view into submission is one thing. Whether they are, their actions are

going to be judged constitutional is an entirely separate matter. It's entirely possible that the view just decides to throw money at the problem and walk away. It will be less bad vibes and fewer court cases and, you know, like here's your 15 million bucks, fine, you know, let's make this problem disappear. That remains to be seen. Obviously, the fact that they're airing these appeals means that they don't want to pay. It means that they don't want to be viewed as as being on wrong side of this argument. Ultimately, is threatening a broadcast license, you know, an infringement on free speech when you don't agree with the viewpoint of the broadcast? I think yes. Oh, yeah, no, a hard yes for me on that. And hard yes for like Ted Cruz. Right. The strange

allies that you end up with, depending on the topic in this era, is fascinating to me. But I think it's quite obvious that it's just like shit they don't like. But this has been the case everywhere, right? Law firms, universities. The Pentagon? The Pentagon. Yes. All reporters and some of them calling their bluff or just frankly having the money to get through it. Like I'm reading Jonathan Swan and Maggie Haberman's new book, regime change. And they did a thousand interviews for it. It's rumored that they maybe even had tapes from the situation room. They're not answering. They were on with Lawrence O'Donnell. last night, he asked them, like, do you have tapes?

They said, we're not going to speak to that. But the fact that the administration hasn't sued them indicates to me that they're telling the truth, right? Like, that they have this on good information and that maybe they also have tapes. So you can, I don't know, there are a lot of frivolous lawsuits, though. Maybe my point isn't as solid because they do sue a lot of people that they have nothing on. Yeah. The question is, who provided the tapes?

There's been a lot of speculation about, like, who would do that? Who do you like for that? I think it's possible that it's J.D. Vance. Hmm. I think it's possible it's Vance who is attempting to, he's creating an ability to separate himself from the Trump administration for a 28 run. I also think it's possible that it's Susie Wiles. Oh, okay. Who do you think it might be?

My guess is that it's more people than you think. Like, I mean, the administration has been, it's weird, like, at the, on the one hand, it's super, super loyal and everyone has fallen in line. And on the other hand, there are so many constant leaks that are coming out. And then even sometimes they don't even do it in leak format. Like, remember Susie Wiles was interviewed, what, like 14 times? For Vanity Fair? I like Judy Vance for it because I also think he's the leaker to the Atlantic about the depletion of our American, of the American stockpile. from doing the war in Iran, like this foreign policy-wise runs right against what J.D. Vance believes in. And he was like America first in the no foreign wars way, even before Trump was. This is after he thought he was Hitler. And then he was coming around to it. And now he's... In between the Hitler's. In between you used to be Hitler, now you're not Hitler. Maybe you are Hitler again. In between the Hitler's. Plus communion. That's where we are, I guess. So I like Judy Vance word. But I feel.

I feel like there could also be like some weird like Cash Patel stuff in there, right? Like someone who feels like... Dan Bonchino has been on the list too? Yes, because he walked away angry. So what did he do on his way out? And he's posted on Twitter slash X, you know, cryptic posts like, you're welcome. And people are like, you're welcome for what? And some people have interpreted that to mean is like, you're welcome.

When all this stuff comes out, you're welcome. I could see that he's frustrated. I, you know, if you came in, I'm not saying, that there's anything necessarily authentic about him. But if you came in thinking that you were going to figure out what actually happened in Butler, because that is the biggest crazy thing to me, that like we have no idea who this kid is.

He had no social media footprint. They cremated him. His parents got fancy lawyers. They had no money. And then like the whole thing went away. That's nuts. And then the Epstein files, which he also cared about.

And like has, I assume, found out stuff was just blocked in every direction from getting anywhere on it? He has a grievance. So you have to think about, like, who has the motivations? Bon Gino makes sense. He has grievance. J.D. Vance makes sense. He has a lust for power.

Susie Wiles, her motivation may be more opaque, but we know that she loves to be the puppet master. So, you know, she wants to potentially control how history views the situation. I don't know. I'm just spitballing, but those are the, you know, several possibilities at the top of my mind. I like it. Maybe Tulsi's cult leader. I want to talk to America 250. Our anniversary is very soon. Just a few weeks. I'll be down in D.C. We're going to do the five from the National Mall. You know, there's a huge state fair that's going to be going on. How do you think the American experiment is going? How much time do we have left? In three minutes. Be America's government teacher.

How do you think we're doing in living up to the ideals of the founding fathers? I think this is a tough moment in American history. I don't think it's impossible to come back from. But if you look at, you know, America's North Star, you know, the ideas that were written down in the preamble to the Constitution, which is, you know, the preample is an introduction to, you know, to the American public. Here is why we're writing this Constitution. And here is what America at her best will be. And if you distill down the ideas in the preamble to the Constitution into four main ideas, the founding fathers, the framers of the Constitution, envisioned America at her best being four things. Just are we, have we achieved, you know, some level of justice that we all agree on? No, we have a weaponization fund that the acting attorney general won't, won't swear under oath is dead. Peaceful. I don't know that we can make an argument that America is inherently peaceful. Good. Good. and free. Those are the four overarching principles that the founding fathers, the framers of the

Constitution, you know, helped us understand that any piece of legislation, any direction the country is pointing to needs to align with these principles of justice, peace, goodness, and freedom. So if we are using that as the benchmark of, you know, to determine how is America doing, we can point to examples of ways in which America is good and Americans are good. I also think we can point to many examples of ways in which we're missing the mark. So I would say that the experiment at this juncture is on shaky ground. I wouldn't say that it is irreparable. I wouldn't say that it's so far gone that we can't pull it back. But I would say that we need to be extremely cautious about the direction that we're heading in. You know, when George Washington left office, he cautioned

Americans in this infant republic. He cautioned them against cunning and ambitious men who would try to subvert the power of the people and usurp for themselves the reins of government. Those are the words that George Washington used, you know, back in the 1790s, cunning unprincipled and ambitious men who would subvert the power of the people and usurp for themselves the reins of government. And it seems relatively prophetic today. Here we are all of these, you know, more than almost 250 years. years later, it seems prophetic that they knew exactly what could happen and they worried about what could happen. Gouverner Morris talked about the same thing at Alexander Hamilton's funeral. He talked about, you know, he's standing in front of the crowd, the thousands of people who are

assembled. He talks about how at the constitutional convention, we worried that the country would fall to despots. We worried that our efforts would be. be insufficient. We worried that the document that we had created would not hold in a moment of crisis. You know, these are the feelings that have been, have pervaded the American experiment truly since the very beginning. And we've had moments where we have felt more sure of ourselves. We have felt more confident in our ability to continue the experiment. And I don't think Americans are feeling especially confident in this moment. 80 plus percent of Americans feel like the country is heading in the wrong direction on both sides of the aisle. So the health of the American

experiment is on shaky ground right now, but I do believe that it's possible for us to begin to write the ship. And it's going to take time and effort, just like if you have a serious health scare, it might take you a while to recover from whatever it is. It's not a bounce back overnight, but we have to recognize where we are in order to start putting us back on a better path. Well, I like the optimism there. I hope that you're right. Listening to you, talk about, you know, what the country is really about and what the smartest, you know, some of the smartest Americans that we've ever had, you know, we're thinking about makes me more confident that we're going to be okay because people don't change that much. There are evolutions of it and there

are boundaries that get tested. And we are certainly in a moment of boundary testing and pushing, but the arc is usually towards the good. And I've seen so much positivity and collective action out of Americans who feel like this country is worth fighting for. And that we are, there's more that unites us than divides us, you know, all of that good political stuff that you hear during campaign season at least. And I do truly believe in that. And definitely, you know, I face it, quite regularly working with people who have diametrically opposed political beliefs and, you know, we all want a better life for our kids and good schools and health care and those things. And I try to pay attention to that as much as I can to not think

about fighting over like UFC fights and algae in the reflecting pool. But the algae is really fun to fight about. I know. If we had had more time, we would have done algae. But at least we got it in this way. Sharon, it was so cool and enlightening to have you. everybody should subscribe to the preamble, follow Sharon, and Sharon says so. Facts matter still, and you're all about that. The era of not knowing is over. It's over, guys. Yeah. We're not doing that anymore. We have to have some baseline level of civic knowledge. You have to know stuff in order to do stuff. You know this. Like, you are a very well-educated woman, and you know how much your education has empowered you to be able to actually do things in the world.

You have to know stuff to be able to do stuff. So we're not with the era of like, oh, I don't know, I'm not aware of that. We're done with that. That's over. All right. Stop trying to make fetch happen. Karen, I'll talk to you later. Thank you.

Thank you. Hey, y'all. It's Kelly Clarkson with Wayfair. Ever order furniture online and wonder what if? Like, what if it doesn't hold up? That sofa was four days old. You should have ordered from Wayfair. With Wayfair, there's no what if.

Just style you love and quality you can trust. Visit wayfair.ca. Wayfair, every style, every home. Oh.