The Chris Cuomo Project - Evan McMullin, Migrant Crisis, Student Loan Forgiveness

Episode Date: September 20, 2022

In this episode of The Chris Cuomo Project, Chris questions the premise that we’re living in a divided society locked in an existential battle. Evan McMullin, independent candidate for U.S. Senate in Utah, speaks to Chris about his background as a C.I.A. intelligence officer, the F.B.I. search of Mar-a-Lago, assembling an independent political coalition, and more. Follow and subscribe to The Chris Cuomo Project on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and YouTube for new episodes every Tuesday. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome. It's time for another episode of The Project. I, of course, am Chris Cuomo. Who else would want to do this? Thank you so much for your support. Appreciate it. Subscribe, spread the word to subscribe, follow, listen, watch. I prefer you watch, but whatever you do, you do you. The free agent merch, it's there. Buy it. I want to get a lot of money together. I'm thinking like a hundred grand. And then we'll start crowdsourcing who we give it out to so we can do some good together. I think it's really cool. I don't like the word independent because I think in America, we need to be interdependent. We got to care about one another. You know, we're forgetting that. We do it in our communities. We do it in our families. We do it in the family that we choose, our friends, right? Our extended family. But we're

not doing it as a culture. We're not doing it as a nation. We're not doing it as a polity, P-O-L-I-T-Y. And we need to. And I think we have to remember that. And instead of independent, we have to be interdependent. And you need to be a free agent. I'm all about changing the game. The fastest growing part of the electorate are those of you who say you are neither Democrat nor Republican. Think about that. What more proof do you need that the current system is insufficient? Now, I know people in both parties will get upset at me and say, you're helping them. You're helping them. Listen, I'm here to help as many people as possible, not just people playing for a party

or a team. What does it mean to you people who are Democrats and Republicans that more people want nothing to do with you than to join your ranks? What do you think it means? Okay. Now, are you a free agent? On the back it says, are you free? Now, most of you are going to say, sure, of course. Of course I am. I'm free.

Yeah, of course. Are you? Or do you often accept groupthink? Do you get drawn into the game? Do you start reading social media and start playing that shit talk game that happens on social media? Do you remember to question the premise? That's what I want to communicate today. question the premise. That means you have to think about what is being presented to you critically. Critical thinkers, it's the fundamental aspect of citizenship. Be a critical thinker. There are many in this society, institutionally, corporately, that they don't want you to be critical thinkers. It'll make their jobs too hard. It's easier to play this game in our politics right now than it would be to be dealing with critical thinkers where I've got to beat you with the best idea. That's harder. So question the premise. Here's the premise for today. We're a divided society. We're in an

existential crisis with ourselves. I don't buy it. I question that premise. Because what I believe the reality is, is that what you're doing is watching the game. I don't really think that you're a participant, except that passively you allow yourself to be drawn in. But we're watching a game that is being fought out among fringe and by fringe players. Now, most know that what's going on in our political culture is not what is best for this nation. It can't be that we are divided close to down the middle on everything. It just doesn't make sense. You don't see it in your community. You don't see it in your friend groups and the people that are your neighbors.

We share too much. We're not extremists. We are regular by and large. What does that mean? You care about your family. You care about their health. You care about your health. You care about what you do. And then you have your passions.

And you talk about each and all of those things a lot more than you ever discuss politics. We want fairness. We want to live and let live, even if we don't like. Live and let live doesn't mean you have to like it. You don't like gay marriage, don't marry a gay person. But we recognize that people should do as they want in this society as long as they don't do anything bad to anybody else. We live our people and our passions, not our politics. Okay? And we're getting sucked into believing that's the most important dynamic to watch, and it's not even involving us more and more. I keep getting told by people who think they're helping me to pick a side.

You have to pick a side. I don't want to pick a side. I want to see solutions. I don't want to admit who is worse. I want to be impressed that someone is better and trying to be better. Well, I mean, you know, soft. I'm not soft. Soft is allowing yourself to be manipulated. Okay? I'll put my chops up against anybody's in terms of covering and understanding politics and the media. This isn't about my credibility. It's not about my legitimacy. It's about me helping and doing what I think matters.

And it doesn't matter to me whether or not I'm considered a player. What matters is changing the game for me, for my kids, for my friends, for you and for your kids. This place has to be run better. And that is the truth. And it's not going to happen as long as people rule in a way that they are rewarded for doing it the current way. If you reward people for doing it this way, it's going to stay this way. And that is not about being a free agent. Now, it's not about being negative. Negativity is

often seen as a proxy for insight. Being nasty doesn't mean that you're being incisive. All right? Insisting on the positive, insisting on better, learning self-restraint, that is strength. And I know it can be done. But it's getting harder because we're getting deeper into this hole. this whole. COVID really made this point to me. COVID kicked my ass. It certainly did personally. I'm still dealing with it. And I will cover that a lot here and on the new show. Long COVID is real. They don't really understand it, but it certainly exists. But COVID taught me a different lesson. I've never seen this nation decide to choose the game over a legitimate crisis. It literally made us sick, COVID, spiritually, psychologically, physically. If we can't come together when something is literally trying to kill us, it's a bad signal. I've never seen it before.

But now that I have, it really changed my focus in terms of what I have to work for and against. We've been overtaken by an insider game that is manipulated by the few to the disadvantage of the many. And the people playing the game, they know the dynamic is toxic. And we know that they know, both in style and substance. How? I'll prove it. They are playing a game that must be changed. I know I say it a lot because I say things a lot hoping that they will sink in. Okay? The system is broken. Forget whose fault it is. It has to change. That's the end of it.

It just has to change. And the people who are in the game, who benefit from the game, who gain advantage by playing the game, know they're playing a game. Here's the proof. Substance. Migrants. What's the problem with us having migrants? They're stealing our jobs. That's the proof. Substance. Migrants. What's the problem with us having migrants? They're stealing our jobs. That's a lie. Statistically, we know that the jobs that they are taking are open because Americans don't want them. And I'm not faulting you for not wanting the job. But if you look at the number of available jobs in this economy, it's at one of the

highest points we've ever seen. So they're not stealing your jobs. Well, open borders. That's the new argument, right? Biden's policies, Democrats' policies, open borders. We don't have an open border. Okay. That's made up. Oh, what are you talking about? They let everybody in. No, they don't. He hasn't even changed the rules. Sanctuary cities. What are you talking about? Sanctuary cities. Sanctuary cities. All right. Sanctuary cities are real, but they are a response to a reality. They didn't create the reality. And that's an important distinction. Look, as a rule, letting people break the law is a mistake. But this is different than that. These are people who have been brought in here to do jobs, started families. They're here. They're making people money and they're making money. So are they really just criminals because of the illegal entry? I don't think it's that simple. But I'm just saying the right knows that demonizing the migrant is easy, especially when many times they're brown.

But they know that's not the right target. They just don't want to mess with the right target. They don't benefit. They don't scare you. They don't entice you. They don't provoke you. They don't outrage you if they go after the real target. The real target? The people who are enticing migrants into our country with jobs. And I'm not talking about being some rich person's housekeeper. I'm talking about big corporations, okay? Agro-business, bringing in labor-intensive jobs and job base. They are the reason that migrants

come. How do I know? I've been with them. You ask them why they're coming. I want to go to a sanctuary city where I can live in fear. I mean, because even if you're in a sanctuary city, they know they got to keep their head down. They do anything wrong, they're going to get thrown out and it's a horrible process. They're coming because of the enticement of the job. Go after the people who employ people illegally and you'll see a reduction. But they don't want to do that.

College loans. Biden wants you to pay for the elites. This is what they do. They're putting it on your backs. Left says, we have to forgive college debt. Otherwise, college can't be made affordable. Why isn't either side talking about why it's so expensive? Keep expanding how you can get loans. Keep expanding access to capital to go to school. Why is it so expensive? Why is it so hard? Why don't we ask? Why don't they go to the universities and hold them to task?

Why do they get to raise the price so much? On what basis? In what world is it okay? Why don't they ask? Because it doesn't help the game. It doesn't make the right the bad one. It doesn't make the left the scary one. They're not doing their job. They're playing a game. Question the premise, okay? Now, both of these are proof that the parties want to play to the fight more than to the fix. And I would too. As Herm Edwards, Jets coach, which means they stunk, but he had a good line.

You play to win the game. You play to win the game. The right has done this more, more flagrantly and to more disastrous effect than the left. But that is mostly because of Trump and them having to cater to a politics of fear that is spawned and fueled by Trump. And they own Trump and they are only Trump forever until they decide to be about something better. But they're not making that choice. And so many of you are like, why not? He's gone now, right? Because it works in the game. It gains them advantage. Now, so the Democrats, they're the good ones, right? Look, I don't believe that the right standard is just to compare yourself to what's worse. Even Democrats have to see that this two-party system isn't working well enough. Too many want more choice and better dynamics. It's the fastest growing part of the electorate.

And we all know that our politics doesn't have to be ugly and zero sum. How do we know that it doesn't have to be like this? Maybe it's always been like this. Maybe it's just how we are. I don't think so. Why? Manners. The existence of manners. manners. I'll tell you why. All these people acting like savages in DC, all these people online spewing shit in every direction, they're not like that when they're face to face, right? Almost all of them behave in their regular lives. In public, they act with decorum. They teach their kids to be respectful. You see it in their bios, family, God. So you're teaching your kids to behave in the right way, to have manners. Say nothing if you have nothing helpful to say. You expect that from your employees, from waitstaff, from the people around you. And so many say they're religious. Find me a major faith that supports this us or them BS and all this invective and hot talk. They all know it's a perversion.

They all know they're playing a game. They all know it's exaggerated for effect. Because in the rest of their lives, they have manners. for effect because in the rest of their lives, they have manners. As George Carlin used to say, they know what they're doing and it is bad for you. And that's the truth. Just as true today as when he said it. No one thinks this is working well, but they continue because that's the game. And shame on me because I was a member of the media and even though I am a member of the media, Because I was a member of the media, and even though I am a member of the media, but when I was doing my last job, I didn't say enough about the fact that we were making social media too powerful. We were using it as a proxy for Vox Populi, the voice of the people, and it isn't.

Social media is not reality. It's surreality. It's an exaggerated place where minority voices are magnified and hate sells and it drives it. And we leaned on it. I can't tell you how many times I had people come to me and say, hey, you got to worry about this thing that you said or this thing that happened. Social media, Twitter, they're going crazy. And it was like hundreds of people, a few thousand people. I would have a million watching the show, but I got to worry about this handful of people. We've never done that before. We've never done that before, but we're doing it now with social media and it's a mistake. Now, you know, it's a game, you know, you don't like the game, so you have to do something about it.

The media is not going to do something about it. It's easier to ref the game than to say, stop playing. The teams aren't going to stop. It's easier than having to do it the hard way, which is to beat the other side with better ideas and better people. But for the rest of you who still dare to care, who want better, who speaks for you? You do. That's being a free agent. And I'm here to help.

You know shipping migrants around to make a point is wrong. You know treating people like pestilence is not decent. It's not right. People broke the law. It doesn't make them evil. And don't sell me that they're just trying to do the right thing. The right isn't even incentivized to do the right thing on this because it's not what the voters whom they are trying to get are rewarding. And again, as for the left, Democrats, you are not pumped up by an

agenda right now. You are outraged and you're playing the rage game. For you, you have righteousness. Reproductive rights is a signature issue in this country. We are in a problematic space because we've had Supreme Court justices who fundamentally lied by omission to get on the court and pretended that they weren't religious zealots and that they didn't have predisposed positions. Look, the Supreme Court has to change. One, you shouldn't be there forever. Two, no more pass that you have to see a case. You're put up there by politicians. You have political views. You can have both. You can be reasonable and fair about the law, but be honest about what you believe, and it should be demanded. Now, they have Trump, and that is a big albatross in terms of trying to have high ground. But I got to tell you,

if you want to be better, stop funding Trumpy candidates in primaries. Stop putting your money behind the worst because it makes it easier for you to compete. That is not you being better. I know the game allows it. I know it's one of the problems with dark money. The problem in politics is an illegal money. It's legal money. But you should not be funding extreme candidates in primaries so that you have as weak an opponent as possible in a general. I don't think it's right. walker than a moderate who knows what they're talking about. But is that really the way to win? Does that make us better? And again, I'm not saying that you guys are equally extreme. The GOP owns it. That proud party of one time, the grand old party, is not grand old anymore. It's about animus all the time. That is their platform. But again, if you want to be better, walk the walk. And again, social media is certainly the problem. It's been co-opted by a motivated minority. You can see all of it. You can question the premise,

but you got to push for it to change. You got to question the premise. Don't play the game and demand that it change. Overwhelmingly, people take the time when they meet me, all right? They take the time to come and talk to me, right? And they may say, I don't like what you said. I don't like where you worked. I don't like this. I don't like that. But what happened with you was wrong. And that sucks. I hope everything's okay. Why? Because even if they disagree, they're still decent. I am not their enemy because we disagree about something. If they're even right about our disagreement, most of the time, you guys ascribe beliefs to me I don't even hold. People are good, okay? It is in your self-interest to generally be good, except when you're playing the game. Decency has to be restored. You can only

do that by showing it yourself and by rejecting it where you don't see it. Change the game. Decency has to be restored. You can only do that by showing it yourself and by rejecting it where you don't see it. Change the game means you have to change the system. How? Ranked choice voting. It's going to be a state by state thing, but it works and it matters. No, it doesn't. All these Republicans wanted Palin and she still lost to the Democrat in Alaska. No. Even if you accept a 60% Republican vote turnout number, they didn't rank her first. Why? Because not all Republicans are Trumpers.

Okay? They're not all fringy extremists. So she didn't get the ranking. So as you go through the math, she doesn't meet the mean. She wound up not being the consensus choice. The Democrat did because people in general are regular, even in a primary. It's not as true in a primary. You got a lot more extreme voters in primaries. They got to be more motivated to get out. Primaries have much lower voter turnout than generals.

Midterm elections, less than presidential years. Ranked choice voting. Term limits in Congress. They have to pass the law. They have to do it. They won't. Why? Because it's to their own disadvantage.

They like being there. Even the ones who say, well, I can't believe everybody's just here forever. They're not jumping up and down about term limits either. Big states and purple states, apportion your electors. Really help with the electoral college. More parties, more choice. Okay. It also means listening to voices that don't fit into the boxes and may not be on your team. That means right now our guest is Evan McMullin, former intelligence operator, knows national security better than most, certainly uniquely. And he's trying to make it in politics, ran for president. Now he's in a Senate run in Utah against Mike Lee, a Trumper, by being a member of neither party. But he did

strike an interesting deal with Democrats. Really interesting what he did here. I hadn't seen it before. And he has some unusual notions about how we can get better. Ready to listen? Evan McMullin, let's get at it. Support for the Chris Cuomo Project comes from PrizePix. I got to tell you, there's a reason PrizePix is America's number one fantasy sports app. Three million members. Why? Easy, plenty of action if you're into DFS,

and it's just you against the numbers. You pick more than or less than on two to six player stat projections, and if you're any good, the winnings will roll in. The big game is right around the corner. You got a little side action on Tay-Tay, do you? Prize picks is the easiest, most exciting way to turn every game-changing moment into like 100x of your own betting cash. With as little as four correct picks, you can turn 10 into a grand.

DFS is cool, but I can't help the feeling that I'm getting played when I'm trying to be a player. You know what I'm saying? And that's why I like PrizePix, okay? I'm not in there with a bunch of sharks. I'm able to control the flow. I'm able to tailor who I want to bet on and what I want to bet on.

You know, for me, it's so much better than just the game, but this is personal to me, and PrizePix gives bet on. You know, for me, it's so much better than just the game. But this is personal to me. And PrizePix gives me the options. And it's fun. And I don't feel like I'm going to get exploited or played by some system that's afoot that I don't understand. So go to prizepix.com slash CCP and use code CCP for a first deposit match up to a hundo. Again, go to prizepix.com slash CCP and use code CCP for a first deposit match up to $100. PrizePix. Pick more, pick less. It's that easy.

Look, no shame in my game. I've been using AG1 for over five years. Why? It works, it's easier, and it's less expensive. That's why. Since 2010, they've been getting their formulations right and tweaking their formulas. Why? Because the science changes, okay? It's not like politics where people decide to believe one thing, and no matter what happens with the facts, they never shift. This is the opposite. Ooh, prebiotics work with probiotics, but in this way.

D works with K, and this type of B works with that. They have the scientists doing it, so I don't need all the bottles, I don't have to spend all the money, and I don't have to figure out when to take what and why. More importantly, it's not just the regular list of vitamins. It's the extras, okay? The adaptogens, the prebiotics, the probiotics that support your body's universal needs, gut optimization, immune support, stress management. That's what foundational nutrition is about. And these are the people at AG1 who've been doing the work to get it right, okay? who've been doing the work to get it right, okay?

I tell friends, I tell family, I get no complaints, okay? If you want to take ownership of your health, it starts with AG1. Try AG1, you get a free one-year supply of vitamin D3K2 and five free AG1 travel packs, okay? That's what happens with your first purchase. So make it. Go to drinkag1.com slash CCP. Drinkag1.com slash CCP. Check it out. Evan McMullin, a true pleasure. Good luck in your Senate race and thank you for joining us. Thank you very much, Chris. Great to be with you.

Now, I don't want to waste the fact that you are an intelligence expert. And before I ask you about something that's happening in the news, politically, do you believe that you have a CIA background works against you? Do you think people look at you and they're suspicious because once a spook, always a spook? Are you worried about the stigma of CIA? Well, I mean, there's a lot to that. I will say that I tend to be attacked by the extremes for my service to the country. I mean, I'm told that I'm a member of the deep state, whatever that is. I think that's an imaginary conspiracy, one of many conspiracies that we see infecting our politics. But I joined the CIA after 9-11, or I joined before 9-11. But

after 9-11, I deployed to the Middle East and South Asia and North Africa to take down Al-Qaeda terrorists and terrorist leaders of other aligned aligned organizations who were hell bent on attacking America again. And, you know, I I'm proud of and grateful that I was able to serve during that time and and do some good things for the country. Certainly large, powerful organizations like the CIA, like the military, like others in our society need accountability and they function more effectively and more consistently with our values when they do have accountability, in this case, to Congress. So that's certainly true. But I am certainly, again, grateful and proud that I had the opportunity to serve in that capacity when I did. Are you surprised that as divided as we are, as deep in the blame

game and the toxic fringes and extremism of our politics right now, that foreign terrorists haven't taken advantage of that and tried to hit us? You know, they're trying. They're trying very hard. They haven't given up. In fact, I think they're trying to reconstitute themselves even in Afghanistan now. But look, we've developed a lot of capacities and ability to collect on them and to action-related targets that we didn't have in 2020 or in 2001 and that we should have had and we should have been developing ahead of that. But now we have them and we're a much harder target now. But I think the key is staying at them overseas. We need to figure out a way to do that. And I think we are in which we don't have to deploy thousands and tens of thousands of U.S. troops, but they are continuing to try to attack us. The fact that Ayman Zawahiri was found in a residential area of Kabul, to me, tells me that

he was quite comfortable there, that he believed that under the Taliban, he understood that he would have that kind of freedom of movement. And if I were in the administration now, in this administration, I'd be very concerned that al Qaeda is perhaps making progress reconstituting its capabilities in Afghanistan. Do you think, God forbid, we had a 9-11 type event, do you think that the resolve and the idea of one nation that came out in 2001 and just a day or so after the attack, you think that would happen now? Or do you think the initial reflex wouldn't be to get around a marginally popular president than President George W. Bush, but to blame that the right would be blaming the left and the left would be blaming the right? Do you think it would be different? You know, I hope it wouldn't be.

It shouldn't be. I remember to that. I remember that time, Chris, and it seems like such a different time in our politics. You know, I was at CIA headquarters when we were attacked on 9-11. And remember the political climate in the country that followed. We were united. It was less of a question of whether you were a Republican or a Democrat or who you voted for in the last election. We knew we were at risk and it was clear and we

were standing up together to confront it. In some ways, I think that's part of the challenge of our politics right now is that, you know, the challenges we face are maybe not as clear cut. And so it's easier for us to be as divided as we are now. But I do think if there were another such episode, I think there would be greater unity. But I do think there are some extremes who maybe are so far gone at this point that they wouldn't seize the opportunity to act together and to stand together as Americans. You know, we all need to work on that. That certainly motivates in part my campaign for U.S. Senate. But I do think that we've gotten to such a polarized time that even such a tragic incident like that may not bring us the kind of unity that it should. I mean, look at the pandemic. You know, we lost, you know, hundreds of thousands, in my view,

more Americans, at least than we should have, because that became a polarized, politicized issue, you would think, you know, standing, you know, as we are here, perhaps before that pandemic, if we could, we would imagine maybe that that would unite our country in the same way that a 9-11 did, but it did not. And I think that's evidence that, you know, that such a, you know, a large terrorist attack again on our country might not yield the same result. But we need to fight very hard to get back to that point. I think the country depends on it. What is your take on the discovery of classified and even higher grade information from Mar-a-Lago? even higher grade information from Mar-a-Lago? Well, let's say, let's consider this. First of all, the kind of classified information that lands on the president of the United States' desk

is not just run-of-the-mill classified information. Okay, that stuff, you know, we don't waste the president's time with that. The kind of classified information that the president has access to is really core to our ability to defend America from very real threats that it faces, most of which are often simply just not known by the public. It would be damaging to our national security if what we knew was publicly known, because then our adversaries would know what we know, et cetera, and they'd be able to threaten us more seriously. But also it would create at times, you know, panic, I think, among, you know, among a lot of the population. But anyway, that's all to say that we have important national security secrets, only the most important land on the president's desk. And the idea that we have a president who walked out of the White House with those most precious, important national security

secrets, those documents, to store them in the basement of his house is just beyond the pale. I mean, if Chris, you and I were intelligence officers now, let's say we're mid-level intelligence officers, and we decided that we were going to take some classified information home from work. Let's say we were at the NSA or the CIA. And, you know, we don't have access to most of what the president has access to, but we have access to some things that are kind of pretty important. We take them home and start storing them in our basement. I promise you that we would not be given the same courtesy of a subpoena and a letter and DOJ attorneys showing up asking nicely to receive these things. And then, you know, taking our word, at least for a time that we had given the things back.

No, we would not be treated as kindly. Donald Trump was treated with kid gloves, I think, in this process. He refused to turn over all the classified documents that he took. And he, I think, provided his people an affidavit that he had. And that is deeply concerning. And Chris, the question I ask is why? There is a reason Donald Trump took those documents. There is a reason why he didn't want to give them all back. Speculating what that reason might be

takes us down a pretty dark path, which I think is why he's under investigation under the Espionage Act. But there is a reason why he did that, and we all deserve to know it. Well, one step sideways as pushback, the idea that all presidents do this. They all take class. Everything he has is classified and top secret. And they all leave with papers. Some put them in libraries. He put them in his house. No big deal. Some presidents, you know, may certainly take records from the White House that pertain to their service. Certainly, this is different. Taking highly classified, top secret documents that are beyond top secret,

actually, they're top secret, plus their compartmented information, their cabinet information. These are documents, in short, for listeners, for viewers, that are beyond top secret that relate to the most important capacities and knowledge we have of the national security realm. That's what the president has access to. I would be shocked to learn that any other president, certainly in modern times, had walked out of the White House with that kind of information. Okay. Pushback. They weren't nice to him. They raided. The word raid kept being used. There were suggestions that armed people showed up and disrespected a former president. Do you believe that? The DOJ attorneys that showed up had appeared at Mar-a-Lago beforehand. And, you know, I don't know if it was weeks or months ahead of time, but talked to Trump's team and asked for the documents back. I believe someone signed an affidavit there saying that they made a mistake going in the way they did? To be clear, I don't know how it meets any definition of the word raid.

They did not go in there guns blazing and looking for him and throwing people up against the wall, which, as we know, sometimes when they execute those warrants, they go ugly early. But do you think it was a mistake to do it at all, given how Trump and his supporters have used it to victimize him? Look, the law must be enforced. Our national security must be protected. Justice must be served.

Look, FBI special agents are armed. It's what they are. They carry weapons. This wasn't publicized. I think the public only found out. We only found out about this raid because Donald Trump drew attention to it. I mean, they went in. You know, yes, there were a number of them. FBI agents are armed. I read that they didn't even wear their FBI windbreakers. So they tried to do it even discreetly,

as discreetly as they could while still, you know, achieving, you know, their objective there, which, again, a judge empowered them to do that. So, no, I think it was done appropriately. And frankly, some might say, well, look, maybe it was done appropriately, but isn't this going to have negative political ramifications? I just think that law enforcement can't operate that way. You know, especially on something like this, you know, no one's above the law. You walk out of a federal government facility with our most sensitive national security secrets that are critical for keeping Americans safe in an increasingly dangerous world. You are going to be visited by the federal government in their pursuit of those documents. And he was treated, it feels to me like DOJ bent over backwards to treat him fairly, almost too fairly. Had I been there, I would have been concerned

about, you know, what is he doing with those documents now? Why did he take them? What is he doing while we treat him with kid gloves? What is he doing with these documents that could threaten American national security? They were, in my view, overly patient with him. What could he do with those documents? Well, there are a lot of people around the world who would love to have those documents in hand. I mean, just imagine what, you know, there are a lot of, you know, of course, countries around the world who invest millions and millions and millions and millions of dollars every year to steal U.S. national security secrets. That's why we have you know, that's why we classify them.

That's why we keep them in secured environments physically and electronically. That's why, you know, we carry out background checks on those with access to them. That's why we have counterintelligence officers who try to thwart the foreign spies trying to steal our secrets. You think a former president, even Trump, would sell things that could hurt Americans? I mean, I really hate to do the speculation myself, Chris, but if you're going to steal classified documents from the government, If you're going to steal classified documents from the government, then, you know, perhaps you want some leverage over the government, as silly as that sounds, because you will obtain no such leverage doing that. Perhaps, you know, there's something you want abroad that you might trade for those documents.

You know, maybe some opportunity, some business opportunity, something perhaps. Yes, they do have a monetary value. Foreign governments pay people who betray our nation every single year I don't know why Donald Trump decided to walk out with those documents and then refused to give them back, even when asked, even when ordered to. I don't know why. But there are no good reasons. Let me put it that way. There are no good reasons. The public deserves to know exactly what they are. What do you say to the Republicans who were up in arms about the search, calling it a raid and saying, how dare they do this? Someone better answer all this pressure on the Democrats and Merrick Garland. And now the same people, if you listen, that nothing sound, is them not asking any of the questions that you are about why he had these documents. Where is his statement now? Why isn't he explaining any of this? Why aren't any of his people explaining any of this? What do you say to those who are so loud and proud about the search who are now silent

now that we know what they found? Well, one of them was, is my opponent, Senator Mike Lee, who assisted. I am aware. Who assisted, yes. That's what we call a loaded question, McMullen. That's what that's called. Go ahead. Yeah, that's right. Well, you know, Senator Lee tried, he assisted Donald's, Donald Trump's efforts to overturn our last election and to stay in power despite having lost an election. That's a big issue. Hopefully we'll talk about that as well. But yes, Senator Lee and other Republicans, the minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, in the House also made some strong statements. Various Republicans, excuse me, in Congress made very strong statements condemning the search of Mar-a-Lago to obtain this classified information before they knew anything about it. And so that tells you everything you need to know.

in which he warns of the spirit of party, that at some point in the future, people elected in Congress could be more devoted to their party loyalties than they were to their duties as a part of that branch of government and to the Constitution. And this episode reminds me of that, that they have no information to go on, yet they condemn the search, this retrieval of this most important national security information. And they do it because they are putting their party loyalty above the interests of the country. And in fact, they're putting their loyalty to one man above the interests of the country. And that's just, that's incredibly dangerous. They believe Donald Trump is truly above the law. That's where it's, that's incredibly dangerous. They believe Donald Trump is truly above the law. That's where it's, that's where it's gotten. Do you believe Senator Mike Lee

is a Trump protector? He's certainly one of Trump's most loyal allies, and he is certainly a Trump sycophant. He is somebody who has decided to betray his oath to the Constitution in order to keep one man and his political allies, including himself, in power against the will of the people. That's what Senator Lee did in participating against Trump's failed coup plot. It is one of the most egregious betrayals of the American Republic and its constitution in our history. And Senator Lee wasn't alone, so he can share the blame with a handful of others. who came here in the mid-1800s fleeing persecution in order to finally find freedom and opportunity that was denied to them elsewhere because of their religious backgrounds. For a senator from this state to participate, to betray his oath to the Constitution and participate in an effort to overthrow our democracy is absolutely inexcusable.

Your opponent, the sitting Senator Mike Lee says, this Evan McMullin, boy, is he telling a long, tall tale here. I did nothing. I presented the information that I had on my voicemail. I want it properly contextualized for people. I participated in those hearings. for people. I participated in those hearings. I never did anything that was wrong in any way to protect the former president. I just demanded due process. Shame on McMullen. Well, let's unpack exactly what Lee did. And by the way, anybody can go to, I've been sort of focused on this a bit on Twitter recently. People can check it out. Senator Lee advised,

and this is publicly reported, I don't think he's denying this, advised Trump's spurious legal efforts, and I'm using air quotes here for legal efforts, to overturn the election. Look, I think there were 62 lawsuits that Trump's team made trying to overturn the election. Only one of them succeeded. It was sort of it was one of the most minor. Lee advised those efforts. We now look back on those and understand that they never really believed those lawsuits would be successful. That was part of an effort to mislead tens of millions of Americans and to convince them that the election had been stolen from Donald Trump. And by the way, it succeeded. That was step one in the effort to overturn our democracy.

Then, you know, as of December 8th, we know from Mike Lee's text messages to Mark Meadows that as early as August 8th, Mike Lee was pushing the White House to find what he called alternative slates of electors from swing states because that, he thought, offered the best chances of overturning the election. Now, this is somebody who calls himself a constitutional conservative. He was using his knowledge of the Constitution to try to find a weakness in it, a loophole, if you will, in the system that would allow them to topple our democracy. That's what it was. Afterwards, after Donald Trump sent violent insurrectionists to hang Mike Pence and kill members of Congress

to stop the certification of the election, Mike said Donald Trump deserved a mulligan, a mulligan for a coup attempt, if you can imagine. So, you know, also Mike Lee has lied about his involvement. He said that he received the so-called coup memo on the from Eastman on January 2nd, four days before January 6th. And that was the first he knew about it. Well, then, you know, we learned that actually Mike Lee had been pushing the fake elector scheme as early as early December. And so he's lied about his involvement. He was central in the plot. And Chris, I would make this analogy. Let's imagine a group of guys planning to rob a bank. One of them is sort of one of the brains behind the idea. And he says, look, I'll drive the getaway car. And so they go to carry out this robbery of a bank. And it doesn't go too well. They kind of get stopped at the door. It's broken up by cops. And the getaway driver says, you know what, I might just leave a little bit early now. That's what Mike Lee did. Yes, he voted to certify the election after he knew the plot had

failed. And he deserves no credit for that whatsoever. Had I been there when that was happening, I would have gone to law enforcement. I would have gone to the public. I would have used every power and ability at my disposal to prevent this attempted overturning of American democracy. That's not what Senator Lee did. He at least, you know, by his own accounts, played footsie with the idea, but more accurately was central to the plot. What does it mean if Senator Lee beats you and the people of Utah give him another term? What would that mean to you? Well, of course, I'll be disappointed if that happens. Now it's a neck and neck race. So we really have the opportunity to replace him. And I'm excited about that.

We're making a lot of progress. This is a cross-partisan coalition. This is a two-way race between Mike Lee and me. People can learn more about it and support us at evanmcmullin.com. But a majority of Utah wants to replace Mike Lee. Donald Trump is only polling at 37% here. That's about where Joe Biden is polling as well. A majority of Utahns are frustrated that we've got some of the worst inflation in the country here in our state. This used to be a very affordable place to live. Now we've got some of the worst inflation in the

country. Gas prices are high, of course. Hopefully they come down. We've also got high health care. We're dealing with severe air and water issues, especially a water shortage in a severe drought. We are worried about the size of our national debt. So many problems that are negatively impacting our state. And Utahns know that we need change. We can't afford any longer to have one of our senators be the type of guy who shows up and sits on his hands until it's time to vote no. He does that without offering any sort of constructive alternative. And then he goes on cable news and complains about what just happened. We can't afford that anymore. We need senators and representatives otherwise in Congress and the

House, too, who will work across party lines to solve problems. And that's what we're doing here. And I'm optimistic about our chances. We don't fake the funk here. And here's the real talk. Over 40 years of age, 52% of us experience some kind of ED between the ages of 40 and 70. I know it's taboo, it's embarrassing, but it shouldn't be. Thankfully, we now have HIMS, and it's changing the vibe by providing affordable access to ED treatment, and it's all online. HIMS is changing men's health care. Why? Because it's giving you access to affordable and discreet sexual health treatments, and you do it right from your couch. HIMS provides access to clinically proven generic alternatives to Viagra or Cialis or whatever.

And it's up to like 95% cheaper. And there are options as low as two bucks a dose. HIMS has hundreds of thousands of trusted subscribers. So if ED is getting you down, it's time to pick it up. Start your free online visit today at HIMS.com slash CCP. H-I-M-S.com slash CCP. And you will get personalized ED treatment options. HIMS.com slash CCP. Prescriptions, you need an online consultation with a healthcare provider, and they will determine if appropriate. Restrictions apply.

You see the website. You'll get details and important safety information. You're going to need a subscription. It's required. Plus, price is going to vary based on product and subscription plan. We don't fake the funk here, and here's the real talk. Over 40 years of age, 52% of us experience some kind of ED between the ages of 40 and 70. I know it's taboo, it's embarrassing, but it shouldn't be. Thankfully, we now have HIMS,

and it's changing the vibe by providing affordable access to ED treatment, and it's all online. HIMS is changing men's health care. Why? Because it's giving you access to affordable and discreet sexual health treatments. And you do it right from your couch. HIMS provides access to clinically proven generic alternatives to Viagra or Cialis or whatever. And it's up to like 95% cheaper. And their options are as low as two bucks a dose.

HIMS has hundreds of thousands of trusted subscribers. So if ED is getting you down, it's time to pick it up. Start your free online visit today at HIMS.com slash CCP. H-I-M-S dot com slash C-C-P. And you will get personalized ED treatment options. HIMS dot com slash C-C-P. Prescriptions, you need an online consultation with a healthcare provider. And they will determine if appropriate.

Restrictions apply. You see the website. You'll get details and important safety information. You're going to need a subscription. It's required. Plus, the price is going to vary based on product and subscription plan. You know, one of the things that you're up against, I would suggest maybe as formidable as Mike Lee, although he's got deep roots in your state, obviously, and time and tenure matters in elected office. He's not just an incumbent. He's been there for a long time.

Is the binary nature of the party game. You will be criticized and have been by Mike Lee as a closet Democrat. You did a deal with the Democrats. They didn't oppose. They didn't put in their own candidate because they can't win in Utah, can't beat Lee. So you are really their proxy. And I want you to speak to that, but also the reality that even if it's true, and it is, that the idea of you're either on one of these teams or you're nowhere, what does that mean for the future of democracy? So first speak to it in terms of your involvement with the Democrats, you plant, and the idea of what that says about our party and our democracy. Well, listen, let me at first, Chris, share the way I think about the teams right now in American politics. I mean, we think of them typically as Republican versus Democrat.

And yeah, we've got these independents and they're growing. That's another dynamic here. Certainly that's the case in Utah, where 35% of voters are registered independents. But look, the teams these days are, it's not Republican versus Democrat. It isn't any longer. That's not what this is. That's not the situation. are a pro-democracy movement and an anti-democracy movement in America. The teams are a movement that is committed to objective truth and a movement that has abandoned it. Those are the teams now. And the sooner we realize that, the better able we're going to be to defend our democracy. It is that simple. And so we know here in Utah that a majority of Utahns want to replace Mike Lee, but what's the challenge? The challenge is that people are divided. That majority is divided into historic political rivalries. So Republicans, principled Republicans, Democrats and independents and members of the third parties like the United Utah Party,

they're divided between, they're divided, but they all want to replace Mike Lee and they're committed to our democracy. And by the way, they have a lot of common ground on even the most, some of the most difficult issues facing our country. And so the whole strategy, which I'm openly talking about on this campaign is to unite those groups. And by the way, I'm not the first one to do this. Senator Romney has very strong cross-partisan support here in Utah. So I would like to take credit for building this coalition. I cannot. It's a coalition that already exists. We are mobilizing it for the purposes of this election. Yes, you know, Democrats and I don't agree on everything. You know, yes, you know, there are many differences in this coalition, but we agree on some critical things, Chris.

We agree on our founding ideals that were created free and of equal value and equal under the law. And therefore, we have a system of self-government in which we select our leaders. And when we vote them out, there's a peaceful transfer of power. We're committed to truth and to decency and to our constitution. That's what's at stake right now. And by the way, all the other challenges we face, high cost of health care, inflation, gas prices, air problems, water problems, all these other challenges, the national debt. We will never solve these things without a functioning system of self-government. And so these are the things that unite us.

These are the things that are enabling our ability to build this coalition, despite the many differences we still have, which by the way, I think those differences are healthy. They make us stronger, but that's why things are coming together the way they are here in Utah. And that's why this is a competitive race. The idea of being an independent, as you know, I don't like the term independent, not because I don't think people should look for an alternative. I think they absolutely should be looking for an alternative. I think the two-party system has failed. But when I think independent, I think out for yourself.

I'm not criticizing you. I'm saying as a political concept. And I talk about free agents here and that that's who this show is for. Open mind, open heart. You're not about team or tribe. And you're willing to listen to people who you disagree with, one, because they're not your enemy and because maybe they know something you don't. That's who this show is for. And one out of three may be better in Utah by most polls. Almost 30 percent nationally overweighted. Once you get younger, people saying, I don't like Democrats

or Republicans. Isn't it time for more parties? I personally would like to see a multi-party system in the United States. There's no way that two parties can represent all of the interests and ideas and preferences of a country of 330 plus million people. It just can't happen. And so, you know, the two parties that we do have are coalitions. You know, when I worked in, you know, Republican politics, when I was the chief policy director, when John Boehner was speaker and then Paul Ryan, you know, the way we thought of the Republican conference in the House was it was a coalition. You had the far right Freedom Caucus guys. Then you had the Republican study committee people that were sort of mainstream conservatives, quite conservative,

but mainstream. And then you had the moderates, the Tuesday group people. And so coalitions do now exist in our country within the two parties. But there's just no way the two parties can fully represent America the way it needs to be represented. I mean, look at those two guys. You know, Boehner basically boohooed himself out of office, never to be heard from again. Ryan was supposed to be the face of the future. I mean, he had this huge early on reach across ability, you know, that, oh, you know, he's reasonable on most things. Then he had to double down on extremism when he was speaker. And now he's out of the game altogether.

I mean, doesn't that tell you that there is no moderate voice that's going to make it in your former party? Well, certainly not, sadly, anytime soon, though here in Utah, we had 40 percent of Republicans voting against Senator Lee in the recent Republican primary. So here it's a little bit different, but I hear you. It's still not enough to change swiftly the direction of the party, unfortunately. But this is, you know, this is a big problem in our politics, Chris, that the extremes have become very, very powerful and very loud, even though they don't represent a majority of Utahns or Americans. And this is what happens, you have gerrymandering, for example, when only 17% of U.S. House districts

are competitive. 83% are a lock between one party or the other. And that puts all the hands, all the power in the hands of the extremes. But I will say, Chris, in the near term, so yes, I would like to see a multi-party system. I think that's what we need here. In the near term, what is required to save American democracy and move our country forward, help it overcome the major challenges that I keep talking about, what's required is a political realignment, a new coalition that includes principled Republicans, independents, and Democrats, even though there will be lots of disagreement between them, that is what's required yesterday to save American democracy and to get our country on track and to strengthen it at a time when it's being threatened from within and without. That's what I'm focused on now. Now, what that might lead to in terms of maybe new parties emerge and become powerful, a lot of people working on that and representing more Americans, perhaps. But right now, what I

think must happen is a new coalition that is capable of defending on a sustainable basis American democracy and governing. What do you make of the idea that it's always been like this? We just have more media now, so everything is exaggerated by this kind of plethora of echoes that we have. But, you know, it's always been a confrontational system and everybody's always been saying that democracy is in trouble and it's always been fine. Look, I think we should always guard jealously our basic rights and our system and the institutions that protect them. And it's true, they are always at some risk because the way I view the world, Chris, is this. This is an eternal problem. There will always be those on the side of freedom wanting to defend true freedom for all. And then there will always be those on the side of freedom, wanting to defend true freedom for all.

And then there will always be those who want to amass power and wealth for themselves at the expense of the people. That will always be the case. And so the idea in the past that, you know, we've been at risk at times is valid, maybe, you know, hyperbolic at times, depending on what's going on. I don't think this is one of those times. I think you only have to look at January 6th and all kinds of other things. CPAC just invited Viktor Orban, who gutted Hungarian democracy, to come to their conference. You know, they're openly talking about how Republicans, unfortunately, now should follow his example. And by the way, they are. You know, you have J.D. Vance, the Republican

Senate nominee in Ohio, talking about how democracy is failing and we need a strong man. And when asked, you know, won't that be terrible, terrible for America? He says it won't be as bad as you think. I mean, we're fighting a real anti-democracy movement in this country. And principled Republicans, Democrats and independents have got to unite now. We'll decide as a country over the next two cycles whether we still are a republic and whether we are going to keep it, as Benjamin Franklin warned, that we might not. And so that is truly what's at stake here. We've been divided in the past. That's certainly true. But even in those times of division, I don't think we've seen a side that has decided to tear down our system of self-government in order for them to hold on to power at the expense of the people's will. Certainly, there have been variations of that, not allowing women or minorities to vote, et cetera, African-Americans to vote. You know, we've had some variations on this in the past, but this is unique and it warrants

special attention by all Americans. What's your biggest fear? You know, my biggest concern, the biggest threat that I think faces our country is our unmooring from truth, because we're unable to find solutions, if that's the case, without truth to overcome major challenges. We're unable to make decisions in our own self-interest, in our own self-preservation, in choosing our leaders. We just become totally ungovernable, weakened, turned against each other, and vulnerable to disinformation and other lies pumped into our ecosystem. That's what I'm most concerned about is that we won't be able to regain our footing with truth in time. But we have got to do it. I think, again, very clearly, there's an anti-democracy

movement in our country. They are their vision of America is not necessarily one that is democratic, one that that has, you know, a, you know, they talk about blood and soil, that America should be defined more by the color of our skin and where people were born, which is the most un-American idea you could have. We should be defined by our commitment to our core ideals. do not build this political realignment that I talk of, that I'm urging between principled Republicans, Democrats, and independents, that it will not happen fast enough or at scale enough to protect us from those who want to take apart our republic. What do you think happens if the right, the Republicans, however you want to define them, take over in the midterms. Doesn't look that likely on the charts and the analyses right now, but what's the worst case scenario? What do you think McCarthy and McConnell want to do other than get as many judges as they

like across the country and a couple of tax cuts? I think if you see the far right come to power in Washington again, I think that they will pursue their goal of gutting Hungarian democracy the way Viktor Orban did in Hungary. I think that's the scenario in America now. I mean, they're openly saying it. So would we not be foolish to say that's not actually what they're going to do or that's not actually what they want to do? The counter is that it's an exaggeration. They're bringing Orban in because they know it'll scare the left and get them talking. And they actually are against strongman policies, which is why they don't like what just happened with the FBI and they accused the left of being heavy handed and

using the mechanisms of law for political purposes, that that's the strongman problem is on the left, not the right. Well, I do think that there, I will say, I do believe there's a problem with extremism on the far left too. I do believe that's the case, but don't tell me, I'm not talking to you when I say this, Chris. But but if you're someone in the far right out there who thinks that the FBI's search of Donald Trump's basement in order to retrieve critical national security information is, you know, an example of of government overreach. Let me tell you what an example of government overreach is. An example of government overreach is trying to keep a president who has lost an election in power despite the will of the people, despite having lost that election. That is the quintessential government overreach. That is, if you're a conservative,

government overreach. That is, if you're a conservative, this is the moment you've been training for. When someone, when a tyrant, when a would-be tyrant would say, okay, there was an election, I lost it. I'm going to declare that election null and void with my allies in Congress as it was, and I'm going to stay in power regardless. That is the quintessential example of tyranny. And that's what almost happened in our country. We weren't so far away from it. You watch Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger and the others on the January 6th committee hearings, and you see how close we were to that. You see how fearful Mike Pence was, our vice president, that that was what was underway and that it might succeed. If people are honest, which I think many are not at this point on this issue, you can't not acknowledge that that is

really tyranny staring us in the face. Now, again, there are people in this country who I think don't believe a democratic republic is core to the American identity because, again, they think about America more in terms of blood and soil. And so that's what they're defending. And if we lose the republic as they defend a blood and soil identity in America, then they're okay with that because that's not how they want to identify America. They want to identify us in a different way, by the color of our skin, by where we were born, by religious, in some case, religious identity, the so-called Christian nationalists. That's how they want to define America. And if democracy doesn't assist them in that effort,

then they'll abandon it. And that is what's happening. Do you consider yourself a member of the forward party? I'm an independent. I am not a member of any party. And I have made that commitment to those who I'm running to represent that I will represent all of them, everyone in this coalition equally. And we have members of the Forward Party and the United Utah Party and the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. You know, they all show up to our events in Utah. And I'm committed to representing all of them as an independent. If you were to get in, would you be a friend of expanding the party system?

Because, you know, in a two party system, the independent is the odd man out unless you have more parties. Would you do anything to try to promote it as a culture change? Because, as you know, and everybody should know at home, parties aren't in the Constitution. Parties aren't an animal of law. They're an animal of culture. And we were warned against them by George Washington. Yes, I would vote in favor of opening up our system with a variety of reforms that will allow Americans to have better choices and better representation. You know, I really love what Alaska did recently, where in their elections now they have open primaries. And so, Chris really love what Alaska did recently, where in their elections now they have open primaries. And so, Chris, if you're running, you can win votes from Republicans,

Democrats, independents, libertarians, all of the above. And then the top four finishers then move on to the general election in which there's ranked choice voting. And that means that voters, of course, can rank their vote. They choose you number one, then maybe I'm number two, and then maybe someone else three and four. And that incentivizes you and me as candidates to find common ground with each other so that your voters, your fans who are never leaving you, your supporters, maybe they'll choose me as their second choice. And you and I will spend a lot of time as candidates talking about where our common ground is for that purpose. And so that's something that I think would open up our system, create better representation, better incentives for leaders, better outcomes, and also open up possibilities for new parties. Last question.

When your loved ones say to you, and you can say they don't say this, but it'll be the only thing you've said that I don't believe, Evan. When your loved ones say to you, enough already. You ran for president. Now you're running for senator. If it doesn't work out, it's a very tight race. Enough. These people are crazy. They're trying to do bad things to you online. You're getting attacked all over the place. You're a smart guy. Make some money and then figure out you're a young guy. Make a difference down the road. Get out of this game before they get you. What do you say to them? Because I know the people who care about you have to be concerned about you fighting this fight again and again. Well, Chris, you're asking about something that, you know, is very real. In 2016, we faced threats. You know, this is not the first time I faced threats while trying to stand up for our country. I certainly did as a CIA officer serving abroad. And those threats exist today. And unfortunately, you know, we experience the reality of them. I don't know what the future holds. I'll just say that. But I know that the cause of freedom on Earth depends to a great degree on freedom in America, that this remains a home for liberty

and justice. I believe that America is located in a choice land on our planet. We're surrounded by two great oceans. We have rich natural resources. Anybody who lives here has an outsized opportunity to be strong and powerful. Any country. We have that. It's critical now and forever that we remain a free country. And if we don't, then I think the cause of freedom internationally and, of course, here home, will really, really suffer. There are billions of people, literally, I've served abroad, lived abroad, billions of people around the world who carry a flame of hope in their hearts that someday, if not them, because they live under dictatorships now, but someday maybe their children or their grandchildren will experience or have even an ounce of what we have here. So this country is worth fighting for. It has a special place in the human cause. And that's what I'm fighting for.

And I don't know what the future holds, but this country is worth sacrificing for. And I am committed to fighting as hard as I can for it. And yes, there are serious challenges, but this is not about me. This is about the importance of America for the people who live here and for the world. Evan McMullin, thank you very much.

I appreciate you joining us and I wish you good luck going forward. Thank you, Chris. Thank you very much. Evan McMullin is a different kind of guy. He is absolutely a traditional conservative. He's just not coming at you hate first. Can he win?

Doing a deal with the Democrats, will that disqualify him? What do you think about these things? What do you think about having someone who doesn't fit the mold? What did you like? What did you not like? Tell me. Call the number 516-412-6307. Send me your comments.

Let me know how you feel. The project is about me and you. It is about collaboration. Thank you for listening. See you soon.