The Daily Beast Podcast - The Desperate Laundering of the Trump Reputations w/ Michael Wolff

Episode Date: July 16, 2021

“There has been no detail that has come out that has been different than the four years we saw him do in office,” Slade Sohmer, editor in chief of The Recount, says on the latest episode of The New Abnormal. But no one knows image rehabilitation better than Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner—in fact, they’ve been doing it for years, Sohmer says. “‘Sources close to Jared and Ivanka say’ was the most used phrase in print of the Trump administration,” he adds. Next guest Michael Wolff, the author of the new book Landslide, his third about Trump, says it’s clear that some Trumpworld figures are trying to redeem themselves in the new Trump books. “I don't think that anybody is pleased,” he says of their post-Trump prospects. “I don't think anyone finds themselves where they would otherwise have hoped they would be after working in a senior job in the White House.” Last on the show is Sen. Jeff Merkley, who breaks down the chances for the massive infrastructure bill, whether the filibuster will survive, and more. If you haven't heard, every single week The New Abnormal does a special bonus episode for Beast Inside, the Daily Beast’s membership program. where Sometimes we interview Senators like Cory Booker or the folks who explain our world in media like Jim Acosta or Soledad O’Brien. Sometimes we just have fun and talk to our favorite comedians and actors like Busy Phillips or Billy Eichner and sometimes its just discussing the fuckery. You can get all of our episodes in your favorite podcast app of choice by becoming a Beast Inside member where you’ll support The Beast’s fearless journalism. Plus! You’ll also get full access to podcasts and articles. To become a member head to newabnormal.thedailybeast.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Hi, I'm Molly Jong-Fast and welcome to The Daily Beast, The New Abnormal. I'm a left-wing pundit and an editor at large at The Daily Beast. We're here to have fun, sharp conversations with some of the smartest people in media, politics, and science that help make what's happening in the country and the world clearer. Our world has been turned up day down. On the new abnormal, we'll talk about the people who got us into this mess and figure out how to get ourselves out of it. And I'm producer Jesse Kenan. I'm here to make sure things don't go too far off the rails.

Today we have one hell of a show. Michael Wolfe, the author of Fire and Fury and Siege, is going to talk to us about his latest book, Landslide, as well as Trump's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. And then, Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley is going to give us an update on where we're at with progress on reconciliation and the filibuster. But first, we have editor-in-chief at the recount, Slade Soamer. Welcome to the new abnormal Slade Soamer.

Hey, thanks for having me. Always a good time to get on a new podcast. It's all happening. Let us talk about literature or, you know, in case we can't get into that, Trump books. Yes, both. What the hell, man. I have been on an incredible Agatha Christie streak in 2021. You know, Trump books not exactly what I want. I want a good, cozy mystery by a summer. fire, I guess you don't do fires in the summer, but who done it? Exactly. He done it. This is the worst mystery ever. And in fact, yeah, and in fact, all these Trump books are at least the three that are, you know, top of mind this week.

Which is Michael Bender, Michael Wolf, who's going to be on this podcast, and the Washington Post, Carol and Rucker. Yeah. So these three books, you know, I will say for disclosure's sake, we have, On the recount, we had Michael Bender on a two-part podcast with John Heilman, so I do want to put that out there. Okay. A little plug, but we'll allow it. Yeah, the reason why I want to bring it up, though, is because I'm going to, like, slag it off a little bit. All right. We'd like to hear it.

And just say that, like, the coverage of these books for me is so just ill-framed that it's like... Breathless. It's like, this is worse than we knew, all this kind of stuff. And it's like, it's not worse than we knew. has been no detail that has come out that has been different than the four years we saw him do in office. Oh, yeah. No, and I would also say, like, the thing that I like is that all of these people, they're sort of breathless reporting about things that happened months ago that we all knew happened months ago. And then there are people like Mark Millie who's like, yeah, he tried to do a

coup in January. But I didn't come out about that because, you know, I didn't have anything to like, you know, who knows, it might have worked. I mean, like, what is the fucking thinking there? To that point, this happens after every election cycle. And, you know, look, if you do new reporting after the fact, I get that, you know, throw in as many of those details as possible. But, you know, for your sources and for these authors who are sitting on nuggets, like you just said, Mark Millie's a guy who did the protest photo or, you know, the photo in front of the church.

Yes. Where they asked the people to take the photo. Yeah. And, you know, so for Millie to come out post-Biden presidency or post-Trump presidency. Right. Six months after to say he was a right-stag moment, you were part of the right-stead moment. You were the one. Exactly.

The laundering of the reputations of, you know, Trump cronyism is going to be, first of all, easy because we live in the worst timeline. Yes, exactly. You know, Jared and Ivanka are going to be the first, like, like, Dancing with the Stars couple to come together. Ivanka, in this Washington Post excerpt, you know, she didn't want to go to stop the steel because she's very concerned with her image, but she decides to go to support her dad. I mean, come on, man. I have to push back on this.

Push, push. Dancing with the Stars is not it. The keeping up with the Kardashians has been canceled. Keeping up with Jared and Ivanka is obvious. it. Come on. That's where this goes. That is where this goes. It is. Just have to make sure I do the fact checking here, you know. Yeah, that was a very

important data point. But the question is, again, you know, Ivanka had trepidation towards the, you know, letting her father install himself as God King. Yeah, well, so the thing about Ivanka and Jared that I find fascinating is that

they're not trying to launder their reputations now. They've been doing it since 2015. You know, source is close to Jared and Ivanka say it was the most used phrase in print of the Trump administration. You know, they had always been trying to push back on that. And you know what? There's a world in which these two people are socialites in, you know, Florida and New York and have nothing to do with the Trump administration. And, you know, guilt by proxy, you know, is one thing. You could say, well, they didn't try to stop, you know, Trump from afar. You. You know, you. You could say, well, they didn't try to stop, you know,

even while they, you know, were distancing themselves. There's no distance there for four years. They were, Jared was his lead policymaker, and Ivanka was rubber stamping everything. And, you know, coming out at the big moments with things that supported her father. And all the while, they've been trying, you know, all their PR machine was very successful at duping the Assella Corridor. And they made millions and millions and millions of dollars. I mean, I think more than anything, they made. you know, their disclosures are like every year north of $40 million.

Like, you think that person is making $40 million just on her talent, on her intellect, on her sparkling wit? I mean, these people are kleptocrats of the highest order and the idea that now we have to listen to their concern. But the other thing with Jared, the thing that gets me, and again, I think we should segue into the ongoing pandemic and the fact that now we have, have a portion of the population that doesn't want to take the vaccine because they think that it will be a win for Democrats, basically. Yes. Well, I mean, if you were to say what percentage, like, where were they in a percentage bracket of people who got the vaccine early, Jared and Ivanka, you know, it's got to be the 0.01%. Like, they got it super early. I'm sure Trump got it as early as, you know, possible. I know there's been some reporting around that, but nothing.

thing has ever kind of stuck around that. Right. You know, these, this is the ultimate problem is, you know, they mismanaged a pandemic worse than basically any country on earth. Jared said blue state people are going to die if their governors don't hit the phones and come to us and beg for ventilators. Remember that? Whatever happened with that?

Whatever happened with that? And also, Jared and company were out there touting. making the vaccine available 10 years ahead of schedule. Right. So, you know, you have that element as well before Trump left office. First of all, if the vaccine came instead of December, January, if it came October, November, you know, all these people would have told everyone to get the vaccine. Everybody.

You know, playing politics with the vaccine and with the pandemic is not something that is new. Right. But it is something that has become, you know, sadly obvious. more and more with each day. Yeah. No, it is interesting to me that Jared Kushner, probably one of the architects of this whole fuckery that may have caused hundreds of thousands of Americans to die is now, you know, in this continual laundering thing. But I'm curious to know, the White House has sort of trying to address the terrible anti-vaxxer misinformation problem in this country.

a.k.a. Alex Berenson and Tucker Carlson, who just asking questions, why do people want vaccines? I'm just asking questions. What do you think? Facebook has long had a terrible anti-vaxxer problem, right? In fact, they make these donations in a way of trying to, like, offset their, you know, everywhere Facebook comes, you know, after there's terrible anti-vaxxer issues. Like, Facebook is really an anti-vaccine delivery system at this point. And you have, and of course the iron. is the wife of Mark Zuckerberg is a doctor. Right. Right. And they give all this money to sort of as a way of kind of making them feel better about this. But my question is, do you think that this White House can do anything about this anti-vaccine sentiment? I really, really don't because to me, this isn't just a public health problem.

This is a public health on social media problem, as you alluded to. You know, Jen Saki said today, actually, at her press briefing cited a study that said there are 12 people who are providing 65% of anti-vaccine misinformation on social media. And one of them is Robert Kennedy and the other one is Alex Berenson. Yep. And until Facebook steps up and Saki did a good job. And look, I'm not the Saki bomb cheerleader. You know, I have, you know, issues with, with how the, you know, White House press corps and the press and the press secretary, you know, I don't find that as as ra, as most people do. But I thought Saki did a very good job today at saying these people are still

active on Facebook, even as they've been kicked off other platforms, including platforms that Facebook owns, which obviously means Instagram. So I do find it fascinating that by allowing these people to spread this information or this misinformation, I should say, you know, this is not just a public health problem. This is a social media problem. And until Zuckerberg and the folks at Facebook get real about this, there is nothing you can do because once it takes hold, it mutates. It's like the virus itself. We've dealt a variant of the virus, but we also have variants of misinformation. And what I mean by that is look at what's

going on in Tennessee. They fired their top vaccine official, Michelle Fiscus. They fired her and then followed that up, by banning any outreach to minors on any, you know, a virus, not just COVID-19. So to me, now you have a mutation problem in misinformation, just like you have a mutation problem in the virus itself. And, you know, you don't know where this goes. You can't, it's like, you know, at the end of Act 1 of Cabaret, when the little Nazi boys steps up and sinks tomorrow belongs to us. And then at the very end, he says, like, do you still think you can control him. This is how it goes. You've created this misinformation monster, and you cannot,

even if Trump came out today and said forcefully, go get the vaccine. I don't think people will listen to him. I think it has mutated past that point. And thank you, Kander and Ebb for your, you know, cabaret reference. Yeah. I mean, yeah, life is a, you know, life is a cabaret. Life is a cabaret. But yes, I agree. I think it's too late. I don't think you can put that genie back in the bottle. And the other thing is like, why the fuck, just can we get back to this? Why the fuck isn't Merritt fucking Garland going after?

You know, I used to call him Merritt fucking Garland because he didn't get the Supreme Court interview. Now I call him Merritt fucking Garland because I feel like what the fuck is he even doing there? If you don't hold these people accountable for anything, they will just do it again. Like, even Hitler went to jail. Right.

Right. So, I mean, question is like, why? Are we, no one ever going to be held accountable for anything in Trump world? No, they aren't. And nobody was ever held accountable in Bush world either. And this is how it goes. And look, I'm not saying that as a Democrat or a liberal or, you know, a leftist or anything. I am actually a fairly neutral journalist.

I have my opinions and all that stuff. But, you know, I try to be neutral, not objective. I don't believe in objectivity in the world ever. Everything is subjective. But even as a more neutral person, this isn't a left-right Democrat-Republican issue. This is a class issue. This is a, you know, this is an issue that we as a country will never, ever solve. And I try and be optimistic when I can. But we will never solve it. These people do not go to jail. People who commit white-collar crimes don't go to jail. People who commit, you know, serious criminal offenses, any sort of negligence like a grossly negligent handling of a pandemic. you know, none of these people ever get held to account, and then you can never learn your lesson. It's Jurassic Park touching the wires where the wires aren't electrocised or, you know, whatever the verb is there. Wait, what part of Jurassic Park do they touch the wires then?

The dinosaurs, that's the whole concept of the first Jurassic Park, is once they touch the wires, they learn not to get electrocuted. And then once the power goes off, then the dinosaurs know that all bets are off. Oh, I was focused on the water, the glass of water. Yeah, the glass of water. You know, life finds a way just as all these white-collar criminals find a way. It's true. I mean, it's, we will never, if nobody went to jail and nobody was held accountable in the 2008 crash, where there was gross, gross, gross behavior that was absolutely criminal, you know, and we learned no lesson from that whatsoever. You know, we got a Dodd-Frank bill out of it, you know, maybe, you know, that still had still has very little teeth.

You know, I just don't think that we as a country do very well because immediately it becomes, do you want to prosecute your enemies? And that's where the chat goes. And then it's like, no, in a democracy, we're going to let it go. And Biden is very, very on the record early and often as saying like, yeah, we're not going to go after our enemies. And it's like, these aren't your enemies, man. These are enemies of the people. No, I think it's a real fucking problem. And I don't think that these people will say like, oh, I got away with it.

I won't do it again. Like, I think these people will be like, next time, you know, I don't think the big danger is Trump 2024, though I think it's possible. I think the big danger is like a very emboldened Ron DeSantis. Yes. So I do think it's one of the ones. those two people. Obviously, we're super early before 2024. I think at this exact point, Chris Christie was leading the 2020 field, or sorry, the 2016 field. He may actually be leading the 2024 field.

Yeah. So, you know, I don't see anyone getting above DeSantis from the new crowd. And then, you know, do I think Trump will run? It depends on where his criminal charges are. Right. I don't think that we as a country, I would not rule out Trump being the president in January of 2025. Oh, no. So I don't think this is a very novel position. I think the Democrats have a massive messaging problem for decades and centuries, really. But I think it is especially pronounced right now.

Today is a good day to be talking about this because they are taking a victory lap on the child tax credit. And they are finally learning how to take victory laps and say, nobody on the other side voted for this. You will see an increase in your paycheck. is all thanks to us. But on on the number one issue that concerns people for reasons that, to me, is passing understanding, which is the surge in crime, which is not true. There is a surge in violent crime, but crime is down. I think the Democrats messaging, make no mistake, this will be the number one issue between now and 2024, because it is on every local news channel and every local news channel is owned by Sinclair and, you know, all this kind of stuff. But, um,

You know, you see it in the New York elections. None of the people facing Adams, you know, came out and really explained the crime situation and what defund the police means and what it means, you know, because I have this conversation with my parents all the time who are scared of crime in the city. I got a text message every single day from my dad being like, don't go on the subway and other slashing, you know. Are they Fox watchers? My dad used to be, we got him at. out of that. I think, you know, I think he's in his more a political phase right now. Okay, good for him. You know, but the one thing that I'll say about this is when you have a rational conversation and you, you almost interview someone like a journalist, you can get to good points. And what I mean by that is like, you know, my dad will say, you know, you can't defund the police. And I'm saying, well, they're not trying to defund the police wholly. You know,

some people are. But, you know, maybe a billion or two billion to go into, you know, preventative programs, homeless programs, mental health programs, you know, which is the actual problem because these people will say, well, you know, I don't want to get slashed on the street by a mentally ill person or a homeless person or wherever. It's like, that's where this money is going. I don't mean to steal from Joe Biden and whisper, like, that's where this money is going. Listen, as I say all the time as I steal from Joe Biden, come on, man. Come on, man. But I actually have a little bit of a counterpoint to this. I think, I think it was interesting, like, to always look back at the historical thing of like 1992. You know, everybody was told super predators are going to flood the streets.

Your kids are going to be murdered the street. And then Comstack came. I actually think we're about to see the most fundamental difference in policing ever occur from both the reaction to George Floyd and the movement to do more mental health. We're seeing cities implement policies. Every city council in every major city that leads the least bit blue has some sort. sort of crime, redistribution of funds on the docket in their city council. And if it really is true, which I think there's a lot of evidence to be, the Republicans may not be able to run on crime as much as they want to in 2024 if these policies actually do work. Well, I agree with your

first point wholeheartedly. And I honestly, you know, depending on where the economy is, because, you know, the old Carville quote, you know, if the economy is in a pretty good place compared to 2020, which, you know, all signs point to mostly yes. You know, even if that's 50-50, I think crime is kind of the only place that they can run, which is like, hey, you're going to be shot in the face by a mentally ill homeless person. You know, that's going to be every Republican ad to me, to me, just, you know, just a thought I have. It seems like they have a lot of bloods out, though, with CRT and Dr. Seuss. Yeah, I think the culture of war both.

shit will be pretty popular. Republicans do really seem kind of obsessed with this idea that they're going to win on like not educating children and not vaccinating children. I mean, remember last year they were like, we open the schools, we need to keep the schools open, which actually they were right about. But then when the schools were open, you know, now the schools are open. So you can't run on that. That's going to be, and by the midterms, that'll be like a year and a half, you know, past. Yeah. Midterms. midterms maybe, 2024, I think that'll be well gone. Hopefully, knock on wood. We are in our non-reality era. So that's another component, you know, or post-reality or whatever, you know, whatever you want

to say. I think a lot of people say post-facts or whatever. But it's not post-facts. It's post-reality. Like, you know, a third of all positive cases came from Florida the other day. You know, Florida is a massive hotspot. And Ronald Santos is still being hailed as the COVID hero. He's selling T-shirts that say, don't Fauci, my Florida. Isn't that incredible? He is selling T-shirts against Anthony Fauci while propagating the pandemic. Yeah, yeah. And, you know, I think that there are too many smart people out there who, you know, really do want to play nuance and really want to, you know, explain that, like, yeah, Fauci could have been wrong about masks.

you know, Fauci could have been wrong about X, Y, and Z. But overall, you always lean on the side of public health and public health officials and, you know, look at how well we did with Ebola and look at how well we did with, you know, all these different things when Fauci was running things unencumbered by, you know, the number one narcissist in the history of this country. You know, there are there are so many, you know, ways that, you know, Fauci defenders want to have nuance. And then there's just another side of. this, which is like nuances for fucking suckers, and we're just going to say, we won the war, and that's the game. And I don't know how that plays out in the midterms. And I don't know how that plays out in 2024. I honestly don't. Well, and the question I think with the, with Congress is it's not even whether or not it plays out, the redistricting. I mean, Democrats are going to have a very hard time hanging on to the House just because of the sheer fuckery that went on with the census and redistricting. Yes, that too. Not to put a horrible cap on a thing where we have to edit a second, but Roe versus Wade is going to get overturned at that culture war. It's going to be back in a

big way in this midterm. Yeah. Yeah, I have not thought ahead to that possibility, but that is, yeah. It's happening in February. Are they listening? I have regardless. By the time the midterms happen, Roe versus Wade will be overturned. And this will be a massive part of the culture war and how we... Yeah, so here's my question for you. Where do you both stand on the retire Stephen Breyer

chant? I mean, pack the fucking courts. Why the hell do we care about Stephen Breyer? Let's just add six justices. Trump added three justices. At 19 is the number I like. Yeah, I mean, it's a fuck, it's fucking bullshit. Like, well, we lose another justice

who cares? Like, at this point, we're so screwed. Like, re, you know, rejigger the court, change the... fucking narrative. Like, don't be an asshole. Like, this could be the last time Democrats ever hold power. Yeah. Well, I'm in favor of, like, you know, how other countries just get to dissolve parliament for

no reason. You know, we should kind of like do the same thing with the Supreme Court be like, all right, you nine, you're out. We're calling for a dissolution. Hey, folks. And Casey, you haven't heard every week we do an extra special bonus episode for Beast Inside, the Daily Beast membership program. This week, we're joined by special guest, author Susan.

Orling, who you may know from her books like the orchid thief, the library book, and her latest on animals, which we're going to talk to her all about. To hear this, along with all of our pasted bonus episodes, and to support the beast's fearless journalism, head to new abnormal.thedailybeast.com. That's new abnormal.com. Michael Wolfe is the author of Fire and Fury, Siege, and his latest book, Landslide. Hi, Michael. Hey, how are you? Good. Good to have you. Delighted to be here. So my first question is actually something that I read in the Times. You talk about, and this is a thing I think is really common.

I'm curious to know what your thinking is. I actually don't believe if you know the answer. It is necessary to go through the motions of getting an answer that you are absolutely certain of. Can you tell me what you mean by that? Oh, yeah, I think I got in trouble for that. Yeah, yeah. Yeah. So anyway, that apparently is something one is not supposed to say.

Although I can go over all of the things that I have read about myself, and no one has ever called me up to say, is that correct or true? So anyway, I'm not going to go there because I'm going to get in trouble again. This is what I've said to myself about this book. Stay on script. And this day, you can't go off script. I'm on script. And in fact, being because I'm tired of being beaten up, although beat me up, why not? But for this book, I actually thought, okay, fine.

I'll just give all of, you know, type out every single fact that's in this book and I will send it to the president or the former president or his office. And let them say it's not true. But in fact, they said overwhelmingly, I got that back. This thing says, accurate, accurate, accurate. So anyway. Oh, wow. That's fascinating. Yeah, no, totally. There were a few things that they disputed. And then I was, I was okay. I have two sources or multiple sources. So I've done this the proper way. How do you get a straight answer out of this White House? Many people around the president have been, you know, I think incredibly straight up and straightforward with me.

because there is as bewildered, confused, horrified by what has gone on as anyone. So you clearly don't get a straight answer from the president because he's not capable of answering a question. It's not, I mean, let's forget that he's a liar. I think that's sort of a secondary problem. It's almost as if he cannot hear a question. So he just says what he wants to say. And then usually he has a spokesperson. and he just recently got this a new spokesperson.

She seems like a deer in the headlights. That's Liz, right? Yeah, exactly. My prediction would be that she would not last very long there. But, I mean, all of his spokespeople have been like that. You know, they have to say what he wants them to say. I mean, that's the price of their existence. There was a funny thing that happened when I was in Mar-Lago interviewing the president.

You know, he kept bringing people over and saying, oh, you know, Michael Wolf. He's the best writer in America. And Sarah Huckabee Sanders was there. And, you know, she was the spokesperson and the point person when I published Fire and Fury. So she was the one who had to say, you know, the president has never met him. Michael Wolf is a liar, blah, all of that kind of stuff. So then he calls her over, Sarah, Sarah, Sarah, and he says, you know Michael Wolf, don't you? And she did this double take.

I mean, it was a classic Jack Benny style double take. And I'm sure it was incomprehensible to her, as it was to me. What was I doing there sitting there in Mar-a-Lago with the president? It is an amazing thing to have someone who is a pathological liar and to have a support staff that has to reflect that. And it's even beyond that because it's not just that he's a pathological liar. liar. I mean, that somehow implies intent that he knows what he's doing. So the more complicated thing is that he has no idea what he's doing. He's just talking. It just comes into his head, whatever it is. But is that because he's stupid? Yes. I mean, I think the combination are,

yes, he's stupid or certainly he's information deprived. I mean, he knows nothing. There's no empirical information that he basically possesses. And then the other thing, is that he does live in this separate reality. Reading Lancelad, there's a part of the book on election night about Fox's early call of Arizona where you have Lockwood Murdoch, not the decision desk, making the call that Fox is going to declare Arizona early for Biden. And then Rupert Murdoch signing off on it by telling his son, fuck him, as in Trump. So Fox News now says that that's completely false. and wildly inaccurate. I'm wondering if you could talk a bit general terms about that information.

Well, yeah. I mean, first thing, they, they, they always, it's an interesting thing that the greater media, which spends a good, good deal of time saying Fox is, is never honest and is always, you know, the perpetrators of, of the big lie. Now has suddenly, when this involves me, taking Fox aside on this. How are they taking Fox aside? I'm just interested, you know, I've reported this. They told me that. I think everybody has said, okay, Fox is challenging. This is a serious challenge to my reporting. They also said something else.

They said that I had said that Bill Hammer called up Jason Miller and gave him a heads up on the Arizona call. They said that was entirely false. And then Jason Miller said, oh, no, that's true. And there were a whole bunch of people who I've actually spoken to also, who were in the Macroom that night in the White House and all heard this. So anyway, it's patently false what Fox has said there. As for the Murdoch call, I am in addition to the writer of three books about Donald Trump.

I am also Rupert Murdoch's biographer. So I'm pretty well sourced to say the very least in his organization and family. So I know incontrovertibly that this exchange happened. And also, I know the nature of the man, the idea that Rupert Murdoch would be uninvolved or disengaged from so significant a call on election night is preposterous. And in fact, in 2018, when Fox made the early call that the Democrats had reclaimed the House of Representatives, and they had made that before the polls closed in many of the Western states so that they may have had a meaningful impact on what happened there. That, too, was a call approved by Rupert Murdoch. You talked about how Robert Mueller didn't make a traditional prosecutorial judgment on Trump committing obstruction of justice,

and that you actually have this indictment. Can you talk to us a little bit about this? is quite fascinating. You know, this is something else I got in hot water for because the Mueller's office said, okay, this isn't true, although I have it. I know I know exactly how this, where this came from. I know exactly who prepared it. And the nature of this is that it probably gives Mueller's office the wherewithal to deny it. I have sourcing issues here in which I'm trying to carefully protect a set of a set of people, but there are people from Mueller's office who side and had this indictment prepared. I think that's probably all I should say.

If you want to say it, if you want to see it sometime, I'll show it to you. Seriously, I will come to Amagandit. Let's get. Yeah, you know, and what do you think, just from your opinion and from what you've written about here, what do you think went wrong with Mueller? I think he got, no, I think he got spooked. You know, I think Mueller was a total straight arrow. I'm, you know, inside the box kind of guy. And he didn't know what the president was going to do. Is the president going to fire him?

Was the president going to fire everybody? You know, I mean, I have a whole set of papers, which I'll show you to. in which, you know, the Mueller team considers all of the possibilities here about what Trump could do to them. So I think that's what happened. I think they got spooked. They got scared. Did you ever hear an impairment story? I think Mueller was, you know, perhaps past his prime here, you know, and decided that there would have had to be, you know, essentially existential conflict here, a constitutional crisis. And he punted. Michael, when you wrote Byron Fury, Donald Trump called you mentally deranged, someone unknowingly writes false information. He threatened to block your publisher from releasing the book.

You're now on landslide is your third book about the Trump administration. And at the end of the book, Trump is no longer president and he has you down to Marlago to talk. I know he did this with at least one other set of authors, Leonegan Rucker at the Post. For their new book, it seems like he's doing a tour of these with people he's attacked previously. Are you surprised by this shift and how he's handling? Yeah, totally surprised. I was flabbergasted. And I'll tell you how it came about.

So I had been talking to several people around the president and said I was going to do this book. And one of them went to the president. I think as a warning and said that I was going to do a third book. And so I was told that the following exchange then occurred, the former president saying, oh, that guy gets ratings. Let's see him. And then they, you know, within possibly that day, somebody called me up and invited me to come down a Mar-a-Lago, which was stunning to me to say the least.

But in its own way, I suppose, explicable. You know, and it was what is Trump interested in? He's interested in an audience. And it doesn't really matter, certainly, because he's not thinking things through or thinks nothing through, that the audience might not be an audience necessarily partial to him. I don't think that matters. It was just suddenly, I'm going to write a bestselling book.

So, yeah, let's talk to him. Okay, so my question is, and this is sort of an obsession of mine, because I've always sort of thought it was true. I mean, I've always thought it was true. You had said that you thought Trump had an affair in the White House. Who do you have an affair with? That really got me into trouble. And I am not going there on that.

No way am I going there. Back in the day, I know that you were part of a group, and I think helped assemble a group that sought to buy New York Magazine. Oh, geez. You guys are really going to go on after me here. All my weak spots included Zuckerman, Weinstein, Epstein. So this is fascinating. I do hope you go over for a minute. It's not a weak spot. It's just something, you know, people who read would love to know more about. You know, you knew Epstein a bit. You spent some time in his townhouse. You said, you know, he's part of a way for a lifestyle that the culture's outgrown. And he's out there publicly, publicly living it out. I'd love to know a little more about that. Like, did you talk to any of the girls who were there? Did you ever record conversations or do reporting while you were there? What was that like?

I have to put you off on this, but you will be satisfied because I have another book coming out in October. And it's a collection of essays, but one of the essays involves Epstein. So all your questions will be answered. It's sort of news. Nobody knows this yet. So there you've got it. Do you think that Trump will run again? Yeah, I think that he has no idea.

I mean, it's the idea that. Donald Trump could make a plan for four years from now is ridiculous. I would sort of predict that he will announce he's running, then take it back, then announce he's running again. And what will happen will just be by the vagaries of what's the last thing he said at the last moment when he might be able to say it to organize a campaign. Do you see anyone who's trying to really redeem themselves through these Trump books and trying to sort of have a future? Maybe. You know, I mean, I think clearly, you know, certainly a lot of the people that have helped me on this would hope to, you know, I think, you know, these are professional political people. They want a career. Do they recognize the problem that

they were going to have? Yeah, absolutely. I, you know, I don't think that anybody is pleased. I don't think anyone finds themselves where they would otherwise have hoped they would be after working in a, having had a senior job in the White House. Last question for you about that. Steve Bannon, I know you're not talking about your sourcing generally, but he is a prime source in your first book and that ended his relationship with Trump for one. He's worked his way back in. He has all sorts of legal troubles and schemes and players he's involved in. But unlike most of the characters in the White House you're describing in a landslide who are toadies and cronies,

Bannon is clearly something different. I'm curious if you still speak with him and what your impression is of how he's doing now and how he's likely to reemerge or if he's likely to reemerge on our national scene with or without Trump. You know, I don't know, and I haven't. I have a fondness for Steve because he was incredibly helpful to me, because he's incredibly funny, because you do get a strangely straight story from him, when often when you least expect it. But I haven't spoken to him recently, partly because I didn't want to use him as a source in this book. You know, I felt he was, you know, too conflicted. I understood the, you know, the, you know, you know, the legal difficulties were extensive, and I understood that he was going to do whatever he had to do to deal with that. Do you think he's sort of compromised by the Chinese at this point? You know, I never quite understood his relationship with, you know, with that one guy. But I suppose he, I mean, he's sort of supported by that guy.

So, yeah, I guess, I guess that would qualify as compromised. Yeah. So I don't think you've mentioned this in any of your essays, at least the ones I've read. I'm a reasonably thorough reader. But to return to Jeffrey Epstein for just one second, you know Donald Trump. Epstein has had relationships with both Trump and Quentin of different sorts. There's been all sorts of speculation about that. What have you heard about that from Trump or from Epstein at any point?

You mean the Epstein-Trump relationship? Sure. Or the Epstein-Quinton. You know, I cover some of the Epstein-Trump relationship in my book. siege, you know, especially the real estate deal which broke up their friendship in 2004 or five. You know, and it was sort of a complicated deal in which Epstein had made a bid on a property in Florida and taken Trump there to advise him on how to move the swimming pool. And then Trump went behind his back and bought the house.

You know, one of the things, you know, I think the seminal thing that rich guys fall out over is always real estate. And certainly this was, this was one of those, clearly one of those instances. You don't think there's any world that that's just a story to cover up something else? I think in that world, all stories cover up something, yes. And there's further, I have further details because then there was, I mean, I have to kind of, Remember here, but Epstein felt that Trump was buying the property for someone else, that this was a money laundering scheme. And then Epstein threatened to go public with this about Trump. And at that point, Epstein believes that or believed that Trump turned him in on the issue of the of the girls in Florida. Whether any of this is true, I have no idea.

I just know that this is a version of the story that was told by Epstein. Do you ever wonder about the Justlan, her father, the Israel arms stuff? Who is this that we're talking about? We're talking about Justlan Maxwell. Oh, Galane. Galane, yeah, sorry, Galane, yeah. I don't know. I think that, and this is at least part speculation, that Epstein had an analysis,

had an involvement with Robert Maxwell's money, the money that he was trying to hide when he was exposed for that immense pension fraud. Yeah, and that some of that is his continued relationship with her related to that. Yeah, I think it began then, and yes, and I think that Epstein had money from her father. Do you see any of these members of Trump world ever going to jail? You know, I don't know. I mean, obviously there are prosecutors who are trying to do this and who could make their careers. If they manage that, I don't know. I mean, I see the indictments in New York as kind of surprisingly weak. I mean, I hear that, or I read that maybe there are other indictments coming. But that seemed, I mean, after all that to do, you know, to indict someone for getting a company car is, you know, I don't know.

One of the other things is that one of the kids or the grandchildren of the CFO got their tuition paid for at a private school in New York. Now, in Siege, I tell the story, you know, it's related to me by a guy who was Trump's sound man on The Apprentice. It's very funny. But he also got his kids' tuition paid for by. Trump at the same school. Columbia Grammar. Yeah, at the same school, which leads me to believe that they probably got a package deal. Or some kind of, or maybe he was able to write it off as a donation or something, because

Michael Cohen was the chairman of the board and Columbia Grammar. Right, exactly. So I, you know, it's, yeah, so it's, again, one of those things, what do we really have here? Is this really an effort to avoid taxes, or is this really some other scheme that they've got going? this was so interesting. Thank you so much for joining us. Jeff Merkley is the junior senator from Oregon, who sits on the committee on the committee on the budget. Talk to me about the meeting you just came out of.

The meeting was Tuesday evening, and it was a two-and-a-half-hour meeting of the budget committee to try to work out the details of launching reconciliation project. And the reconciliation bill, you know, when you describe it that way, it doesn't, well, what's that? It sounds like just some, I don't know, arcane Senate procedure. But what it represents is an effort to do a massive number of things in a single bill, the likes of which hasn't been seen on Capitol Hill in ages. We're talking about a massive investment in climate. We're talking about two years funded of preschool for children and free community.

college. We're talking about a child tax credit that will lift half of America's children out of poverty and just tremendous help. It'll be the biggest tax break for low income and middle class Americans ever in the history of our country, a huge investment in housing and so forth. So just so many things. And we had to reach agreement on how big this package would be and how it would be structured in order to start the process. It is the beginning of a very difficult journey. Reconciliation bill will go through a massive, painful floor process called Voterrama. There will probably be 100 amendments voted on.

Then it has to be dealt with by committees and with all the details hashed out in every area. And then we have to come back together and actually have another Voterrama to pass the bill. But if we couldn't get agreement to launch the process, none of this would be possible. Now the vision is there. It's on the horizon, but the vision is there. Do you think it's going to be enough for climate? It's never enough for climate. But it will be by far and away the most dramatic investment, probably any industrial nation,

has made to pivot to renewable energy. When I say it's not enough, right now across the country, we're seeing all kinds of brutal impacts of climate change. My home state on fire. Last couple days, dozens of homes have burned. Last year, six cities in my state burned to the ground. The snowpack is so diminished. The irrigators are facing the fourth year of drought,

acidification of the ocean affecting our shellfish. I just talked to the head of the World Bank today to try to get the World Bank to stop funding fossil fuel projects. Just close the door on that. think it'll work? Well, you know, they have gone a long ways. The World Bank did quit funding coal projects, and they did quit funding drilling projects two years ago, but they're still holding the door open to do natural gas projects. It's ridiculous. And it's like, that means more methane in the atmosphere for the next 30 to 60 years and shouldn't be done. And it's not just, hey, I'm picking on the World Bank at this moment. Right. But I'm sure you saw that Exxon video

of the Exxon lobbyists talking about how they have people in their pockets. Yes, and they are incredibly, incredibly powerful. That video had to do with having the Republican Senate leadership in their pocket. Yes. I always feel like the big problem with Democrats, and I always say this to every senator, and I think they're really sick of it. Of course, we only have Democratic senators

because Republican senators would never come on this podcast. But I would say, like, the problem is I feel like fundamentally, because Democrats are the good guys, they feel like they don't have to focus on messaging. Well, that's a fair point. And the ACAs, the Affordable Care Act, is a really good example of that. We had this beautiful set of principles

that virtually everybody in America supported across the political spectrum. And we couldn't explain it to people. Meanwhile, the Republicans had a brief from a communications expert that said, just call it a government, takeover. And they did day and night. And people that was a government takeover instead of a health care bill of rights. And I went to my caucus repeatedly and said, call it a health care bill

of rights. That's the way I talk about it in rural Oregon. And I go through the list and people vote in rural Oregon saying, yeah, each one of those we like. They hate the bill, but they like each one of the elements in it. And that will be a challenge with this reconciliation bill because this bill has so much in it. We've got to have some way to boil it down to investments. in family infrastructure and climate, something like that. And, you know, it's interesting because you do see that Democrats passed this stimulus, and it was very, it was so popular Republicans pretended they voted for it. That's right.

No, that's so true. The rescue plan that has put checks in people's pockets and supported the paycheck protection program, small businesses, really rebuilt the economy. And we were, our economy was in completely collapsed. this time a year ago. And we were losing millions of jobs a month and people had no idea where it would end. Is this launching the next Great Depression? And by investing from the bottom up, from small business up, from the unemployed individual, from checks in people's pockets, from shots in their arms, the economy has rebounded in an extraordinary way. Republicans did a $2 trillion

dollar bill that I call the biggest bank heist in history because it was basically rating the national treasury for tax reductions for the richest Americans and the biggest corporations. And Arctic drilling. And that. For something that the, you know, that just serves Americans so well. Today we learned that what we thought was the coup was actually probably a coup and that we got very lucky that this didn't happen. How can Trump and no one in Trump world ever be held responsible at all? Like, doesn't the Biden DOJ need to do more? Well, boy, that's not my specialty. But aren't you scared of like what you could,

of what's coming down the pipe? I mean, won't sooner or later. I mean, there's another election in 22. Republicans haven't like, they have no remorse, if anything. They're more emboldened than ever. You know, I believe in the mantra run, govern run. Run on the things you believe in that will make the world a better place. If you get elected, do them and then run on having done them. And I feel that's what we're in the middle of right now. And it's why we have to complete this bill that takes on all these key things from climate to child care and college. And meanwhile, we've got to come back and pass S1, the For the People Act, to take on the corrupt gerrymandered voter suppression and dark money. And if we do that, we can go into those next elections with our heads held high and say,

despite McConnell's obstruction, we delivered for America on the fundamental rights of America, the integrity of our elections, the whole vision of government of Biden for the people, and we use that power to do great things for families who have been so neglected over the last four decades as the rich sword and the middle class America struggled. So let's talk about that voting rights bill, because in order to pass that, you either need a filibuster cut out or you need Mansion and cinema to vote to overturn the filibuster. I mean, how do you pass that? Yeah, so first we have to have a bill that 50 people buy into.

And Mansion's been very helpful in getting us that basic framework in supporting elements in all four of the key areas, which are end gerrymandering, shine a light on the dark money, stop many of the strategies, many of them as we possibly. can that are designed to obstruct the ballot box for targeted groups of Americans and enact much improved ethics bills. So I think we can get to that bill that 50 of us agree on. I think we're close to that. Then we have to say, well, McConnell can prevent us from closing debate, and he can prevent us from closing debate, even on getting it to the floor of the Senate. That's outrageous. The whole idea that we spend our time debating whether to debate when time is so precious for all the work the Senate has to get done. It just has to go. We've just got to get rid of the filibuster on debating whether to debate. Then comes the floor, and there is some value in this

perspective that the Senate shouldn't be the House. And when people say that, what they mean is, the majority shouldn't be able to run over the minority like they don't exist. Like there's value in listening to everyone. And that is, that's the most positive element of the filibuster, which really for eight decades, all it did was stop civil rights bills. So it didn't really serve that high, elevated idea of listening to everyone. What it really did was obstruct political power for black American and black citizens, and it was evil. But if you want to frame it in the best way, the minority can slow down the process enough to be heard,

enough to put amendments forward that they believe in, and enough to be work to be able to try to strike a compromise. But what we have right now is a no-show, no effort obstruction that is used to paralyze the place as a political strategy, a power political strategy of Mitch McConnell. It's not being used to try to be heard, to try to do amendments, to try to work out of compromise, none of those positive things. So can we reform it to build that social contract I've just described? You can't run over the minority fast, but ultimately the minority can't stop you from.

completing a bill. And so that's the reform side of it. That's one path. A carve-out is another, a carve-out based on constitutional values. When constitutional rights are being obstructed, you create a carve-out. The reconciliation that I've just been talking about was initially a carve-out to be able to reduce the deficit. Then the Republicans changed it to a carve-out to be able to increase the deficit by doing tax cuts for the rich and powerful, which opened the door for us to do the work we're trying to do for ordinary Americans who are struggling. So carve out's a second possibility. There's another possibility, the Harkin strategy, which is kind of straightforward every week that passes, the votes that are required to close debate drops. So the minority

can slow things down, but ultimately they can't obstruct. So it achieves that goal. We have to get 50 of us in a room and agree on one of these strategies and get it done. And do you think that there's appetite for that? I mean, do you think you can get mansion and cinema to go along with that? There is a huge appetite for it because we took an oath to the Constitution, and we see it being trampled. The Constitution calls on us to set the terms and conditions as standards across the country, and for good reason, because you may live in Oregon,

but your sense of fair representation depends on having fair elections in every other state, not just in Oregon. So setting basic national standards was something that was put explicitly into Article 1 of the Constitution or responsibility that we have in the Senate. Our Republican friends have decided to ignore that responsibility because it's all about power. And they want, they like the idea. And when I say this, I don't mean Republican citizens because you poll people and across the country, they want us to take on these corrupt practices in every party.

But we're talking about the Republican power structure driven by the Koch brothers and big banks and so on and so forth, big drug companies that they want government by and for the powerful, bottom line. Republicans stole at least two Supreme Court seats in the last administration. Don't you think Biden should consider expanding the courts? I think it would be extremely difficult. This is not the moment while we're. immersed in trying to pass a reconciliation bill or voting rights. I think there is a very good plan out there for basically rotating term limits of some 18 years so that every president in a four-year term gets a certain number of nominations. So I think it can be much improved. There's no question

our court system has been taken over by corporatists. The whole strategy set up more than 30 years ago by the Federal Society was about controlling the courts for the powerful. And they funded it massively. I'm interviewing one nominee for a judgeship. I said, why did you join the Federalist Society? She said, well, they offered free dinners in law school. And I said, well, then you rejoined them a couple of years. And she said, oh, just a valuable network.

Well, that valuable network is all about power for the powerful. And so we see their decisions one time after another, basically corporations over consumers, corporations over the environment, corporations over the ability of workers to unionize, so on and so forth. So it's a problem. It's not the moment right now for the administration put its effort into that. Thank you so much. There's so much to be done. Thank you, Senator. You're welcome. Great to be with you. Thank you. Please come back. What's crazier than QAnon, more outlandish than Pizza Gate, and scarier than a Mexican getaway with Ted Cruz?

The answer is what the American right wing has planned next. Be one of the first to listen to Fever Dreams, the new podcast from The Daily Beast, tracking the conspiracy slingers, orange acolytes, and straight-up grifters pushing to retake power. Every Wednesday hosts Swin Subisang and Will Summer, checking in on the movement of the radical right. Head to the DailyBeast.com

slash podcasts or your favorite podcast player to catch the first episode and get subscribed. That's Fever Dreams, which you can subscribe to wherever you get your podcasts. Ready to Rock! I was born ready. That's right. I was actually born in Stanford, Connecticut, but that's kind of right. I feel like that's not ready to rock town. I feel like that's ready to go to bed by 9 p.m. town.

Today, on our one segment, we will discuss the people who bring us ire. Do they bring us ire? Do they cause us ire? The inspire ire. They inspire ire. So my fuck that guy today is a person who worked for Donald J. Trump during the insurrection. And now, months and months and months and months and months and months and months and months and months later during the Biden presidency, has told the Washington Post writers in this new Trump book, that in fact

that he was very worried that Trump was going to pull off a coup. His name, General Mark Millie, his job

trying to not look like an asshole now months and months after the real crisis. Think if Mark Millie had said in January when all of us

were like, it seems like there's going to be a coup, are we a little worried about a coup? Think if Mark Millie had come out and said,

I just want to talk this through for a minute and said, you know, this guy's really crazy. It looks like he doesn't want to leave. I'm concerned about a coup. He could have resigned and he could have said this and he could have gone out to the media. And if he had done that, think of all the hardship we would have avoided. There would have been no insurrection. There would have been no question of Trump sowing dissent and causing his supporters to no longer believe in democracy. Like, if one person had done something brave at any point during this presidency of Trump, there would have been a change. But because no one ever fucking did anything brave ever, nothing changed.

And now we have an entire section of the Republican Party, a large section of it, in fact, most of it, that don't believe in democracy. Because they believe that this election was stolen from Donald J. Trump, an orange reality television host, which, we all know it wasn't. So I ask you if you that this, if Mark Millie had done the right thing, just think of how different everything would be. So for that, fuck you, Mark Millie. Well put. So Biden plays right off of this and talks about the same time period, which I hate to do it, but former guy president Donald J. Trump, he wanted to fly the flag at half-mast for Ashley Babette, one of the insurrectionists. As per reporting from my dear friends Will Sumer and Aswood Subisang, she tweeted things like that January 6 would mark the storm along the way today

for the Q and non-supporters imagined Trump would arrest or execute as political enemies. Nothing will stop us. They can try and try and try, but the storm is here and is descending upon D.C. in less than 24 hours. You're supposed to honor people that are an example of good in this country when you fly the flag at half-mast. As always, Donald J. Trump encourages all the worst instincts that happen in America today. And I really could not be more disgusted with this news. Yep, fuck them. On that note, we'll wrap this episode of the new abnormal from The Daily Beast.

In future episodes, we'll be talking to smart folks from the Daily Beast and beyond from media, culture, politics, and science. will help us understand what's happening to our country and the world. We hope you'll subscribe to us on your favorite podcast app and share the show on social media. Thanks so much for listening and we'll see you again on the next episode. Want more great listens? Check out our comedy podcast, The Last Laugh, and our star-studied The Daily Beast podcast at the Daily Beast.com slash podcasts.

If you enjoyed this episode, consider becoming a Daily Beast subscriber. Subscribing is the best way to feed the beast and support all of your podcasts as we cover what might become the darkest timeline. Head to the DailyBeast.com slash membership slash podcast and sign up today.