The Daily Beast Podcast - There’s One Looming Reason Why Trump Fired Waltz Not Hegseth

Episode Date: May 2, 2025

On this episode of The New Abnormal, hosts Andy Levy and Danielle Moodie theorize why Trump fired National Security Adviser Mike Waltz over Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth following several Signalgates. Plus, David Sirota, founder and editor-in-chief of The Lever, breaks down Trump’s chaotic first 100 days. Then, Media Matters for America’s senior fellow Matt Gertz examines MAGA’s media spinning of collapsing poll numbers. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Hi, I'm Andy Levy, former Fox News and CNN-HLN guy, and current cable news conscientious objector. I'm a former libertarian who now sits pretty comfortably on the left. Hi, I'm Danielle Moody, former educator and recovering lobbyist. But today, I'm an unapologetic, woke commentator on America's threats to democracy. And I'm producer Jesse Cannon, and I'm here to make sure things don't go too far off the rails. We're here to have fun, smart conversations with some of the most knowledgeable and entertaining people in politics, media, and beyond. Our goal is to try and make sense of our current crazy world, our new abnormal, and hopefully even make you laugh through the tears. What an excellent show we have for you today.

David Sorota, the founder and editor-in-chief of the lever, joins us to break down Trump's chaotic first 100 days and explain why the economic damage is fueling rising public frustration. Then we'll talk to Media Matters for America's senior fellow Matt Gertz about how MAGA Media is spinning Trump's collapsing poll numbers despite all evidence to the contrary. But first, let's have some fun. Well, we have some news. As it seems, Mike Waltz has left the chat. Mike Waltz, Trump's national security advisor, is out, as well as his deputy, is also out. What I find fascinating here about this firing is that, first off, he was traveling with Donald Trump on Air Force One. I guess he only got a one-way ticket because he got on a plane, right?

And then, like, the next leg he was not. So I'm like, did you exit midair? Like, what happened? Also, if you knew that you were going to fire this man, why was he on Air Force One to begin with? I don't know why I'm trying to make sense and nonsense. But I find it amazing, Andy, that it's waltz that's out as opposed to Pete Hegsef, who has now, it has been confirmed, has had multiple signal chats with no one with clearance,

including his wife, his private attorney, his brother-in-law, got signal put in on on a private computer so that he could use it, all of which was not approved by the Pentagon because they sent out a special notice two weeks before Whiskey Leaks, aka Signalgate, saying that signal was not secure. So am I the only one that's shocked that Waltz is out and not Hegsa? I don't know if you're the only one. I think it's, look, Walsh was the one that added Jeffrey Goldberg to that chat. So that was his screw up. So there is that. I mean, I do think that's part of it. But I also think that Waltz was supposed to be sort of, he was one of those so-called adults in the room, the same way Marco Rubio was supposed to be that too. How's that working out?

But the point is that Waltz is not necessarily perfectly aligned with a lot of MAGA and a lot of the rest of the people in the Trump administration when it comes to foreign policy. He's considered more hawkish. and now that Trump is, or not now, because he's been doing it for a while, but, you know, with Trump listening to people like Laura Lumer and firing people because she doesn't like them, I am fairly certain that Mike Waltz is one of the people that Laura Lumer doesn't like. I guess what I would say, Danielle, is I don't think it's surprising that Waltz is gone, but that doesn't negate the fact that you're absolutely right that Higgs says should be gone too. But I do wonder how much of this is actually sort of policy-based or philosophy-based as much as it is the royal screwer up with the signal chat? I mean, it's been how many years? 87. And pretty sure ain't not a decision come out of Trump camp that is policy-based about firing

anybody. It's like, I like you today. Fuck you tomorrow. That's the vibe there. Well, the thing that is seemingly, I guess it's not even concerning. I guess it's not shocking. but the ABC interview that Donald Trump did with Terry Moran, where he was told on air that an image of Kilmar Obrigo Garcia, as folks know, who is the man that had a protected status not to be removed to

El Salvador, who then Senator Chris Van Holland went to El Salvador at first was denied access to him and then met with him, which was a big relief to many people who had assumed the worst to get proof of life. He's presented with a photoshopped version of Kilmar-Brigo Garcia's knuckles with a MS-13 tattoo, which is apparently it's, you know, brown skin and tattoos. That's what gets you kidnapped from the United States and thrown into an El Salvadorian gulag. he's presented with the fact that it's Photoshopped and he don't care. It didn't phase him. Yeah.

Look, it didn't phase him at all. And, you know, his response to Terry Moran was to, I don't want to say yell at Terry Moran because he didn't raise his voice, but he basically was like, you know, he did the thing where he belittles them and tries to make it seem like he's doing them a big favor. And he said things like, I'd never heard of you before this. You know, we're giving you your big chance here. Don't, you know, you don't blow it, et cetera, et cetera. The funny thing to me is, so Abrago Garcia does have knuckle tats.

They do not say MS-13. They're symbols that the Trump administration is trying to claim stand for MS-13. The people who actually study these things, experts on MS-13 and stuff like that, said that the iconography of the four tattoos that Abrago-Garcia has, they've never seen those before. They have absolutely nothing to do with MS-13. Somebody completely made that up. So this is wrong on so many levels.

It's wrong on the fact that Trump really did seem to think that the Photoshopped part where it said MS-13 above each knuckle tat, which was supposed to be a way of telling people, oh, this is how you decode what these tattoos are. But Trump seems to think that that wasn't photoshopped or that wasn't added in as a sort of decoder. But then on top of that, even again, this claim that they keep making, I saw that, you know, in trying to defend Trump on Fox News, people were saying, no, Trump was just saying that the tattoos themselves represent MS-13. And they absolutely don't. This is a lie. I don't know what other word to use for it. Again, when MS-13 experts and people who deal with this kind of iconography and symbolism and talk about what these things means, and what various gang signs and gang tattoos mean.

When they say they've never seen this before, that's a pretty good bet that somebody's lying to you in the administration. And that's exactly what's happening here. So you're like, oh, with the knuckles and folks are lying. But this is what they do. I also believe that when they're flattering Trump, kissing his ass like they did in the cabinet meeting, I wonder how many people in that room believe anything that comes out of their

house. The way in which that cabinet meeting with all of the red Maga hats, Elon Musk wearing two Maga hats, because that's how Maga fide he is and how much of a fucking tool he is, are sitting around and just like patting Donald Trump on the back, just it's offensive and disgusting. And I don't know what they're patting each other on the back for because I'm not quite sure what, if anything, they've accomplished. And then you had RFK Jr. Go off on an entire... It's like we call everything

that they do deranged, but it was like, what are you talking about? It's just like fetus debris and bats and Andy, I don't... Yeah, I mean, deranged is the perfect word for it, but it's also just the utter sycophancy. Rolling Stone put together some of the quotes.

Lee Zeldin, who is the EPA administrator. This is the 100th day of the most consequential historical first hundred days in the history of this country. Doug Bergam, you're not just courageous, you're actually fearless. Pam Bondi going on and on and on. And then eventually claiming that Trump's work at the border seizing fentanyl or fentanyl, as she likes to call it. It would be nice, by the way, if you knew the actual names of the drugs you're claiming to stop from coming here. But she claims that Trump has saved 258 million lives. Think about that first thing. That means that she is

saying that if Donald Trump hadn't been elected in November, 75% of America would be dead right now. You know that math is not my strong suit. Mine either. But I'm like, you're supposed to be 330 million plus Americans in the country. And she's saying 258 million of them were saved from fentanyl. When the number is so bad, Danielle, that both of us who are not math people are like, that can't be right. you know that's a big lie.

But it is unbelievable just watching this, just the loser energy. And like you said, Elon Musk with the two hats, just the biggest losers in the world. And these are the people running the country now. Yeah. That, I mean, look, I don't love to name. I mean, yes, I do actually. I name Colvin, it's necessary. But like, they are losers.

They just seem as if they are a group of people who were, laughed at, who were, you know, dismissed and now they're all in a room together, patting each other on the back for things that they haven't accomplished or done or understand. I mean, it's one thing to not know the drugs that you're supposed to be ridding the streets of. The other, the education secretary doesn't know the difference between AI and A1, the steak sauce. You have RFK Jr. going off on deranged tangents about shit that he doesn't know because he's in charge of our health, but reminding everyone, he's not even a pretend doctor, like Dr. Seuss knows more. It is a roundup of the island of misfit toys, but I will refer to them as the island of deranged

toys. That is what they are. It's like Donald Trump found everyone that was broken and dumb and said, put him in my cabinet. Yeah, I mean, don't even get me started on RFK. He's out there talking about how the MMR vaccine, the measles, mumps and rebella vaccine, has aborted fetus debris in it. Absolutely not true. Not even close to true.

Like it's one of those things where it's like, I don't even know why you think that's true. That's just completely made up. And his other big thing is he's now telling people to do their own research on vaccines. Like is he sending them fucking links? Because the research that he does is full of shit. Well, that and you know what?

You're running the agency that you're supposed to be doing the research for us. But he is, Andy. That's where he came up with fetus debris. I know. He's right to say, I guess, actually, that people should do their own research because otherwise we get that shit from it, literal, that shit from him. But you are the head of health and human services. You and the CDC, like we, our tax dollars are supposed to be paying you to do the research for us. Those organizations are supposed to be staffed with the experts who do the research for us.

And they mostly have been throughout our history. It's just unbelievable that their response to everything is do your own research. That is literally the government salary that you are getting. That is what you are supposed to be doing. I need to read this quote that he apparently gave at a News Nation town hall because I just like this is this is where we are. He said that there are populations like the Mennonites in Texas who are most afflicted. And I'm assuming what he's talking about is with measles, with outbreak right now. And they have religious objections.

to the vaccination because the MMR vaccine contains a lot of, as you said, quote, aborted fetuses, debris, and DNA particles. Then he says this. So they don't want to take it. We ought to be able to take care of those populations when they get sick. What? The way that you take care of populations so that they don't get sick is that you give them a fucking vaccine.

What are we supposed to give them when they get sick with measles that is only cured with a vaccine. Theriflu? Nyquil? Robitussin? Like, what, what's the alternative here? Ultraviolet light? Maybe some bleach. Yeah, or some bleach? Yeah. Maybe there's another horse medicine that works on measles. I don't know. Or maybe, you know, because he thinks that heroin works on everything. Maybe that's the shock that they'll take. Oh, God. And I mean, the derangement continues. I was just thinking they like to say that people like you and I, Danielle, have Trump derangement syndrome. The real Trump Durangerin's syndrome is coming from inside the House, inside the White House. It's the people around Donald Trump, and it's Donald Trump himself. And he had a town hall a couple nights ago. He was there

with Bill O'Reilly, Stephen A. Smith. Chris Cuomo. Of course, Chris Cuomo. Stephen A. Smith asked him a question about Harvard, and he responded by talking about Harlem and saying, I got a very high black vote and then he said, we had riots in Harlem. And frankly, if you look what's gone on and people from Harlem went up and they protested Stephen and they protested very strongly against Harvard. They happened to be on my side. You know, I got a very high black vote. You know that very, very high black vote. It was a very great compliment. I, up until a couple days ago, lived in Harlem. I do not remember seeing any protests about Harvard one way or the other, let alone on Trump's side. The shit that just gets made up. And you start.

off the show, Danielle, talking about whether the people who sit around in those cabinet meetings, whether they believe the crap that they say. Yeah, I think that's an open question. I think most, a lot of them don't and they're just sucking up. I think Trump is so far gone that he believes everything he says is true. Like, I think he could pass a lie detector test very, very easily. Yeah. With saying things like they protested in Harlem against Harvard, because I think his brain is just that cooked. Like, so here's the thing, because there were so many social media posts. where people were like that he mixed up Harvard and Harlem to completely different places. And what I can imagine, because he called in to this town hall, he was not there in person,

right? And he was not on video. He was on the phone. So what I imagine is that Stephen A. Smith, and I'm just imagining that this happens, is that Stephen A. Smith says, you know, what, you know, about what he's doing, weaponizing, withholding federal aid from Harvard, Stephen A. Smith, he's like, oh, he's black. What is he going to be asking me questions about Harvard? So he must be talking about Harlem. And then somebody in aid maybe said, no, he said Harvard. And then he was just like, Harvard, Harlem. Yeah, they're protesting. It was wild. And black people love me, Stephen. You know that. Like, that's how I think that that went. And I don't think I'm that far off. No, I think you're 100% accurate. I absolutely believe this. A good way that Trump, you know, in the future, if, if he's, you know, if he's, you know, He or anyone else needs to remember the difference. I lived in Harlem.

I would never go to Harvard. That's good. That's very good. I think that he's cooked. I really do. I think that between the sleeping at the Pope's funeral, between the conflating of one institution, one literal geographical place,

and everybody around him is just like, I guarantee you he got off of that call for the town hall. And anybody, any aides that were in that room said, that was great boss. You did a great job, boss. Like, how do you trust anybody who doesn't tell you the truth or want anybody around you to give you any real feedback? And they just like, blow smoke up his ass and he's like, I'm amazing. Yeah.

But I mean, that's the, you know, that's the classic narcissist personality trait where they, they just want to be flattered and told that they're always right and all that stuff. I mean, let's be honest, Trump is a figurehead. He's not in rooms making policy decisions or anything like that. In the classic sort of authoritarian playbook, he's a figurehead. They trot him out. I said this early on into this term. You know, they send him to the Super Bowl.

They send him to the Daytona 500. Occasionally, they hold a televised cabinet meeting. But for the most part, he is not the power anymore. It's the people around him, whether it's Elon Musk, whether it's Stephen Miller. But they are the people running the country right now. I mean, Donald Trump is not running the country. I firmly believe that. I mean, we'll buy the fucking numbers.

Nobody's running the country right now because it's in the shitter. Running it into the ground is what I meant. Well, you know, well, maybe he'll leave this job and go on to his next one as Pope. I guess time will tell because the conclave comes next. So, before we sign off, Andy and I have some bittersweet news to share with all of you. Sunday is going to be our very last show together. the new abnormal. We've had a blast being a part of this show over the last few years, and we are excited to announce our next project together. Yeah, I mean, first I want to give a, you know,

a heartfelt thank you to all our fantastic listeners and guests that we've had the pleasure of speaking with on the show. And yeah, we are launching a brand new podcast. It's going to be called As the World Churns, and it'll be available wherever you get your podcasts. And, as a sort of added bonus, at least in the case of Danielle, you will get to see our faces. Because we are going to be on YouTube. So go to YouTube, search for As the World Churns. We're going to launch next week. And if you want to stick with audio, again, in my case, I can't fault you for doing that.

You can continue to get us on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, anywhere else, overcast, anywhere else you get your podcasts. Just do a search for As the World Churns. And yeah, we hope to. see you there. Yes, friends, it is going to be a brand new chapter for Andy and I, and we're super excited about launching on YouTube and continuing with the audio podcast. So do follow us as the world churns, and you can follow us individually on Blue Sky, which is where you will find me at Danielle Moody.bsk-y dot social. And then Danielle Moody on Instagram, YouTube, and TikTok. And you can find me on Blue Sky at Andy Levy.com. Because I've got a

nice, easy custom handle over there. Wow. And we're also going to be launching the As the World churns socials, socials, across all social media platforms, pretty much. So look for us there, too. We can't wait to see you. And I also want to say, please stay tuned to this feed for more programming from The Daily Beast as we have something brand new coming up for you starting on Tuesday. Folks, I am very happy to welcome to the new Abnormal, the founder and editor-in-chief of The Lever, a reader-supported investigative news outlet, you know it, because we've had countless of their brilliant reporters on this program. David Sorota is also an Academy Award nominated screenplay writer for one of my favorites, Netflix's Don't Look Up, which pretty much was a documentary back in 2022.

David, thank you so much. Let's talk about it, because Donald Trump has just surpassed his first 100 days. As we know in media, it's a benchmark of when a president is supposed to have their highest approval rating. They are still flying high on their election win. And this is when they have most of the goodwill from voters still bestowed upon them. But if you look at Donald Trump's approval ratings, which are depending on what poll you look at around 39%. You look at the covers of major outlets in the way that the New Yorker put Lady Liberty in prison, the economists put the bald eagle basically broken, battered, and in bandages.

The reporting on the first 100 days is not great for Donald Trump in this administration. What have been your thoughts? Well, it's not just the reporting. It's the actual track record. I mean, we're talking right now just a day or so after the economic report found that the economic growth had actually contracted for the first time in three years, likely driven by Trump's attempt to launch a trade war with China. The economic contraction can really be blamed almost singularly on Donald Trump. This is not some hangover from the Biden administration's

policies. Donald Trump came in and was a shock to the system, sort of alienating our trading partners. And I should be clear, I think our trade policies do certainly need to change. I think they were starting to change in a constructive way under the Biden administration. I think what Donald Trump has done with tariffs has been sort of a blunt force, erratic shock to the system that has been generally bad for everybody. And I think so and then in the polls, the polls reflect that. The polls reflect the people that are not happy with what's going on. They do not have a lot of confidence in the Trump administration on when it comes to the economy. So I think that we're in a first hundred days that I think is fair to say is extremely consequential, right? The first hundred days was a benchmark set out by

FDR, you know, a whirlwind of action. And I do think there has been a whirlwind of action. The problem is that the actions have created a lot of chaos and damage. They have not put us on a better path. There's not really any economic indicator at all to suggest things are moving in a better direction than when Trump first got into office. You know, and of course, his first responses were to take that economic report, say, like you articulated at the time, top that, oh, he said this was a hangover from Joe Biden. And as a matter of fact, the second quarter is also going to be a hangover from Joe Biden. That's a pretty long hangover if I've ever seen one. It's such nonsense because maybe you could make that argument if you were Donald

Trump and you had come in and you had sort of a light touch on economic policy. Right. You just put your bill into Congress. It hasn't passed yet. You're starting trade negotiations, conversations, et cetera, et cetera. Had that been what Trump had done, maybe? he could argue, look, I haven't even really touched the steering wheel yet. So what's going on is just a hangover from the direction we were already going in. But that's not what's happened. Like everybody has seen with their own eyes that Donald Trump got into the cockpit and radically, to use the metaphor, you know, steered the plane in a much different direction. We're now living through the consequences of that. Right. And the fact is, is that he actually inherited an economy that was, as

many had said the envy of the world coming out of COVID that was strong. We had jobs numbers that were high, that we had growth that was on track. And Donald Trump, in the first 100 days, with what I refer to as market manipulation, has been able to wipe out an entire year of gains, as some have stated, in 100 days. And so when you have some of the biggest retailers went into the White House last week, Call Donald Trump out. You had Target, Walmart, Home Depot CEOs say, if you don't stop or rescind these tariffs, we're going to have empty shelves. Donald Trump started to have a different tune and say, oh, well, our conversations with China are going well. And the Chinese said, we're not talking to you at all, so we have no idea what you're talking about.

So what do you make of Donald Trump's pivot following that meeting and whether or not you think that these CEOs or any CEOs for that matter? have any sway with Trump outside of what he's concocted in his own mind? Well, I think what we're seeing is that Trump's rhetoric is now meeting reality. And it's sort of a game of chicken between what he says he wants to do and how what he wants to do will actually affect the real world. I mean, I think Donald Trump has a compelling argument and has made a compelling argument about the fact that, for instance, our trade policies in the NAFTA, China free trade era, Our trade policies have incentivized corporations to offshore American factories, American production and American jobs, to other countries, putting American workers in an unwinnable competition with workers that make very low wages in countries that have very few environmental standards.

All of that is true, and all of that argues for we need a different trade policy. It does not argue for in the first 90 days of a presidency, a president unilaterally with no real thought or precision, throwing up blanket tariffs that are not part of a larger industrial policy, and then using exemptions to reward powerful political donors, political boosters who were at his inauguration, right? You saw exemptions for this or that electronics and negotiations with various folks for tariff exemptions. Point being, not a consistent policy with a vision for how that's going to rebuild American manufacturing. And so I think his pivot, if it is a pivot, if it ends up actually being a policy pivot, is him realizing at some level in his brain, hey, this is causing so much chaos and damage that it is becoming politically damaging to me. And I look at it and I wonder, how is there not anybody in the White House, clearly with any influence over the president, to say, hey, if you want to change our trade policy, there's a way to do it that is a gradual way, a well-thought-out way, and a way that can reduce the amount of chaos that we're seeing.

But I think then that raises the question, well, what is Trump's real goal here? Is it really to bring back manufacturing and production? Or is it for him to exert further control over the economy? so that different corporations, different industries have to try to kiss his ring to get what they want. I want a tariff exemption. I want this or that tax break, et cetera, et cetera. The more control he exerts, the more everyone, I guess in theory, has to bend the need of the king. And there's an argument that that's what this is really all about, a power grab.

Right. And I think that, you know, when you listen to his Treasury Secretary, for instance, use the phrase that what Donald Trump is doing is quote unquote strategic uncertainty. I don't even know what the hell that means, but that is what the Treasury Secretary said as a way to kind of signal to the American people that there's a level of 40 chess that's being played. We can't comprehend the capacity at which Donald Trump is playing with. Is again, to your point, there is no one. There is no one that has sway over this president. But I think that the point that you made about power is it. That is the end all be all. Because if you were interested in, let's say, preserving your party or you cared or we were actually going to have

midterm elections, then the decisions that you are making now that are causing economic pain and hardship, you would think to yourself, oh, this isn't going to play well in midterms. And this is going to cost people to have to go out there and defend really bad policies when we could be right in the middle of a recession or depression. So I feel like that is exactly what this is. It is a power grab. The other issue that Donald Trump rode high into office on, and I mean, I know that it was a narrow win, but this is how he has expressed it, is immigration. And when you look at the polling with regard to how people think about his handling with immigration, he is also underwater there. What do you make of that that had also been an area where he was seen as the end all be all,

that he alone can fix it? Well, I think a lot of it has to do with the perception of chaos. I mean, Donald Trump has done the opposite of instilling a sense of stability, a sense of well-planned, well-thought-out policies. So in the economy, you've got sort of haphazard tariffs. When it comes to immigration, you have haphazard ice raids, deportation policies that seem slapped together, not well-thought-out. In a lot of cases, particularly draconian, talking about moving people to El Salvador and the like. I guess the point is that I look at the polls and I see a public that gets the sense that things are out of control. And there's a fine line between being somebody who's going to bring change to Washington, which I think a lot of people support that in theory, that the establishment, if you will, has not done a very good job on lots of policies for many years. But there's a fine line between bringing change and reform to Washington and bringing chaos to the country.

and bringing chaos to the country. And I think that the country typically hasn't been a country that enjoys or politically rewards chaos agents. And I think that we're now living through that chaos. And I think the immigration situation and the way Trump has comported himself on immigration is just another data point, another example of a set of policies that does not really look like really a set of well-thought-out policies. but again is a set of policies that represents chaos.

And that is absolutely right because that is all we have seen over the last 100 days is absolute and total chaos, right? And now you have House Republicans that just voted on a measure that is going to allow staying on the immigration for a moment, allow ICE to detain. And I'm not going to use the word deport. I'm going to say what it is. Kidnap U.S. citizens. There was an amendment that was put through by Representative Pramila Gaiapal to, state clearly that ICE has no jurisdiction to unlawfully detain and to deport U.S. citizens, and House GOP voted that measure down. And so what do you make of this? And that just to me,

because it conjures the conversation that we saw in the Oval Office between the president of El Salvador and Donald Trump, where he told Buckelly, well, we need five more Seacots because we're going after homegrown next. As it relates to Congress, I think you see a party that's unwilling to exert its own congressional prerogatives. It is Donald Trump's party. What is about to be very interesting is whether that paradigm remains, even as Trump's policies and Trump himself becomes less and less popular. You've seen a move in the Senate, for instance, where some Senate Republicans are trying to limit the power of the president to unilaterally in the way Trump has done. use emergency powers to impose these tariffs. You may see a set of negotiations in the Congress

about Trump's proposed or potential Medicaid cuts, tax cuts. Is there going to be a millionaire tax increase? There's been some discussion of that among Republicans. When it comes to immigration, will you see some Republicans buck the president? It's a big question. Right now, not yet, but I think as Trump's approval ratings go down and people's confidence in his his administration decreases. A lot of Republicans are going to face a really difficult set of questions, especially, by the way, intensifying those questions will be, as you allude to, the midterm elections. So I don't think the story of Congress has been written just yet. I don't necessarily think Congress is just going to remain a complete rubber stamp. I mean, I guess I'd put it

this way. We've seen the Congress be a Trump rubber, the Republican Congress be a Trump rubber stamp up until this point. But I haven't seen members of the Republican Party up until very recently start saying what they've been saying recently, which is, it looks like some micro-fissures in the Republican Party where you're going to have voices who have to go home and try to get reelected defending the wildly unpopular policies of the president. And I think that's a potential place we may see some cracks. Where do you see us going from here, David? We've now passed this benchmark, rallies and protests continue to happen on a regular basis and continue to grow. And Rachel Maddow said on her program the other night that what she sees is that Donald Trump is losing

and the American people are winning. What is your take? Boy, I wish I was that optimistic. I know, so do I. I would put it this way. I think we're definitely in a pitched battle for the future. I think Trump has shown no sign of relenting. He doesn't seem to be politically or electorally afraid. of what's going on. The other sort of scary dynamic is that some of the Democratic leadership seems content to essentially roll over and play dead and let Trump sort of ruin himself, which I don't think is a particularly good political strategy. I mean, I can see the argument for that. Hey, he's ruining himself. Let him ruin himself. I don't agree with that strategy. I understand where the argument comes from just purely on the sort of electoral argument. I think it's kind of

immoral. We need an actual opposition party that isn't just standing back and letting the country burn. I'd like to see Democrats do a lot better job of more vigorously trying to gum up the works and stop things. And I think ultimately the Democrats will feel compelled to do that if there continues to be these polling numbers that show mass discontent. And if there continues to be people out in the streets protesting and putting pressure on the opposition party to really be a true opposition party. I guess that's a long way of saying, if I'm optimistic about anything, it's that more and more people realize what's going on. That should translate to more and more pressure on the opposition party to be a real opposition. And a real opposition party still does have levers of power

to use to try to reduce the harm that Donald Trump is doing. and ultimately reduce his power to do that harm. Well, David, we will have to leave it there today. Really appreciate you making the time for the new abnormal and the incredible work that you all do over at the lever. Folks, if you have not checked out the lever, you absolutely should. It is essential news. Really appreciate you.

Thank you. Thanks so much for having me. With convicted felon Donald Trump's approval ratings, sinking like the Andrea Doria, we here at New Abnormal HQ, were wondering how conservative media that's in the tank for him, i.e. 99.99% of it, was handling this. Providentially, senior fellow at Media Matters for America, Matt Gertz, wrote a piece called Five Ways Maga Media are spinning Trump's poll collapse, and he's here now to tell us. Matt,

thanks so much for joining us. Thanks for having me. Now, Matt, there will, of course, be haters and losers who say there's no way to spin approval ratings, the numbers are the numbers. But it sounds like you're here to tell them they're wrong. Oh, absolutely. I mean, the reality is that Donald Trump's presidency is soaring. It is soaring off into orbit somewhere and could not be going better. And so anyone who says otherwise is just lying. This is why we have a space force to accompany the approval ratings. All right. So what's the first way that MAGA Media is attacking the numbers? And please, I'm begging you, do not say that it's the old standby of fake. news. It's absolutely the old standby of fake news. You son of a bitch. I'm sorry. Look, this is the

posts so the posts. Well, this was, I think, fairly, as you point out, fairly obvious that this was going to be their reaction coming out of the gate. I mean, what we're looking at here is a pretty big collapse and one that is different from Donald Trump's first term. In Donald Trump's first term, you may remember, he was facing very broad opposition very, very early, whereas this time around there was all this talk about how there had been a vibe shit. shift and NFL players who are doing the Trump dance and all of this nonsense. And so instead, we're seeing that basically collapse altogether. But Donald Trump doesn't like the idea that people might dislike him.

And so he put out a truth social post early in the week saying that these were fake polls from fake news organizations, all caps, of course. Then he had talked to his pollster, John McLaughlin, who assured him that these numbers couldn't be real. And he said that these people should be investigated for election fraud, all caps, and add in the Fox News pollster while you're at it. He's just kind of, you know, letting people at DOJ and the FBI know that he would like some federal investigations of news outlets because their pollsters have been very mean and unfair to him, like all presidents do, I guess. This was actually a argument that got a lot of play on Fox News, on Newsmax.

What we've basically been seeing is them finding pollsters willing to say that the polls can't be right. And so you had one of Trump's pollsters on Newsmax saying these are propaganda polls. You know, the media is just trying to lie to the American people. And you had Matt Tauri, another Republican pollster, saying this is just no possible way. These numbers could be real. He's not in free fall. He's had a little bit of slippage because he's doing a lot. He's breaking a lot of eggs to make.

oblet, but he's not dropping any significant way, and this is all nonsense. This is just pay no attention to the numbers that even Fox's own pollsters are coming up with that say that Trump's support is now cratering down to the low 40s, high 30s, the worst numbers of any first 100 days in the history of polling. It's all just fake. Yeah. So there's a word that's become popular over, I feel like just over the. past couple of years, a SIEA, short for a psychological operation. I am going to go ahead and assume

that that also comes into play here. Oh, yeah. So this one we saw on Steve Bannon's war room. He had the pollster that he likes to talk to, Mark Mitchell from Rasmussen reports on. And he asked, Mitchell, what's what's going on with all these polls that the media is bombarding us with? And he said it's a psychological operation. The polls all look the same. And in spite of that, there are large numbers of Google searches for Trump approval. And that's how he knows it's a si-op, that people are getting these stories shoved down their throats. So basically, people are interested in what Trump's approval is. And all the polls say that his approval is bad. And therefore, it's a conspiracy by all these media outlets to try to destroy Trump. I love how all

the polls look the same means that they're a sciop and not that they're all correct. It's like, I keep adding two plus two and getting four. Who's behind this? Yeah, that is, I think, the level of discourse we're dealing with. Jesus. What about the idea that it's not fair to look at Trump's approval ratings only a hundred days into his term? We got to give the guy time, Matt. Yeah, this is a fun argument because under no circumstances, if the polls were looking good for Donald Trump, would anyone be talking about this. Right. And if a Democrat were president, no one on Fox would be looking at bad poll numbers and saying, well, it's early. We got to give him time. But, you know, this is the kind of thing that you end up doing if your job is to polish turds for a living. And Trump puts out a lot of

them. So you got Brian Kilmead on Fox and Friends saying, when you look at the hundred days of Trump, the problem with the hundred days, looking at the polls, this format, and his agenda is. not built for a hundred days. He's redoing the base. He's framing out the house. A lot of it was rotted and he's replacing it. There's not a lot of glory in framing out a house. He says the Trump's rebuilding. He's got a plan like the Sylons. And we just have to wait and look ahead to the glorious future of Trump's trade deals and passing huge tax cuts for millionaires while cutting Medicaid. My memory, Matt, it's been a while is that the Sylon's plan didn't work out all that I have to say I don't recall exactly how that last season ended.

Okay. Starbuck was an angel? Yeah, there were angels involved. I don't know. It got very weird after like season three. Maybe it'll work out better for Donald Trump. There's only one way to find out. Yeah.

The thing is, though, weren't we sort of promised that the minute he took office, everything was going to be better? Yeah, not only that. It was that the mere fact that. Donald Trump might be becoming president. Oh, yeah, I remember that. Was giving the markets a lift. It's very interesting how this works at. But when the markets go up, it's because of Donald Trump. But when the markets go down, it's because of everybody else. Right. I guess. You're right. Before he was even elected, the markets were going up.

He claimed because of the possibility that he was going to be president. And then when the markets go down when he is president, it's Joe Biden's fault. Yeah, that's basically where we are. Amazing. All right. Let me run. this one by you. The polls are good, actually. What do you think of that? Ah, yes. That is what Fox contributor Arnie Fleischer's take was. He points out, the base will not crack. The base is solid for Donald Trump. They understand he's got a lot of high hurdles because he's put high hurdles in front of himself because he's taking on consequential big issues that have been neglected for so long. But he said the average of the polls show that Trump has a 45% job approval. That is not bad.

That, by the way, is also not the average of all the polls. It was like 43% by that point, and it's going downwards, not upwards. But he says, this is mid-link, not the stuff of doom, gloom, negativity or decline. That's just the way modern politics is. Presidents are, I guess, just unpopular no matter what. And all you can do is grin and bear it. The base will not crack comment. I thought it is particularly relevant here because when you think about everyone at Fox News,

and everyone within the broader right-wing media ecosystem. The base is what they care about above all, because the base are their listeners and viewers. That's the audience that they depend on. So they all have to kind of act as if things are going great for Trump no matter what, because while what Trump is doing is alienating, like, the marginal voters that allowed him to win the election, the base is still on board.

And so that's who they're, that's who they're preaching to all the time. And so, you know, they're just, this is why when people say, like, what would make Fox News break with Donald Trump? I mean, the answer is there's basically nothing because the incentive for them will always be to support him because that's where their viewers are. It is very bad for the Republican Party, though, to be lassoed to that sort of incentive structure because they do need those marginal voters in order to win elections. And if the president is alienating those voters and his loyal propagandists are telling him to keep doing it, it makes it less likely that he'll be able to change course before we have, you know,

some sort of massive economic or financial collapse. It's almost like Fox News and places like that. They don't really care about midterm elections so much, it feels like, because you're exactly right. And look, I think Fleischer is right to a certain extent in the one thing he said about the base not cracking, because I've just reached a point where you see quotes from, like the economy could be tanking, all of bad shit could be going on, and people will find a way to blame someone other than Trump because they are so invested in him. But like you said,

nobody thinks the base is 50%. The base is whatever it is, 20, 25, maybe 30%, and that's not enough to win elections. Yeah, I would say one modification I would make is they do care somewhat about the Senate. They don't care at all about the House. Because legislating is just not a thing that Republicans do a lot of, they need the Senate in order to confirm nominees, particularly the judges, and they want the presidency because that controls, you know, all of the apparatus of government, the executive branch. I think there's a fairly likely outcome in which Republicans get crushed in the House but managed to hold onto the Senate because the map is so bad for Democrats. And that's not a terrible outcome for Fox News, if anything, they'll just

be able to kind of refocus on whatever the emerging Democratic presidential candidates are doing over the two years after that. Yeah. And to clarify on my end, when I said they don't care about the midterms, I actually, I didn't mean Republicans as much as I meant like Fox News and places like that. They are so invested in Donald Trump that they will, as you said, support him pretty much to the end, even if it costs Republicans in midterm elections. That's sort of. sort of what I meant. Yeah, I think that's absolutely right. I do find it hard to believe, though, that you would come on this show and sort of intimate that Ari Fleischer might peddle bullshit. I mean, would I say such a thing about him? The Arnie Fleischer? I don't know. He's another one,

though. This is going on a tangent, but like he was such a nothing during the Bush administration. Some people really, really like to be on TV. No, exactly. Yeah. One of the odd things that I've taken away from spending the last 18 years in these swamps is that there are just certain people who really enjoy having a spot on Sean Hannity's show once a week, talking about whatever is happening, and they'll say whatever in order to keep that. Yeah, there are also people who possibly used to be part of a show that I was part of who really enjoy being the host of their own show and we'll say anything to keep that going. But I digress. All right. So I think we covered four of these five ways that MAGA is spinning the approval

ratings. What about the idea that it doesn't matter? Just ignore it. Yeah. We're seeing that too. Maria Bardoomo, who was at one point kind of a business reporter, but now is just a fairly ridiculous Trump Schill, who was, I guess, at the White House the other day hanging out with the president, she says there's no other way to look at this first 100 days other than a huge success, which is strange because something like 60% of Americans in the poll conducted by her own outlet seem to think that it is not, in fact, a huge success. But for some of these people at Fox, there's just no other way. It's inconceivable that anyone could come to a conclusion that Trump is not bringing us into a golden age as we speak. I am curious though. Is there, I don't necessarily

mean a hard number, but is there a point at which it becomes impossible even for MAGA media to not sort of sit up and take note? You know, I keep reading about how the ports are becoming empty here in the country and we are going to see a real supply line issues starting, you know, maybe as early as this month. If people are, you know, like during the worst of COVID, if people are trying to hoard toilet paper and stuff like that, is there a point at which even the biggest sycophants have to say something or no? Is it just they're too invested? It's a good question. And I think what's been fairly obvious watching the coverage over the last month is that None of the SIGA fans are thinking about that at all.

They are all working on a sort of get through the day mentality in which they pivot back and forth between saying that tariffs are going to be incredibly successful and rebuild American manufacturing capacity and saying that it's all Trump's going to take them off. It'll be art of the deal. He's going to get all these deals. And that's what's going to make the market shoot up. Because Trump is so focused on movements in the stock market, that's also the barometer that everyone at Fox and other outlets like it are using. And that is not really, as you point out, really figuring in some of these issues that we're going to see once we start having real shortages.

I mean, if the number of containers drops by 40% from Asia, as we're seeing right now, that's going to have a massive impact on all of us, on the things we are able to buy and how much we pay for them. Donald Trump, the other day, said that instead of having $20 for your kids, you'll only have two dolls and they might cost a little more, which is in and of itself a kind of insane thing for a... billionaire to say. And what about people who, like, currently can only afford the two dolls? Do their children not get any dolls at all?

But also, it's not just dolls. It's literally everything. It is the PPE that hospitals depend on. It is building materials. It is the machines that would be used in these factories that were supposedly going to have for this glorious manufacturing future. I do think there is going to be some sort of point if we get the worst of this, if we start seeing widespread collapses of small businesses, huge layoffs. I think that it'll really depend on the extent to which the audiences of some of these shows start rebelling against them.

We have started seeing to some extent an uptick in call-in shows like Sean Hannity's. we're getting more people calling in and say, hey, these tariffs are not going great. When are they going to end? And Hannity doesn't really have much to say about this. And it has been kind of spinning it as some sort of propaganda campaign targeting him. But the reality is people do live in the real world, not only in the world that they see on Fox News. And there's going to be, I think, some real suffering and emissoration and impoverishment of the American public for no reason other than the president that Fox News wanted so desperately to be president

has decided that that is what he would like to see happen. Yeah, it really is wild. And I think you're absolutely right. It's going to depend on whether there's a viewership revolt or not. Matt, thank you so much. It's always fun talking to you, whether it's about politics or sylons. And I really appreciate you coming on, ma'am. Happy to do it. Take care. Danielle Moody. How are we closing out our Fuck That Guy for the week for this show? What you got for us? Well, I figured, as you know, Danielle, I am a strong ally and supporter of women.

So I wanted to close out Fuck That Guy with a woman. And it is, in this case, going to be Attorney General Pam Bondi. Those four words together make no sense whatsoever. Nope. But it is Attorney General. General Pam Bondi, who announced on Thursday that the Justice Department will be rolling back the Biden-era policy that bans the department from going after reporters' information in leak investigations, for going after reporters' sources, for subpoenaing reporters to reveal their sources,

etc., etc., etc. It's not at all surprising, but it's a big blow against press freedom, as it's meant to be. It is obviously meant to have a chilling effect on people leaking from the administration. The sad thing is, though, you know, you would think, oh, well, this is, you know, what do you expect from the Trump administration? Well, what they're doing is rolling back to the Obama administration's policies. And the Obama administration sucked on stuff like that. I feel like I need to point out. So I won't say that this is unprecedented as, you know, a lot of the stuff that we've been dealing with in this first hundred days truly has been unprecedented. This is not unprecedented, but it's still really bad, and it's still aimed at, you know,

scaring journalists, scaring sources, threatening journalists and sources with jail for reporting on leaks. And just in general, it's another step in the direction of removing an oppositional press from this country. So for all those reasons, my final fuck that guy. Why is you, Attorney General Pam Bondy? That and her fucking Diamond Cross and her lion-ass face. This is, it's an intimidation tactic. It is fascism. It's not, oh, we're not sliding there.

We are here and this is what it looks like. You get rid of the press. You get rid of opposition. You scare people into speaking out. You threaten them. And then you get your way. And you get state TV like Fox. That's where we are.

Fuck that attorney general and that administration. frankly. All right, Danielle, here it is. Here it is. The final new abnormal fuck that guy. Mm-hmm. The honor goes to, don't stop interrupting me, damn it. I'm trying to build you up here. Oh, okay. Good. Good. Really. Build it up. The honor goes to you, Danielle, to close out, I guess what you would have to say has been a historic podcast segment. So go ahead, Danielle. Who's your fuck that guy? Well, thank you, Andy, for that robust Tia. And what I will say, for my final fuck that guy. And it makes sense because it's a collective, right?

So I'm giving it to the entire House Republicans, all of them, led by the Fisher Price Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, because what did they do besides abdicate their responsibility to hold an oath to the Constitution and not to one man? Is that they just flagrantly have decided to just fuck the Constitution, shred it, use it as toilet paper, burn it, like Mark Meadows did documents on January 6th. This is what they have done, is that they voted down an effort to block immigration enforcers from using federal resources to get this folks, detain or deport U.S. citizens. So ICE can now detain and deport U.S. citizens. Deport them to where? Because they're from here is the one question.

among many. So they have rolled up this yet again, just another privilege and right to Donald Trump inside of what he refers to as just one big beautiful bill, which is this sweeping budget bill. An amendment was introduced by Representative Primalogial-Paul, a Democrat from Washington State, who wanted to make clear in said amendment that ICE cannot detain or deport U.S. citizens and the entire GOP lawmakers killed that amendment. So why does this matter? Well, because if you recall, roughly two weeks ago, when the president of El Salvador,

Buckelly was sitting in the Oval Office, and Donald Trump said, we're going to need five more. And what he was referring to was five more Seacott-style El Salvadorian Gulag prisons, because we're going after, quote, home groans next, that's what we were talking about. That is what should have sent five alarm bells sounds off everywhere in this country because he's building the infrastructure. Republicans just gave

him the green light. And so all bets are off for people who thought that, ah, he's just going to get rid of the Browns and get rid of the illegals and pop, blah, blah, blah, blah, bah. Nah, folks, we've been telling you for a long time on this show. He's coming for all of us. So fuck those guys. Yeah, I just want to address the point you made sort of at the beginning where you basically said deport them to where they're from here. And that is exactly why we have to stop using the word deport for any of this. Because you're right. You can't deport someone who is a citizen here. I'm all in favor of language evolving. I'm not in favor of language being tortured. And that's what they're doing here. These are not deportations. The guys that are in the Salvadoran Gulag right now, they were not deported either. They were kidnapped.

They were kidnapped and sent to a country that for most of them has nothing to do with them. Like when you deport someone, you send them back to their country of origin. And that's not what happened in that case. And that's obviously not what's going to happen here. You can't deport an American the citizen back to their country of origin. This is their country of origin. It doesn't even matter if they weren't born here. They are American citizens. They cannot be deported.

They can be, I guess you could use the word exiled, maybe, but you can't deport them. And that should be sign number one that this is illegal, is that it doesn't even make sense linguistically. So yeah, fuck all those guys. This has been the Daily Beast, the new abnormal. This podcast is a Daily Beast production with production by Jesse Cannon and Seamus Calder. Please stay listening to this feed for more programming from The Daily Beast coming right up. 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.