The Daily Beast Podcast - Trump’s New Indictment Is Truly Making America Great Again

Episode Date: June 9, 2023

The orange skies must have been a premonition for the news that former President Donald Trump has been indicted on federal charges. Hosts Danielle Moodie and Andy Levy tackle this breaking news at the top of the episode, along with a SCOTUS semi-win, and the one good thing Chris Christie has done lately (and it’s not running for president.) Then, Congressman Ruben Gallego, who’s trying to become Arizona Senator Ruben Gallego, tells Andy why people should vote for him and not Kyrsten Sinema and Dr. Melissa Gonzales, a Professor and the Chair of the Department of Environmental Health Sciences at the Tulane School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, tells Danielle what caused this “tinderbox” of wildfires, what is really happening when you’re standing outside directly in that air, and the likelihood of this happening again. 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 today. We'll be joined by Congressman Ruben Gallego, who's trying to become Senator Ruben Gallego, and he'll talk to us all about how he'll represent Arizona if he does indeed win the seat. And then we'll talk to Dr. Melissa Gonzalez, who's a professor and the chair of the Department of Environmental Health Sciences at the Tulane School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine. And she'll talk to us all about this unprecedented East Coast climate change. But four. Well, because we love you, the listeners, we have come back from our earlier recording session

because there's a bit of news that I guess you could call fucking historic. Donald Trump, the former president of the United States, has been indicted by the Justice Department on seven counts, including a. of justice and mishandling of classified documents. This, according to ABC News, other reports are coming in as we speak, but we didn't have time to wait for them because we had to record this for you, the listeners. Danielle, pretty crazy. The times we live in, it's almost like the new abnormal, isn't it?

It's almost like that. And it's almost as if the orange sky over New York was a premonition and not just toxins from a fucking wildfire. miles and miles away. We've been waiting for this moment for what feels like forever. It doesn't feel real. I feel like we're in some type of dream like dream scape right now. But the fact is that Donald Trump twice impeached now, twice indicted.

You are, sir, number one. And we are exhausted by all the winning you're doing. It's incredible. This is an incredible moment. He is supposed to report to a Miami courthouse on Tuesday. So we know that the shit is about to hit the fan in Florida. And this time, not just being slung by Ron DeSantis on LGBTQ people, but apparently at Donald Trump. So Donald Trump has issued a statement on this. And for those who don't know, this news kind of broke when Trump

posted it on truth social, his, as Daniel likes to call it, his busted ass Twitter. Broke ass. Broke ass Twitter. Sorry. Please don't misquote me. All right. My bad. My bad. And then it got confirmed by various news organizations, including CNN, ABC, the New York Times, etc. Trump has put up a statement, an official statement, which basically just recycles what he said in his truths. He starts by saying the corrupt Biden administration has informed my attorney that I have been indicted seemingly over the boxes hoax. So now it's a hoax. And he says, even though Joe Biden has 1850 boxes at the University of Delaware, additional boxes in Chinatown, D.C., blah, blah, blah.

and documents strewn all over his garage floor where he parks his corvette and which is secured by only a garage door that is paper thin and open most of the time. So, okay, take that for what it's worth. He goes on to say, in all caps, I am an innocent man, which is either a Billy Joel quote, I don't know what to make of that, Danielle. What do you think of that? I mean, first of all, he talks about Biden's garage door as if he's been there hanging out in the garage with Biden. I know. That's a little weird, yeah. Which was just weird.

Can I tell you guys my theory on this? I think Trump's fantasizing about that old, on the article shirtless Biden washes transab and driveway. Oh, dear God. But I think that the most important thing in this copy and paste that he did from his truthy is the bottom where it says, quote, this is indeed a dark day for the United States of America. We are a country in serious and rapid decline, but together we will make America great again.

I mean, I'll chop off the last part. We will make America great again. Yes, this is a dark day for the United States of America because we never thought that we'd have a grifting criminal ass crook in the White House, let alone one that would then take documents and tell the world, by the way, in his own words at a CNN town hall, yeah, I took the boxes. They were mine. Like, dude, it's like you were doing, you spit in a rap battle just like one-on-one.

You told everyone what it was that you did. and you said that we couldn't handle the truth. And now you're like, they're indicting me. With your own words, you idiot. And also, no one who is innocent has to say so in all caps with an exclamation point. The only thing I'll quibble with you on is I do think that indicting a former president is a good thing. You know, if there's evidence that they have committed crimes. So I would say that this baby does make America great again.

Yeah. ABC News is Catherine Fowler is now reporting that the counts in. include willful retention of national defense information, corruptly concealing documents, conspiracy to obstruct justice, false statements. So those are, I guess, four of the counts, if I'm counting correctly. So, you know, news is going to continue to trickle out. And, you know, we don't know the specific charges, but we know the deal. He took a bunch of classified documents, kept him in a room in Mar-a-Lago, pretended that they were no longer classified because he decided that as president or former president,

he could just wave a magic wand and declassify stuff. And this seems to be the Justice Department saying, no, you can't. Yeah. And, you know, dear friends, I'm so grateful for the fact that this happened during Pride Month that we can all celebrate this moment. This is what justice looks like.

And so I cannot wait to read the indictment to understand all of the charges and bring them to you all one by one, you know, one cocktail at a time. Anyway, so we just wanted to jump in and do that. Again, we do it for you, the listeners. But now, please enjoy the regular show. Let's have some fun. Danielle, welcome.

We are currently broadcasting or recording from the seventh circle of hell here in New York City, where, thankfully, it's not as bad today as it was yesterday when the sky was a sickly shade of yellow, orange, and I woke up, And I shit you not, my eyes were burning in my apartment. Yeah, it's pretty wild. The apocalyptic shade tinge of yellow was not giving, as the kids say, and I do not love it. Wearing a mask back outside, walking down the streets of New York, honestly, in Brooklyn was like pandemic level.

There was nobody outside. It is 70 degrees in June in New York City. And it was giving pandemic. I don't love this for us. Yeah, no, it was zero ris and no drip, in my opinion, for real, for real. It was insane. And look, we are not the first state or city to be hit with wildfire smoke. I know California goes through this pretty much every year.

It's a fairly rare occasion here. And so we are not, you know, we're not used to it. And so waking up and just looking outside and when what you can see looks like it's got some kind a sepia filter on it is very, very bizarre. Like, I was sending pictures to people and having to explain, I didn't put a filter on this. I swear, this is what it actually looks like. And it was just, I mean, again, even in my apartment, my eyes were burning and I could feel it when I was breathing.

It was, it was unreal. Yeah. Stay safe, folks, because this is legit, possibly our new abnormal. So speaking of things that are seemingly going better than our air outside. I thought you were going to say abnormal. No. seemingly going better than what is happening outside. Apparently, having your approval ratings being the toilet may have given the Supreme Court the idea to not fully gut our voting rights in the United States with their recent decision that upheld a lower court's decision in Alabama that their voting restrictions were in fact, guess what, violating people's civil rights.

and, you know, racist. Yeah, this was a huge case, and it was one of the cases that people were looking at before the terms started. And I don't think a lot of people thought that this would be the actual outcome. This has to do with the Alabama legislature. You'll be shocked to know is controlled by Republicans. You'll also be shocked to know that it redrew the congressional map and basically set it up so that out of the seven congressional districts in the state, only one district had a majority black. population of voting age. So basically the law was challenged and the challenge was that they said, look, by doing this, you're disenfranchising a lot of black people. And the argument against it was,

you know, because what you're doing is you're basically, you're putting all the black people or as many as you can in this one district because then you get one Democratic congressperson from Alabama and you get six Republican. So the argument is, well, you can't do that. And the counter argument is, yes, we can because race is not something that needs to be taken into account. And the Supreme Court, again, surprisingly, basically said no, race is an important factor here. And look, we'll see where this goes in the long term, but this is honestly a bit of a victory and a surprise one. Yeah. And I just want to add that, you know, I follow some folks, friends of mine who are attorneys and follow the Supreme Court as their work, Melissa Murray being one of them. She is one of the hosts of sisters in law.

But this is what she tweeted, and I think that it's important because the media has been lifting this up as a victory. And it's not quite a victory. And she said, first, this doesn't strengthen the Voting Rights Act. It preserves the status quo. And the status quo is that the court has done an a-plus job of hobbling the V. Act over the last 10 years. She goes on to tweet that in the 2013 Shelby v. Holder decision, it eviscerated the preclearance formula. The precarance regime required states with a history of voting discrimination to first preclear any changes to their voting rules and regs with the Department of Justice or a three-judge federal court panel. The court invalidated the preclearance formula on the ground that the progress had been made. And minorities were voting,

blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. That is what Chief Justice John Roberts' legacy is, is that he said, oh look around we had a black president and america is post-racial and the minute that they gutted the pre-clearance piece of the voting rights act every single one of the fucking states that were under preclearance then guess what put out new voting restrictions so we were not post-racial america was not all up in good the red states were still going to do what the fuck they've been doing which is limiting the voice and the vote of people of color yeah and another person someone we've had on the show a bunch of times, Jay Willis, who writes about this stuff and covers it at balls and strikes, said he was never happier than to be wrong on how the court ruled today. But then he said, my quick read of Robert's opinion is that it's a bare majority of the court saying, we're not going to make racial gerrymandering legal in this case, this time. And so he is also a little bit, he's on a bit of a hold your horses train here saying, don't portray this as John Roberts saves the Voting Right Act.

But everyone agrees this is a good ruling. And it's interesting that Kavanaugh joined the 5-4 majority. But as you said, you know, a lot of people who look at this stuff seriously are saying, let's not get over our skis here and hail a brave new day in American jurisprudence. No, I think that it was a Hail Mary by a court that is failing the integrity test. And simply to say, oh, look, let's give us the appropriate. appearance that we're following the rule of law as opposed to being a bought and sold fucking court. So I think that their poll numbers and all of these terrible stories about Justice

Clarence Thomas played a part in their decision. I do not think it was just a straight reading of the law. I think that it was also a PR stunt. Okay. So that mostly covers the good news but not fully I guess because let's turn to what's shaping up. to be a really, really nasty Republican primary race. And we can start with, according to a new poll, Ron DeSantis, he ain't doing so good. This poll by civics, that's with a cue, because of course it is, has Zastantis with a major unfavorable rating for people aged 18 to 34. It's at 63%. 62% of women. think of him unfavorably 85% of African Americans and 68% of the Hispanic population. The overall net negative in this poll is 19 points for him.

In a similar poll done in December, it was at zero, meaning he had an equal approval and disapproval rating, and now he has a disapproval rating 19 points higher than his approval rating. That's kind of good news or would be if, you know, the only other person who appears to have a chance at the Republican nomination was Donald Trump. I mean, you know, here's the thing. I think the funniest part of his approval ratings going down is that people really wanted to helm him as the second coming. And the man, he is as interesting as fucking Mike Pence.

Like, they are just communion wafer. Like, in comparison to Donald Trump, like, look, I could say we could do an entire show just on all the fuckery and disgust that I have directed towards Donald Trump. But the reality is that the rest of the field, in comparison to him, they don't hold a candle. And unfortunately, you need to do more than just roll out one cruel piece of policy at a time in order to secure the presidential nomination. And Ron DeSantis proves time and time again, every time that he is outside of his control bubble, that he fucking sucks.

That he sucks. He has the personality of a thumbtack. And actually, a personality of a thumbtack would be sharp, and he is not. Yeah, it's a thumbtack that you've taken off the bulletin board and it got all bent and twisted. All you can do is throw it in the trash. We're all happy that his approval rating is tanking, assuming that poll is accurate. But again, we're looking at what I guess for now is a two-man race between Trump and DeSantis. I mean, there's, you know, Pence and Christy jumped in this week.

And I am fairly certain they have as good a chance of being the Republican nominee as my cat does. But, you know, this campaign is already reaching. You almost want to call this a historic new low. It's probably not the first time we all remember going back to the Willie Horton ad where Willie Horton, a black man, was made darker. So my point is this is not the first time that there's been sort of cheating going on and manipulation, digital manipulation. But we live in the age of what some people call AI.

I prefer to call machine learning because there's nothing. intelligent about it. But basically it means you can, you know, you can generate pretty good fakes. And the DeSantis campaign, in the form of its DeSantis War Room Twitter account, shared a video featuring Donald Trump and Republican Public Enemy Number One, Anthony Fauci. In this video, there were scenes of Trump hugging Fauci, of Trump smiling grandly at Fauci, and AFP noticed an interesting thing. All those images were fake. And they showed the real images side by side with them and you can, and you see the differences. And according to the AFP, have a number of tells that suggest they are AI generated.

Is looking like a bad Pixar movie one of them? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So, I mean, look, we're in June of 2023 and we're already at the fake images stage of this campaign. It's going to be real interesting to see just how. low this one goes. But I'm confused by the deep fakes that DeSantis put out because here's the thing. Is he just assuming that the base of the Republican Party are idiots and have the memories of Nats? Because we all know what Donald Trump said about Dr. Fauci over the course of his entire administration. Like we know where he stood. So to then create these fake images that say that Donald Trump was in

embracing Fauci, he was not. And we know that. One, I think that it's going to be a really dangerous political cycle when we have no regulation around AI slash machine learning and how it is used to spread disinformation. And this is coming from one of a candidate. Like this isn't coming from some like outside source. So I think that people need to be on the lookout for these things. And the reality is that they just want to push lies. It doesn't matter who is at the front of the Republican nomination pack. They all do the same thing, which is about pushing lies, lying to their constituents, and spreading bullshit. That's it. Par for the course. Well, that's the thing. It is part for the course. And so I think the answer to your question is, you know, do they just think that people are

stupid? I think the answer to that question is an easy yes. And in terms of the Republican base, I guess this sounds elitist or whatever, but I think they're probably right. And I think think we saw that over the last, what, seven years or whatever it's been since 2016, 2015, where Trump basically just lied with impunity and just said things that could be incredibly easily disproven. But what happens is you get up there and you say, no, this is what he said, this is what it really is. Or, oh, this was, you know, in this case, this is the image that the Sanchez used. Here's the actual real life image. And there are people who do not give a shit or do not believe the people who are doing the fact checking and just think that, you know,

in their mind, fact checking is woke in their sense of the word woke, meaning that it's just, well, I don't know what it means because I don't know what woke means to them at this point. But you get my point. Like they just lump that in with the libs, the elites, the media, the Jews, you know, use whatever term you want. But that's what they look at it as. and they will believe their lying eyes. I mean, you know, you're lying eyes.

That is the mantra of the Republican Party. It's just, I'm so outdone. And I think like part of this too, and I just want to talk about Pence for a second, like part of it too is that we're being gaslit into believing that there is a moderate among the bunch, that there is an adult among the bunch, that there is somebody that actually wants to uphold truth and justice and like the credo of America out of this Republican bunch. and there is not one of them. They will all do what it is that they can,

use what it is that they can to dupe their base into voting for them. And it's just like you look at Mike Pence and I see the follow-up, actually Dana Bash, I think is the first person on CNN to do that. To use a follow-up question when talking about the fucking,

you know, he wants to say that I upheld my oath and I kept, you know, and I kept my oath. But at the same time, if Donald Trump is the nominee, then I'm going to support him. But you shouldn't support.

him and she's just like so you just said that this is a man that disregards the constitution that wanted to put his own personal power over the constitution for somebody else to do the same but if he is the party's nominee you're going to support him and it's just like yeah that's what that's what i'm going to do and i'm just like who are you people you have no values you have no morals and you really have no differentiating factor from donald trump you all hold the same bullshit lies as truth. I don't know. So whether you use deep fakes or misinformation or what have you, I see no difference between Donald Trump, Pence, DeSantis, Haley, and the rest of the bunch of idiots. Yeah, look, Mike Pence did the right thing one day of his life. One day. And it was an

important thing. And I am on the side of the folks who think he deserves credit for that. But that's it. He literally did the right thing one day of his life. And again, yes, it was a very important thing and kudos to him for doing it. But for him to get up there and now say, oh, he doesn't think the Justice Department should go after Trump. We need to put it in the past. And to say that, you know, he would, if Trump is the nominee, he will vote for him. They have no morals. You can occasionally do the right thing for the right reason, but you got to show me a life. And that day does not appear to be indicative of Mike Pence's life. No, it doesn't. And the only reason why he has a life is because he decided not to get in the car and leave the Capitol building.

Yeah, I mean, I'm trying to figure out when the last time that a guy running for the nomination of his party has a substantial part of that party that wants to kill him. Let us think. And I feel like it has to go back to like the early days of America when, you know, when shit was kind of real and you had duels and you had, you know, you had stuff like that. And it feels like, you know, not since then have we had this sort of situation that I feel like not enough people are talking about. Like there's legit a guy running to be the Republican nominee. And there are a bunch of Republicans who wanted to hang him and still think he's a traitor. Correct. It's just, it's so bizarre. It is. You know, and we've got another candidate who

threw his hat in the ring this week. Well, we have two other candidates, but one of them is the governor of North Dakota. Quick, what's his name? Listeners, you don't know. Don't pretend. you know, nobody knows. No, if your life depended on this, we would be at your funeral. Yes, absolutely. It's Doug. I'm not even, I'm going to say Bergam. I'm going to agree with you.

So, anyway, he somehow is running for the Republican nomination, and I think we've just said all we need to about him. And another guy, I think we've covered that. Former New Jersey governor, Chris Christie, who people do know, but generally not in a good way, has also decided he's going to run again. And look, he has absolutely no chance. And he would more than likely be a horrible president. He is doing the one thing that every other Republican candidate refuses to do.

He is going after Donald Trump. Mm-hmm. So to me, this is good. I mean, let him get in there. I hope he makes it on to, you know, the debate stage, if there is a debate stage, if Donald Trump decides to show up. And if he wants to just be the pit bull going after Trump, let him do it. He has absolutely no chance of being president.

He has absolutely no chance of being in anyone's cabinet who will be president. So I'm not entirely sure what the point of this is. And, you know, he spent a lot of years sucking up to Trump. So going back to the Mike Pence doing the right thing one day, this does not make Chris Christie a good guy. No. But sure, get up there and say all the shit about Trump that all the other candidates are two chicken shit to say.

He's showing the most backbone at this moment to be able to say what needs to be said. And the thing is, is that there is no way for you to get the Republican nomination without taking on Donald Trump. Like, it's not going to fucking happen. And so while I don't think that Chris Christie is making it to anybody's stage, because I, again, with most of these people, I question when you're in single digits, who is your constituency? Who, like, who is your base? much in the same way that Chris Christie wrote that book that nobody bought. I'm like, who told you people wanted to hear from you? But at the same time, I'm like, unless you're going to directly name and shame Donald Trump and set yourself apart and call yourself an actual leader, you can't do that unless you decide to name him.

And just like, not say that guy and that administration, you mean the one you supported, the one you were the vice president for, the one whose cabinet you tried to beg to get inside of. the one you were an ambassador for. It's like, give me a fucking break with this band of clowns that they have right now. Yeah, we're talking about Christy, which is more we're doing for the guy whose name I've already forgotten from North Dakota. It's the guy who's not Christy Gnome because she's South Dakota, I guess, but I always confused that. Bergam.

Bergum. Doug Bergum. Doug. Or Bergum, I have no idea. It could be anything. Chris Christie is a known quantity. And, you know, he'll get press coverage. he already saw him. He was on CNN the other day telling Jake Tapper, quote,

turns out I was wrong. I couldn't make Trump a better candidate and I couldn't make him a better president. And he disappointed me. It's like, really, you thought you could make Trump a better person? Like, already it's just you have no credibility, you know, but he's worth talking about because he's a known figure. And again, he seems to be the only one, because I agree with you, Danielle. I think ultimately, if you're not going after Trump, Why are you, you're not giving anyone a reason in the Republican Party not to vote for Trump. Right. We'll see what happens with DeSantis.

Again, it is getting ugly there. And he may turn out to, you know, be realizing what you just said that this is the way it's going to have to be. And there are a bunch of reports about how much the two campaigns hate each other already. And again, it's only June of 2023. So this is all kind of delicious to just sit there and watch. At least Christy is saying the things that need to be said about Trump. The only thing I worry about is he's kind of giving the other candidates maybe cover not to say those things. I don't know.

The whole thing's stupid. Chris Christie's not going to be president, but he's worth a five-minute conversation. Yeah. Thanks, Chris Christie. Joining me now is Arizona Congressman Ruben Gallego, who is looking to replace Kirsten Cinema as Arizona Senator Ruben Gallego. Congressman, thanks for coming on. Thanks for having me. So let's start with why, as in why you're running for Senate.

The aforementioned Senator Cinema has left. the Democratic Party. So assuming she runs again, she'll be an independent. Why should people vote for you and not her? Well, look, this isn't a race against Kirsten Cinema. You know, I respect her as a senator, but she is just not going to be able to come in out of third place. This is a race for the people of Arizona. They need someone that actually represents them, someone that understands the value of hard work and that people need to be rewarded for that hard word, someone that understands that someone in D.C. needs to be actually fighting for them and not fighting for, you know, the moneyed interests and the people that already have power.

And from what I've seen in my time in D.C., there's too much people that worry about the top people elite in this country and not enough of the people in Arizona that actually need the everyday help that they deserve. I read a really interesting interview that you did with the New Yorker several months ago, and you had an interesting line in there. You said that you think Kirsten Cinema has forgotten what it's like to be poor? Certainly. I mean, I think it's not just for,

I think this happens a lot with a lot of elected officials is that they kind of get wrapped up in the pomp and circumstance of the jobs and there's people around you that will help you believe in that. It will actually give you this idea that what you're surrounding yourself with

is something that should be valued and not your service to your country and to the people that have sent you there. When that actually starts translating into politics into how you vote and what you spend your time on, that's when it starts really affecting these communities that really needs somebody that actually cares about them and fights for them. Yeah, absolutely. There's another woman in your state who is suffering from some sort of delusional syndrome. I believe she currently thinks she's the governor

and she thinks Donald Trump is the president. I'm talking, of course, about Carrie Lake, who, again, even though she apparently thinks she's governor, is considering getting into the GOP senatorial race. Are you looking forward to that? Look, I look forward to me running against any Republican in the state of Arizona. The day, of a moderate Republican Party are dead in Arizona and Kerry Lake or any other people are really going to be running in a very radical way and with their viewpoints on that, whether it is anti-choice positioning in a state like Arizona, whether it is a position that, you know, isn't going to give solutions to our water crisis, solutions to our housing crisis, all the things that

people need someone to actually work for them when they look at someone like Kerry Lake or the other Republicans, they're just there to fight these culture wars, but cultural rules does not help you pay, your mortgage, your culture wars does not help us solve the water crisis that's really hitting the southwest, especially Arizona. And if they think that that's the type of campaign that Arizona's want to see, they're going to have a very big surprise on an election night. Well, it seems like, you know, at this point in history, from a national perspective, all senatorial races are key races. But Arizona feels like it might be particularly important, doesn't it? Yeah, look, it's going to be me and the president on the top of the ticket.

And so if Arizona and when Arizona, I should say, it becomes more significant, the chances that are, number one, would keep the White House, and number two, that we keep the Senate. It's also a real indicator of where this country is going. You know, the South and Southwest is a growing portion of the country. The fact that it's democratic values that have won elections for the last six years really tells you where the future of potential the party is and where we should be focusing on. And by reaffirming that again in 2022, I think that's a big marker for the rest of the country to follow that, you know, a very common sense, very strong pro-family, pro-worker party can win in some very difficult and political

environments. Just moving a little. I want to talk about your life. You are a first-generation American, right? Probably so, yeah. And you went to Harvard and then into the Marines, which is not an often-seen combination. I did something similar. I did something similar, but with a better school, Columbia, and a better service branch, the Army, but I still respect with you did, Congressman. Don't get me wrong. Okay, now, to be clear, I have flown an officer, though. So, you know, neither was I. All right. All right, I'll let it slide then.

You know, really used the story. I think of a lot of immigrants and sons of immigrants and daughters of immigrants in this country. So I'm not any more special than that. I guess it's just because I went to this other school. Sure. I just always wanted to repay my country. I just felt that I'd gotten so many advantages because I was lucky enough to be born here. And I felt that I should at least, you know, do something.

And something small. I mean, I thought I wasn't like some, you know, post-September 11th hero who decided to go sign up and I respect all of those people. I joined before September 11th. I joined the research. And I was just going to do my small part for my country because I felt like I owed it to them. And I still have no regrets about it either. You know, that's really why I joined. And the history of what happened next was, unfortunately, nothing I could have predicted, but I would never take it back. And I'm always going to be a proud of story of my country. Yeah, I mean, look, your unit saw a lot of combat in Iraq, suffered heavy casualties. You've been open about how wrong you now think that war was, and you've been gut-wrenchingly honest about suffering from PTSD. Have you gotten any backlash for that? Yeah, no, you do see some people talking about, you know, me being someone who shouldn't be trusted because of my PTSD or that I have anger issues. You see it online. It's one of those things that I knew was going to happen. Yeah.

But it matters to be out there to encourage people to go get help. just if you're in the military. I mean, not just if you were just in the military. I think this is something that a lot of people need to deal with. There's a lot of mentalists in this country and there's, there shouldn't be any shame to try to better yourself. And there's also, you know, all those, you know, Cid comments. Sometimes it comes really from the far left and some of the far right that, you know, that I was a baby killer and all these kinds of things, things that, you know, you heard about other people hearing the Vietnam War. But I know my service. I know what me and my Marines did. And I'm proud of what we did. And look, and yeah, the war was.

wrong. I knew the war was wrong, you know, not there. But I was never going to abandon my fellow Marines in the time of need because, you know, you sign up to serve your country, not to serve the specific wars that you like. Absolutely. And you've done a lot of congressional work involving the military on the House of Armed Services Committee, the Veterans Affairs Committee. I'm curious, how much of your desire to go to Washington was driven by your military experience? I mean, it's almost probably, I would say, 90%. Wow. You know, when I was in Iraq, after we started dying, we knew it was a problem. We knew that's we were in trouble and that we weren't going to be able to survive if we didn't get a lot of the military equipment that we needed specifically armor or that we needed even more men because we're

covering an area of western iraq that was there just wasn't enough of us right and i remember getting visited by politicians and then more of us died and then another politician was going out of kodal and again tell us hey don't take care of you and then again more of us died i remember were my friends contacting senators and, you know, some of them actually, you know, cornering them in hallways, you know, trying to demand that we got, you know, up armored vehicles. They all, again, would lie and say I would do something. And they never did. And, you know, we just kind of kept on dying. And then we got back from the war. And we were not doing very well. And I certainly wasn't doing very well when I got back from the war. And the whole system just wasn't even ready for us.

You know, I wanted to get service for PTSD. The military and the VA told me that I didn't have PTSD because I didn't see combat. And of course, I had seen combat, but my paperwork hadn't been upgraded. And the only way you could actually have seen combat is if you had the combat action ribbon. You know, there's video of me in combat. I actually brought it to the VA so I could get services and they wouldn't give me that service unless I had that little piece of paper. Though there was, you know, clearly evidence of me in combat. And these are the kind of things that my friends saw, you know, some of them ended up home

I had many of my brothers that ended up sleeping on benches. It just always reminds me because they were so quick to get us into Iraq. Right. And they were very quick to get us into battle. And we all felt abandoned when we got back. Yeah, absolutely. In addition to your service on the Armed Services Committee, the Veterans Affairs Committee, you've made sort of a focus or you've made a big deal about things like curtailing prescription

drug prices, capping insulin prices for Medicare recipients, things that make an immediate difference in a lot of people's lives. Yep. We choose to make things difficult as a government for working class people. We can make pharmaceutical pricing lower for working class people. They do it all over the world, but for some reason, because of very powerful pharmaceutical industry lobbyists and some of their Senate friends, you know, we have people that are rationing their drugs. We have people in Arizona that are literally driving three or four hours to go to Mexico to buy the same drug that they could buy the United States

from the same factory, but it's just cheaper for them to get it down there. We choose to put these people in there, and politicians choose to do it. And it does have real strong effects on our families if they're consistently in poverty. It is hard. Yeah, absolutely. And I do think that it says a lot

that you focus on issues like this. And I think, I feel like it draws a nice contrast between you and Senator Cinema. And I wish it was just Senator Sinema. Unfortunately, I think there's just a lot of people in politics that I'm sure they join for the right reasons. I'm sure they believe they're doing things for the right reasons or even what they are doing now, maybe for the right reasons. But they are actively hurting people's lives. You're actively hurting the ability for people to actually live well in this country.

And it is sad that, again, that there is no real lobby for them. One of the things I remind people, for every member of Congress, there's three pharmaceutical lobbyists. Wow. There's not necessarily that many lobbyists for working class people, for people that have to figure out how much money they made by the hour, you know, the people that have to like, you know, take a shower after work. That lobby doesn't exist in D.C. And that's why the people that are supposed to be their lobbyists, their advocates are the electives. Back in February, again, you did this interview with Benjamin Wallace Wells at the New Yorker. I have to say it was one of the most open interviews I've ever seen a politician give, and I just, I really enjoyed reading it.

Among the things that stuck with me was this quote from you. You said, sometimes you have to maybe not work hand in hand with your loyal opposition. Maybe you should focus on making people's lives better. A lot of people grew up watching the West Wing and think that politics can be decided by two people who agree. Well, sometimes you should just care about the outcome. So I read that and I was like, this to me was a fantastic take on the almost religious belief a lot of liberals seem to have, the importance of reaching across the aisle, even when the people on that side are Marjorie Taylor Green, Jim Jordan, and the guy in the office next to you is George Santos, et cetera. Yeah, look, I think there's this obsession in terms of performative bipartisanship,

but it doesn't actually bring out any good outcomes for working customers. Sometimes it's actually quite detrimental, like things get watered down. Things, you know, don't actually turn out any better. It's a whole industry. You know, you have groups that are popping up that try to encourage it. You have the press that actually is part of it. the problem too because they they look at it at a value that the bipartisanship, the process of it as a higher value than the actual outcome. You know, if I can get permissible prices reduced for our

families and do it with just one Republican vote, I would rather do that than to get only, you know, 10% of that because I got 20, 20 more Republicans. There's an obsession with politicians, again, on that performative aspect of it, that the victory is in the process of the fact that, you know, you were able to pass a bill, but not necessarily, but it actually helps that family. It doesn't mean you don't go across the aisle. I actually have a lot of bipartisan bills to pass. But you do it because you want to do something good, not because you want to be able to say, you know, look at me, I'm all bipartisan shipping.

Yeah, no, absolutely. No one is, you know, I'm certainly not arguing that you shouldn't try to work with your Republican colleagues. It just seems that sometimes for some politicians, the process is almost the result for them. and they were able to say, well, I worked with my Republican colleagues as if that's the most important thing. Exactly. Yeah, exactly. That's exactly my viewpoint. And I think a lot of, you know, I say this, I think a lot of our politicians, pundits were shaped by, you know, the West Wing, which is a great aspirational show. But it's not really what's happening here. It's not really what's happening in politics. Right. Yeah, absolutely. Before I let you go, I want to touch on something you said earlier.

You said that Republicans and people like Senator Cinema, but just, well, actually, more the Carrie Lakes and the Republicans are focusing on culture war stuff. I'm curious your take on that because it all seems to, they can call it culture war, they can call it whatever they want. It all seems to, to me, to boil down to, we want to just have license to mean and cruel to various groups of people. Yeah, it is another way for you to still be anti-gay. It's another way for you to be mean to Latinos and to, you know, black people. I mean, there's It's just another way for them to do it without actually using the pejorative terms so that way they can still get away with it.

You know, with a weak and not, people that actually understand that weak and than not. And, you know, I hear it all the time. That's when I talk to some of my more working class friends and especially looking at home, because they're very welcoming and accepting, but they don't necessarily understand everything that's going on. And my general advice to anybody in this world is when someone's telling you to hate and not trust another person, it's a very good indication that they're probably. probably trying to sell you something or trying to make you scared of something just to distract you.

And this is the same thing that's been happening for years, whether it was abortion, whether it was original gay marriage, you know, scaring people about, you know, immigrants, all these kinds of things. The same, same playbook, they're trying to scare you from, you know, naturally, you know, trusting and loving your fellow Americans. And in the end, it's just going to end up letting you both morally bankrupt or potentially really bankrupt because it never ends well for working class people when we're being split apart. Yeah, 100%. Congress from Gallego, thank you so much for joining us.

And best of luck to you in becoming Senator Gallego. Thank you. Have a good one. Folks, I am very excited to welcome to the new abnormal Dr. Melissa Gonzalez, who is the professor and the chair of Department of Environmental Health Sciences at the Two Lane School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine in New Orleans. Melissa is an exposure scientist. and looks at how people get exposed to indoor and outdoor air contaminants

and how this exposure impacts our health. Dr. Gonzalez, thank you so much for making the time to join the new abnormal. And I guess I will start out with what is currently our new abnormal. Situated right now in New York City, over 100 million people in the surrounding areas are experiencing some of the most unhealthy air that we've ever had, I think, in this country. For the last two days, New York City has been labeled as having the most hazardous air on the planet.

Can you speak to how this is happening? And I guess whether or not we're either overreacting too much or not enough. Well, you know, these are very good questions. And it is pretty amazing the level of air pollutants that you're seeing from the smoke and a plume that's coming from the wildfires in can. Canada. You know, what's been impressive is the number of wildfires, the increasing number of wildfires and how early it is in the season. And California had, and the West Coast had a lot of wildfires. But I lived in the West for a long time and they have experienced wildfire smoke. And it's usually pretty intense, very close. So I have some personal experience with wildfire

smoke, with my family, with elder members of my family, as do many people in the Western United States. But what is really amazing about this particular situation is the large fire that is going on in Canada on the eastern side of Canada right now. Usually it's in the West. We see wildfires across the Western United States. Canada sees it across Canada as well because of the heavy forest that they have there. But you know, some of the things that are contributing to this particular incident is that we have had really good. dry temperatures that have dried out a lot of the heavily forested areas in eastern Canada, similarly to other parts of the world, but what's happening is you have a lot of fuel.

So combining that with continued hot, dry, windy temperatures, there are more lightning strikes during those times. So you have a lot of natural source of ignition. You just have a tender box there that's ready to explode into fire. So that's what we're seeing is a lot of uncontrolled wildfires that are very large, not usually seen in this time of year, but happening in this part of the country. Combined with that, you've got, as I said, the temperatures are hotter. You've got high pressure systems that really don't let cooler air come in or rain come in so much. And the way that the jet streams and the other air movements are taking it from Canada and moving it south. southeast, and right into the most populated areas of our country where you're located.

So therefore, we have a really different situation than we do with a broader spread-out population where you have high levels in a very small area of New York City, all across New York, and then as it's diluting and getting moved by the air, it is going down into the Washington, D.C. area, seeing the higher levels this morning, Pennsylvania saw them overnight. It's going to continue moving southwards, but it's also moving it towards the Great Lakes of Detroit also had high levels yesterday. I think there's other places in Michigan that are planning to have high levels today. And we haven't, there is not, I believe that the fires are not under control in Canada. So you still have the source of the smoke still coming in.

So you have the source, you have the air movements, you have the downwind populations, and that's where we are today. I want to unpack this a little bit because I think that it's really important for people to understand the distinctions that you laid out between what has been the norm in terms of how the west coast of the country has experienced wildfires and what is happening right now in Canada. And by reaction then this spread of wildfire air pollutants that are happening downward into the United States along the eastern and Midwest areas. And I think that, you know, one of the things that you stated is that Canada right now is having a warmer than usual spring. And that warmer than usual spring is what is aiding in the

increase in wildfires that are happening earlier in the season and in a different region of the country than would normally happen. Can you just explain that? Because I feel that what we are hearing, and even with people's reaction, let's say, on social media, is that I hear a lot of folks from California saying, well, welcome. This is what we've experienced for a really long time. And I want people to understand, while I'm not trying to put geographical location against geographical location, I think it's important to unpack what the difference is in what we're experiencing and speak to how the wildfires have increased and the seasons are longer because of global warming. So actually, what you're thinking about here is how is it really different? And certainly,

air pollution is local, but it's actually very regional. What I think we're seeing here is that we are seeing drier Canada than we have seen in the past. I know that Canada, the country itself has very concerned about what's going to happen this summer, but what has been happening in California with the intensity of temperature differences and precipitation differences. And then if you have, you know, a lot of precipitation, you will get more growth of vegetation, but when it dries out, you have more fuel. So you have, you know, you have a spreading of that type of condition going to a broader area. And so Canada and the, you know, you have a spreading of that type of condition going to a broader area. And so Canada in the West is used to seeing the fires earlier.

Canada does see fires across its wooded area, but they're quite surprised that it's happening this early and to this intensity. So unfortunately, it is more of, I don't mean to say more of the same as California, but it is wide, it's spreading. The conditions are spreading the local conditions with the fuel, as I was talking, are, of course, somewhat different because you're going to have different types of forest burning in northeastern Canada than you do in the Western United States and even Western Canada. But nonetheless, the conditions are such that you have a lot of fuel.

You have the drying conditions. They're now fuel as opposed to being moist, wet areas. They are very dry. So it's quite impressive how we're seeing the similar types of things can happen in. the East Coast that can happen in the West Coast. Plus, you've got the way that the air currents flow. So it's going to be bringing it down in this area. Remember also that, you know, depending on which way the winds were flowing,

when the California fires were happening, it varied as to who was getting impacted by the smoke. And when there were fires in the West, we saw that smoke flowing eastward. And it did flow all the way to the East Coast. So if you look back, you'll see articles that talked about, New York City experiencing haze from the California wildfires. It's location, it's sources, it's a number of people. But overall, if you just think of us as a whole, we are going to experience,

especially with that large of a source, a wildfire, it is going to impact a lot of people. And we can see that it carries a long, long way. And the closer you are to it, the higher your your potential for greater exposure is. And what we couldn't have phantomed such a large population, as is around the New York City area and New York State and the whole Tri-City area all the way down to the mid-Atlantic. Exactly.

It is just as a large population that is experiencing just incredibly high levels that maybe would have been over a less populated area and not noticed as much before or diluted more. But whatever is happening, that it's concentrating and pushing it down and situating it right on top of these areas is a confluence of many things happening at the same time.

Wow. So the other thing that I think that is important for people to understand, now I want to talk about what is actually in the air pollutant. You know, for the first time, I think that people are looking on Siri, on their phone, on the weather app, and actually paying attention to the air quality.

Where largely in the United States, that's not something that we've ever really had to pay attention to because our air, unlike a lot of other places in the world, has always been in the green zone, has always been in the healthy space, except, you know, for times when we have a rise in allergy season or what have you and you see, okay, there are dander reports and X, Y, and Z. Can you talk about how there are some people that are just like, well, it's trees that are burning, it's wood, it's fine for us to breathe in. You have fireplaces and wildfires are normal. What is the difference with what is happening right now? and why it is unhealthy, unlike the wood that you would burn, say, in your fireplace. Well, think about your fireplace. You would hope that your fireplace was well maintained so that most of the smoke is going

up and out of your house, right? It's not filling up your house with smoke. Now, if it was filling up your house with smoke, you burned toast, or you caught something on fire on your stove, your house fills up with smoke. You're choking, you're coughing, your smoke detector is going off telling you, you've got a fire, you've got smoke, you know, you've got high levels and you leave, right? You open the windows. You get it out. So that is something that you can control, but you would not sit in that situation. So we're talking here similarly to a situation where you have a really high level of smoke.

We saw the measurements. We know the air quality index being in the extremely unhealthy range. So it's just as if you were standing outside, you would not stand if you were, you know, if you had a barbecue or a would fire outside. You wouldn't stand right next to it for very long. In fact, you would probably get upwind of it so it wasn't blowing down wind on you. Does that analogy make sense? I mean, this is like standing next to a fire. It's like standing or being in a room where you've got smoke coming in. But your options are limited. Now your options are limited so that like, well, obviously when you're outside, your options are limited. It's to come inside, right? So you're protecting yourself when you're indoor environment. And that's why most of the recommendations are to stay

inside as much as possible. You want to limit your exposure outside because you really don't have any way of reducing that exposure. It's pretty consistently high outside. That analogy makes a lot of sense. And I ask that question because there's a lot of misinformation. There's a lot of disinformation that is purposefully filling up our social media platforms and filling up people's airwaves depending on what networks that they're listening to. And so for those that are saying it's not a big deal, this is a part of like the natural cycle of things, I think it's important to say, if something had caught fire in your home,

you wouldn't sit in that fire. You wouldn't sit in that smoke. You would open up windows or you would vacate. But when that smoke is outside, that you're breathing in all of these different types of particles that are mixed with, it isn't just trees, it's pesticides, it's rubber, it's chemicals, it's toxins that you're breathing in.

That is, you know, when people are saying, oh, it's the equivalent of sitting outside and smoking 17 cigarettes, or it's the equivalent of sitting next to a barbecue or a bonfire and not moving, I think it's important for people to understand you wouldn't do, you wouldn't take those actions, you would go and find safe space and safe air so as not to be breathing in those irritants, and this is the same thing. If you have a heart condition or a lung condition, you're extremely vulnerable.

A child as well or somebody who's older is not going to have the same. say they're more vulnerable, susceptible populations. So these are the types of people that early on in the air quality index that includes both the levels and the level of protection of who is going to be most vulnerable to the effects of air pollutants. That's why that starts out early on in just over 100, that if you have heart disease, congestive heart failure, heart attacks, asthma, COPD, pulmonary fibrosis, you certainly are not going to want to be out there. you're susceptible to actually having additional effects. You're going to have them sooner.

You're going to have them more severely. And those are the people that we really want to protect early on. Those are also our family members. Right. So it's a matter of thinking of who are we talking about as well. You know, your personal risk, your individual risk depends really on your personal underlying health conditions. But it's not everybody that has those. We have a range of people in our population that we need to be thinking about.

And I want to ask, is this because of our. lack of intentional policy creation around climate change. Is it possible then that this is going to be our new normal, that there are going to be days, maybe even weeks in the future and in the near future where we have to be forced inside because the air is unsafe? Is this something that in this moment, people should be waking up to that very real reality. Well, I think across the eastern United States today, people probably did wake up to that reality. And I think the reality that it's episodic, they will happen again. We don't know when they're going to happen again, but the frequency and the intensity of changes has shifted. So the likelihood is much higher that this is

going to be happening again and again. Now, to what intensity? We don't know. But air quality went up to the extreme level, right? Maroon-colored level. But if this is shifting and you're getting exposures over time, chronic exposures are not, are not good for us either. So yes, we should be paying attention to what's going on and to our individual contributions as well as what can be done at a larger level. And finally, what can people be doing to keep themselves safe? What recommendations should people be following? So there's recommendations based on what individual underlying health conditions are. So obviously if it's above 150, above 100 or so, you know, people with heart disease and lung disease should remain inside. Now, when you think about

this, when we talk about our cardio exercise, it's frequency, intensity, and duration, right? And so if you are going to be outside during extreme conditions, well, first of all, it's a high-risk health emergency for everybody at those levels above 300. But if those people who do have to go outside, at lower levels, let's just say. And I know the Department of Health in New York has recommended that people wear N95 masks. Now, that is considering that you have to be realistic about the level of protection that you're getting from that. Remember, it has to fit well. It has to cover your nose and your mouth. It has to, but we don't have typical fit test. Like, remember, these masks were developed for other settings. They were also for short-term use. They need to be replaced.

over time, you can't be exercising in them. They weren't designed for exercising the frequency of being outside. So you want to reduce your time outside. You want to reduce the intensity of whatever you do outside. You want to reduce the amount of time you spend outside. And you want to actually recognize the limitations of the mask. As we know from before, but then also with these small particulate, just like you would change your filter in your air conditioner, so to speak, you would know that this filter is what it's doing for you this filter in your air is going to get clogged as well. You know, the freshness of the mask would have to be considered. You have to change these.

You know, you can't be using the same ones. So you could use them for short durations of time, low intensity, and paying attention to those air quality situations. When is it going to go down? Other other times of day. For example, with ozone, it's higher in the late afternoon and lower in the morning. something to consider just because ozone is a summertime air pollutants. So you're going to get co-pollutants that are taking place. And as you just mentioned, smoke is not from wildfires is not just the particulate matter,

which is what you're filtering out with your mask. There's a lot of toxic gases, other things like this, but you're still going to breathe in and they will irritate your lungs. They're going to irritate your eyes. You'll still experience those impacts too. So reducing your exposure time and just staying inside. is probably the best thing that people can do to the greatest extent possible. Well, Dr. Melissa Gonzalez, thank you so much for making the time for the new abnormal

and giving us some really good insights into the environmental concerns that we're experiencing right now. Appreciate you. Thank you. Danielle Moody. Andy Levy. Who is your fuck that guy to close out a glorious smoke-filled week? Well, he's an oldie but a goodie, and we haven't had to talk about it.

him since he lost his primetime show, but Tucker Carlson, because oh, oh goodness, how delicious this is. So Tucker Carlson decided he was going to become a mascot for Twitter and Elon Musk and launch a new show, Tucker on Twitter, Tut, if you will. And he decided to launch this 10-minute show. And right after the 10 minutes of the show, Tucker Carlson apparently received a copy of a letter that was obtained by Axios from Fox attorneys that said that he is in breach of contract. The claim is a breach of contract claim sets Fox News up to explore potential legal action against Carlson, a move that would intensify, according to Axios, the already thorny public battle. This is what Carlson's attorneys said in response, is that, quote,

Fox defends its very existence on freedom of speech grounds. Now they want to take Tucker Carlson's right to speak freely away from him because he took to social media to share his thoughts on current events. No, they want to take it away from you because you signed a contract and an updated one at that cost the network $787 million. And they don't want you making any more money. And my thought is that even though Tucker Carlson was being paid, oh, I don't know, an exorbitant amount of money like over $20 million a fucking year, is that guess who has deeper pocket? and can take you to court and not even bat an eyelash on the amount of money that is being spent to make sure that you don't have a platform. Fox.

So this is a fight on top of, you know, the DeSantis Trump chicken fight that I want to see. I want to see this one. This one I am looking forward to from Fox and Tucker Carlson, Tucker on Twitter. How fucking lame is that? It's pretty lame. I mean, there are people who Bill O'Reilly went from the, spot that Tucker Carlson occupied, the prime time prime slot on Fox News to hosting his own show. It's safe to say that his relevance took a bit of a nosedive. So I'm not sure what Tucker thinks he's

doing here. I know it's a different world now. And I do think there are things Tucker could have done. Nothing was going to give him the publicity and the power of that spot on Fox News. But he could have done things that I think would have kept him more relevant than a little 10-minute monologue. on Twitter. And I am looking forward to this lawsuit. I hope it plays out. But is it worth it, Tucker, for this? Like, that's the thing that kind of surprises me. Like, again, there are things he could have done where I could see him, you know, him thinking, you know what, this is worth it. This is worth the fight. This ain't it. I don't think. I mean, unless Elon Musk gave him a lot of fucking money to do this very stupid 10-minute show, but I can't imagine that it is on par with what he

was making at box. No, and I don't think money is an issue for Tucker Carlson. Like, I, you know, I'm fairly certain he could not work another day in his life and not have to worry about where his next meal is coming from, particularly given his position as the husband of a frozen food heiress. But this just seems like, really, you're going to risk it all for this? And again, Musk may be throwing money at him. I have no idea. And, you know, Musk, another guy who's not in any danger of missing any meals, but he's, I think, worth a lot less than he was when he bought Twitter. So who the hell knows with him? The whole thing just seems so dumb.

And we'll see who watches this. We'll see if they're able to monetize it. And, you know, I guess you can't be too quick to judge on a first effort. But I think underwhelming is an understatement. Yeah, I think, you know, what is it? Mr. Pillow, my pillow. I'm sure he's chomping at the bit. Yeah.

So, yeah, fuck that guy. Andy, not to be outdone, but who is your fuck that guy for this week? My fuck that guy, this is a story that producer Jesse Cannon flagged for my attention because he is a huge sports fan. I'm joking people. He didn't even know what this was. Let's just trade the fuck out of Jesse. That's fine.

So there's been this big thing in the world of golf for the last year or so. The PGA tour, which runs golf. which runs the majors, you know, things like the Masters, the U.S. Open, et cetera, has been pretty much the only professional golf tour of note. And about a year ago, a Saudi government-backed venture called LiveGolf, LIV, started up and obviously being backed by the Saudi government had, I think, unlimited funds is a nice way of saying it. Yeah.

And they were able to lure a bunch of pro golfers to their tour to the eternal shame of those pro golfers. And then there were golfers in the PGA tour who said, no, I'm not, I mean, they were throwing like hundreds of millions of dollars at people like Phil Mickelson and other top golfers. And some PGA tour guys, to their credit, at least said, no, I'm not taking that money because the Saudi government sucks. I want to read you a little quote from PGA tour commissioner. This is what he had to say at that time. He said, I would ask any player that has left or any player that would consider leaving, have you ever had to apologize for being a member of the PGA Tour? And he went into a litany of things that the Saudi government had done, the way they

treat women, the way they treat gays, the way they, you know, kill journalists. That was PGA Tour chairman Jay Monaghan a year ago. Well, flash forward to this past week and the PGA Tour has cut a deal with LiveGolf. Dan Wolkin at USA Today put it best. He just, he wrote frauds all of them. And what he meant by that is at the end, all they care about is money when he's talking about Jay Monaghan here. They have reached this accommodation with LiveGolf and LiveGolf is now, they're merging their business operations. And basically what they've done is leave the golfers who people like Rory McElroy and even

Tiger Woods, who were sort of the loudest in saying, hell no, this, you know, I am not going to this abomination. they stood up very strongly and they turned down hundreds of millions of dollars and the PGA tour just basically said, you know, just gave them a big fuck you. So my fuck that guy goes to Jay Monaghan, the commissioner of the PGA. And this is just an absolutely horrific decision. And it lets the Saudis greenwash, as I think the term is, you know, their sins. And it gives them a very, very strong foothold in what's supposed to be, you know, a cleanly run sport. So fuck you, Jay Monaghan.

Fuck that guy. Yeah, this is how the Saudis are going to be able to legitimize themselves and their government and have a foothold into the United States. Like you begin to slowly buy up the sports and, you know, favorite American past times and these things. and because we're a capitalistic, greedy-ass country, then all of a sudden you wake up one day and you're like, oh, shit, there's a whole bunch of propaganda that is coming our way.

There's a whole bunch of things that have slowly been able to peel away at who we are. And so, you know, when I look at this decision, I think that it is a terrible one. I think that it signals so in so many ways, so many red flags. But then I look at the decision of famed soccer player Lionel Messi, who was offered nearly half of. a billion fucking dollars by the Saudis to come play soccer over there. And he turned it down. He turned it down.

Half a billion dollars. He turned it down. And is now signed to play in Miami, which, you know, to be honest, Florida, not great. But it's not the Saudis yet. So I just think this is a terrible decision. And also the WNBA commissioner came out and said, oh, I think that this would be a good thing for the WNBA. and people are like, wait, what? Did we not just go through like an entire saga with Brittany Griner?

Do we not understand that many of the members are women, are queer? Like, what are you thinking? Look past the money, people. So fuck that guy. Yeah, and I used a wrong term earlier. I said greenwashing. It's sports washing is the term that's used for this. And the Saudis have been doing it with pro wrestling and now golf.

And you're right to bring up someone like messy. It's easy to say, you know what, these guys have. all the money in the world. It's easy to say that about, obviously about Tiger Woods and Rory McElroy and golfers who turn down the Saudis, it's easy to say, well, they're set, what do they care? But the fact is, they still did it. They still turned down hundreds of millions of dollars that other people didn't. And that takes something and that shows something. And for them to just be left high and dry like this by Jay Monaghan and their own league is just, it's just God-awful. So, yeah, fuck all those guys.

Hope you enjoy checking out this episode of The New Abnormal. We're back every Tuesday, Friday, and Sunday. If you enjoyed it, please share it with a friend and keep the conversation going. This podcast is a Daily Beast production with production by Jesse Cannon and Seamus Calder. Want more great listens? Check out our comedy podcast, The Last Laugh, and our star-studded 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.