The NPR Politics Podcast - Roundup: Congress, Cameos & Clapbacks

Episode Date: December 8, 2023

Lawmakers are scrambling to get things done before the end of the year, but is there an appetite to fund more aid for Ukraine if Republicans' immigration priorities are not met? And, a look at the end of two long-running congressional sagas: the retirement of Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., and Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., drops his hold on military promotions.Plus: George Santos' new gig, and responding to online trolls. This episode: political correspondent Susan Davis, White House correspondent Asma Khalid, and congressional correspondent Deirdre Walsh.This episode was edited by Casey Morell. It was produced by Jeongyoon Han. Our executive producer is Muthoni Muturi.Unlock access to this and other bonus content by supporting The NPR Politics Podcast+. Sign up via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org. Connect:Email the show at [e-mail] the NPR Politics Podcast Facebook Group.Subscribe to the NPR Politics Newsletter.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

Hi, this is James calling from a traffic jammed I-10 freeway in Katy, Texas, just outside of Houston. One of the biggest freeways in the country. This podcast was recorded at 12.38 p.m. on Friday, December 8th. Things might have changed by the time you hear this, but hopefully I will be out of this traffic jam and going my usually 75 miles an hour. All right, here's the show. That's a little speedy. That's the Midwest traffic. We always like to drive at 75. Texas speed limit right there. No 75 mile per hour on my commute.

I'm actually surprised we don't get more traffic timestamps because that is my peak podcast listening time when I'm stuck in the car. Same. Hey there, it's the NPR Politics Podcast. I'm Susan Davis. I cover politics. I'm Asma Khalid. I cover the White House. And I'm Deirdre Walsh. I cover Congress. And it's almost Christmas, which means you can bet on Congress trying to jam together one last must-pass bill. Usually when we're here, it's a spending bill to head off a government shutdown. But Congress punted on that issue issue and they'll take on that fight in the new year. So now they're looking at trying to pass a defense bill coupled

with an emergency spending bill that ties together foreign policy and domestic needs. And it's not going so great. Deirdre, this has morphed from a foreign policy debate about Ukraine and Israel to a U.S. border debate. And Republicans say they will continue to withhold their support unless Democrats and President Biden concede to make some major changes on border policy. So what is the status of these talks? I mean, it depends on who you talk to. They definitely stalled out earlier this week. But late yesterday afternoon, there was this small group of senators, including Connecticut Democrat Chris Murphy, Oklahoma Republican Jim Lankford, and Arizona Independent Kyrsten Sinema, talking seriously and dodging reporters in the hallways,

which is a sign that maybe that things were picking up. They're actually talking. Things are picking back up. You know, even the Republicans like the top Senate Republican, Mitch McConnell, who is a very strong supporter of additional aid to Ukraine, saying basically the price for this national security package that the president asked for is border policy changes. I mean, the president did ask for additional border money in this request to Congress. But he himself actually did say this week border policy changes, which Republicans all glommed on to after that answer recently this week. And they're really, you know, upping their demands.

I mean, the problems for these the small group of negotiators is both the Democrats are split on this issue and the Republicans are split on this issue. House Republicans and Senate Republicans are split on this issue. And so the issue that they're really focused on is pretty narrow. I mean, it's been decades since Congress has passed any significant immigration reform. They're not talking about any comprehensive immigration reform. restricting how many people coming into the country at the southwest border can request asylum. That is the sort of chief policy issue that this group is focused on. There are a lot of politics about this I don't get. And let me start here, Asma. The president is desperate, I think that's a fair characterization, to get Ukraine aid approved. They made an additional push this week saying we need this money. He also, frankly, has a political weakness on the border.

Border policy has not been a political strong suit for him. So why not take a deal that includes some conservative border wins and get the Ukraine money? It seems like politically a win-win for him. Well, I think it comes down to what is being proposed from Republicans. I mean, the White House message and frankly, the president's message is that he has proposed some changes for the border. He's asked for billions of dollars more for border agents, for more asylum officers. And so fundamentally, he says he recognizes that the situation at the border cannot be sustained as it has been.

Right. For the last few months, we've seen just a drastic number of people coming in and not really the resources to deal with that. You know, I think that sort of fundamentally, though, we also see politics being played from Republicans, that House Republicans are calling for things that are not really where some members, I should say, of the Democratic Party is at this moment in time. I mean, immigration writ large is just a really complicated issue for the Democratic Party. It is an issue in which there are internal divisions, right? I mean, I went down to Arizona recently, and you can meet Democrats who fundamentally do feel like some solution needs to be proposed at the border. At the same time, there are, you know, a generation of young voters in Arizona who came of age in the shadow of Joe Arpaio, this hardline sheriff who really went after immigrants in Arizona. And so there's a

group of younger voters who are now really energized and organizing around Democratic Party politics. And they're also a part of, you know, Joe Biden's base in the state. But then, Deirdre, it seems to raise a question over whether the Republican Party really wants a border deal in that it has been a very effective political attack towards the president who they are trying to defeat in 2024. And passing a conservative border bill, the party would essentially take co-ownership of the issue. It would weaken the line of attack against the president if they're actually capable of getting something done. I mean, I agree. It's of good reason to be cynical about this issue. I think

there are a lot of Republicans in safe districts that want no part of any immigration deal. But I don't know that anything that emerges from this would actually get the brand of being like a conservative immigration bill, right? I mean, by definition, it would have to have bipartisan support, and it would be fairly narrow. The question is, are enough of them willing to say, okay, because they also agree that the other national security pieces of this bill, which include a lot of things that they talk a lot about in terms of the threat posed by China, that's a big part of helping Taiwan in this national security package, helping Israel, a close ally of the

United States, if they're willing to go along with neutralizing part of the issue that they think is a really strong issue against a lot of Democrats in swing states like Arizona, swing districts around the country. I think that's a big question. And what Asma was talking about in terms of splits within the Democratic Party obviously goes for the Republicans, right? I mean, there are those in swing districts who are okay with a smaller deal and those who are from solidly red states who, you know, may decide to take action against House Speaker Mike Johnson if he allows any kind of compromise to come up on immigration. Sure. And it's also worth remembering that

House Republicans are pretty divided on the issue of whether to continue to provide funding to Ukraine at all. Right, right. And Mike Johnson was one in the past who voted against it and is now saying he would support it, but we'll see. You know, there's still another week or two left in the congressional session. Legislative miracles happen all the time on Capitol Hill on Christmas. But as we're sitting here today, it doesn't look like they're going to get a deal on the emergency spending bill before the end of the year. Asma, what is the administration saying that this means for what's happening in Ukraine, if they don't get the money quickly? The White House has been warning that it could be dire for what happens on the ground in Ukraine.

The National Security Spokesman John Kirby said just this week that the White House was not in a position to make a promise to Ukraine, just given where things are on the Hill. And you heard the president say himself that he really wants Congress to pass this aid before it breaks for the holidays. It sounds like from what Deirdre is saying that that's not necessarily likely, but there is an urgency from the White House. Frankly, I think it's stunning that we've gotten to this point in the first place. While Congress, Republicans and Congress are willing to give Putin the greatest gift he could hope for and abandon our global

leadership, not just Ukraine, but beyond that. And I will say part of this is about, of course, what happens tangibly on the ground in Ukraine. But another part of this to me is about Biden and his foreign policy vision, his own personal legacy. Here is a man who really staked a good chunk, I think, of his legacy on being a global leader, a statesman who would unite the world and really show that American leadership is reliable, it's dependable. And he is now warning that potentially Putin could make a move in Ukraine and trying to say that this could embolden other would-be aggressors. I do think that there are some Republicans who are concerned about, you know, any delay in aid going to Ukraine. Sure. And especially people like Jim

Lankford, who talks about it, you know, sort of making the point every time he talks to reporters, I also support the money for Ukraine, but we need to come to a deal on this border issue. Border security is part of national security overall. But, you know, some of the other House Republicans I talked to just say the politics of the border is just dominating all the other issues in their district. All right, let's take a quick break and we'll talk more about the Hill when we get back. And we're back. And this week on Capitol Hill, we also saw the conclusion of two of the year's biggest political sagas. The first, the speakership of Kevin McCarthy. And the second, the blockade on military promotions by Republican Alabama Senator Tommy Tuberville. Safe to say neither ended as either man had hoped. Deirdre McCarthy announced that he will retire at the end of the year, his parting gift to the party being a one-seat slimmer majority when he goes.

What would you say that McCarthy's legacy is? I mean, some of the things he probably doesn't want to be his legacy is the first speaker ousted by his party, I think the third shortest House speaker. I mean, he wasn't much of a legislator, right? I mean, in his tenure as Speaker, he dodged a shutdown, which is part of the reason why he got ousted. And he avoided a default on the country's debt limit. But other than that, he doesn't have a lot of legislative accomplishments. A lot of the Republicans I talked to following his exit are really focused on Kevin McCarthy's political legacy. They see him as one of the party's sort of strongest fundraisers, you know, sharpest political minds. He helped recruit a lot of the

younger women, veteran, minority Republicans that are serving in the House Republican Conference. Now, he had an aggressive push to get his majority. They didn't get as big of a majority as he himself predicted. But I think that they are, a lot of House Republicans are worried about what happens in the next election without him as Speaker because he raised himself along with his super PACs, you know, $500 million in the 2022 cycle. I mean, I think his political legacy is far outsized than his legislative legacy. Speaking of legislative legacies, Tommy Tuberville ended his block on hundreds of military promotions. He had been holding them up in protest of unrelated abortion policy under the Biden administration.

What changed? Just political pressure from his fellow Republicans who were just sort of fed up with the politics of the issue and the damage that a lot of veterans in the Senate Republican conference were saying was happening to the military. I mean, these hundreds of promotions were going to have to be sent back to the Armed Services Committee at the end of the year if Congress didn't act and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer was determined to push through a rules change on how the Senate approves military promotions. A lot of Senate Republicans would have voted for that. And that would have been embarrassing to the party. And Tuberville, as you said, when he emerged the other day and told reporters I was there and he basically admitted he didn't get what he wanted, but he sort of put a spotlight on the issue and may wage a legal fight. There is sort of a lesson of Tuberville, especially in the Senate. It's like, these tactics matter, but you need a strategy to get out of it, right? Like every chess move, you need to have a plan. And he didn't really seem to have a plan beyond the blockade.

Week after week, Senate Republicans were asking him what he wanted and giving him ideas. I mean, I think this proposal to relent on hundreds, but just have the, you know, 11 four-star generals who are still under a hold, I think came from his fellow Senate Republicans. I don't necessarily think that was his idea, but I think they were the ones pushing to give him an off-ramp, and he finally took it. This week was also a reminder that the political and legal fights surrounding President Biden's son Hunter are back and not going anywhere. Last night, the special counsel that's been investigating him charged him on nine counts related to his failure to pay taxes on millions of dollars in income.

The news coincides this week with House Republicans intensifying their push for impeachment of President Biden for allegedly benefiting off of his son's business dealings. Asma, has the White House weighed in on this or changed their positioning on how they're approaching this? I mean, the White House has historically not commented on much of anything to do with the president's son, Hunter Biden. And this situation is no different. What I will say is that the president's son facing these additional legal charges, potentially going to trial now as the president's own campaign reelect is kicking off, is really not ideal. It's not where the president would want to be.

It's certainly not what Democrats want to be talking about. They don't want this in the backdrop of the 2024 election cycle. And so it's certainly an unneeded or unnecessary distraction that Democrats don't want this in the backdrop of the 2024 election cycle. And so it's certainly an unneeded or unnecessary distraction that Democrats don't want to be dealing with. But historically, we have not seen this White House engage. That being said, I don't anticipate that Republicans will not try to make it an issue that's tied to the president. And Deirdre, it looks like the House could vote as early as next week to formalize their impeachment investigation.

That's their plan. You know, back in September, then House Speaker Kevin McCarthy sort of unilaterally directed three committees to start investigating. And, you know, let's face it, they, I think, had already started once the House Republicans took control of the House. There was a split inside the House Republican Conference about whether or not it was good politics to move forward with impeachment. They didn't have evidence of a clear high crime or misdemeanor. Still don't. But the far right has been pressing the new House Speaker Mike Johnson for action on this. And they're unhappy with him on some other things that he's been doing. So he recently met with former President Trump down at Mar-a-Lago and then a few days later came back and

announced they were moving forward. You know, I think there's a big difference between the case they're trying to make about President Biden and his family's influence peddling than this indictment that we saw from on Hunter Biden's tax returns. And, you know, I think there is obviously a lot of it's very serious what Hunter Biden is facing. There are whistleblowers that have testified before House committees about slow walking the investigation into Hunter Biden's tax returns. You know, he was facing this misdemeanor deal that fell apart. And now he's facing, you know, serious prison time and felony charges on tax evasion. But I think House Republicans are still focused on this argument of, you know, the Biden corruption issue, the Biden family business, where they just don't have the evidence for a clear-cut argument. And I think it'll be interesting to see whether they change their messaging at all after this. But, you know,

what the president's son did has, there's no link to President Biden having any financial benefit to any of his son's dealings, right? And they still don't have any evidence of that. So I think that, you know, even some moderate Republicans who now say, okay, I'm okay with voting for an inquiry, they're not ready to vote for impeachment articles yet. Look, and there's clearly a distinction between the son of a president doing something wrong and being criminally charged. And the fact that the Republican front runner for the nomination is also facing multiple criminal charges.

Hunter Biden has also taken a more aggressive posture towards the impeachment inquiry through his lawyer. He has offered to come and testify, but said he would only do it in public, would not submit to a closed door deposition, which is sort of standard operating procedure in a congressional investigation. But it is sort of a telling sign that the president's son would like to take a more aggressive stance towards this impeachment inquiry. Right. And it will be interesting to see whether that public hearing ever happens. They're talking about voting Hunter Biden in contempt for refusing to come to this closed door deposition. But I'm not sure how that legal argument goes when he's already expressed a willingness to come in public, right? and NPR polls, I think it showed that 63% of respondents believe President Biden has done something unethical or illegal in relation to his son's business dealings. As you can expect, that was largely along partisan lines. But the controversy does seem to be affecting how voters

view the president. Sure. And one thing I think we're all certainly watching in 2024 is to see how closely impeachment proceedings align with court proceedings against former President Trump. All right. One more quick break. And when we get back, time for Can't Let It Go. Hey there, it's Susan Davis with a quick but very sincere thank you to our NPR Politics Plus supporters and anyone listening who donates to public media. After all, public media means you, the public, support it. Thank you. That is our whole mission at NPR, and that's why we're here. If you like perks, NPR Politics Plus offers sponsor-free episodes and extra bonus episodes of the show, including our trivia game that we play with a listener. And if you want to make a tax-deductible donation to your favorite station or stations in the NPR network, that's great, too. What really matters is that you are part of the community that makes this work possible. Journalists across the NPR network need resources to do their best work.

And those resources cost money. Microphones, laptops, safety gear, software. Whatever amount you can pitch in makes a real difference. So please give today at donate.npr.org slash politics or explore NPR Plus at plus.npr.org. And thank you. And we're back and it's time for Can't Let It Go, the part of the show where we talk about the things we just can't stop thinking about, politics or otherwise. Asma, what can't you let go of this week? Well, I thought about doing Taylor Swift's cat photo shoot, which also I will say I found very amusing. Too easy? But in all honesty, what I really can't let go is how the conflict between

Israel and Hamas seems to be exposing these really deep rifts in American society. And I will say, Sue, it just seems to me like people are retreating to their tribes. And they seem at times, you know, unable or unwilling to see their fellow Americans as fellow Americans. And I think part of what I am witnessing right now in American culture and American society feels so relevant to me also from a political angle is that I spent years covering voters and demographics. And in 2016, I wrote about witnessing these cracks in society between races, religions, and the lack of empathy people had for one another. And it feels like over each year, those cracks have become deeper and deeper chasms.

And I worry that we're not even in a general election season yet. So as you all are, I am a mom now, which I was not during the 20 election cycle. And one of the things I think when you become a mom is that you start thinking a lot about the kind of world you want your kids to live in, the kind of people you want them to be. And I have struggled with looking at how people are behaving in this moment, thinking like, I don't want to raise kids who think their lives or their stories are more important than somebody else. I want them to be able to hold two ideas, two truths in their head at the same time,

to be able to see killing innocent people as bad, point blank, no matter what their religion is or their race. And sadly, I will say I see really, really few people showing them an example of how to do that, showing all of us an example of how to do that. So I feel like I'm monologuing here, but I have just not been able to let that go. And I just want to say one quick last thing. There is this guy who, if I ever write a book, I feel like I will dedicate the beginning of my book to him. I met him during the 2016 election in North Carolina. His name is

Ken Lewis. He's black. And he told me something about just how, you know, kind of rough American politics were becoming at that moment that, and I want to quote him here, he said, we are trying to create in America something that perhaps has never been done before. And that is to have a real democracy in a society that is pluralistic. And I think about this all the time because I'm like, there is no other place really that is a multicultural, pluralistic place like the U.S. that has a democracy. And we all assume it's going to keep working in perpetuity because it has been working. But there's no evidence of that. And I know that's like a real down note to end on.

But no, I get it, though, because I think the point and what you said about like being a mother changes the way you view a lot of news. And I was talking to our colleague, Greg Myrie, he's been on the podcast a lot. He's a national security correspondent, and he just did a reporting stint in Israel. And we're coming back, we're chatting about it. And he talked about like these stories get harder to cover when you become a parent, because when you see children involved, you always see your own children. And it does affect how we see these stories, especially when you see so many, like younger generations of people being affected. It does make you question all that stuff.

So I do think there's just something very human in changing the way you view the world when you have a stake, a different stake in the future of it. I also have a teenager now who asks a lot more sort of harder questions that you can't answer without a lot of nuance about the conflict. Like, it's seeing so much on social media that I feel like I constantly have to say, nope, that's not really true. Nope, you're, I don't know what, I said, let me look at your algorithm. I think you're getting a lot of misinformation. That's terrifying. So it's, it's, yeah, I mean, there are some things that, you know, I heard this, I'm like, what? Where are you getting that from? And I think going back to the people we cover, they're doing a terrible job of, I think, politicians overall of having a real conversation about a lot of very tough things that are happening around the world because it's just constantly so nasty and partisan and tribal. That's right. That I think that, you know, you know, people

just can find the person that they agree with and glom on to the what they're saying and live in their corner and not understand. Because we all live together here. Right. I mean, what's the future? What's the 10 year, 20 year horizon of that? I mean, I will say on the positive side, as a mom of a teenager, I do think that the younger generation does have a lot more discussion about issues that I didn't talk about at that age. And I think that they are more tolerant and more willing to understand different points of view. And I think I see sort of a positive and a negative. A negative in how much they're getting on social media. That's wrong. But a positive in the sense that they're going to school.

A lot of people come from different types of families. And they're understanding where they come from. Deidre, what about you? What can't you let go of this week? Totally different topic. I don't know about you guys. But sometimes when the haters on social media say something, I have this instinct to want to clap back, but I just have learned you just

don't, right? Like no good comes of clapping back. It's a path to nowhere. But I think there's a good example of a journalist who did in a very successful way. This week, a Canadian broadcaster named Leslie Horton was doing a broadcast and was answering viewer emails on live television. When she got an email from a viewer... Can you respond to an email that I just got saying, congratulations on your pregnancy. If you're going to wear old bus driver pants, you have to expect emails like this. So thanks for that. No, I'm not pregnant. I actually lost my uterus to cancer last year. And this is what women of my age look like. So if it is offensive to you, that is unfortunate. Think about the emails that you send.

Think about the emails that you send. Amen to that. I read more about this and it turns out this was a viewer who had been sending nasty emails for four years. Oh my gosh. a viewer who had been sending nasty emails for four years. And so she was like, look, I'm done. And, you know, she had been very public about her cancer diagnosis, had taken time off work. A lot of the audience were familiar with her struggle. So I think this was a way of saying, that is way over the line and I'm just not going to take it. So Sue, what about you? What can you not let go of? The thing I can't let go of this week is partly politics and partly otherwise.

It involves the app Cameo. Do you guys know what this is? Wait, what is it? No, I don't know what that is. Cameo. Cameo is an app in which oftentimes a lot of celebrities, lower tier celebrities, if that's a nice way to say it. D-list, maybe? BC D-list. A mix of celebrities or other people of repute or ill repute, as it would be,

can be paid to send messages, video messages to people. And this week, Senator John Fetterman, Democrat from Pennsylvania, took advantage of this app because disgraced, expelled former congressman George Santos joined Cameo and was accepting donations to send Cameo videos. And Fetterman spent $334 and some change to have Santos send a Cameo to Bob Menendez, a Democrat from New Jersey, who is also under federal investigation. I don't think I need to tell you, but these people that want to make you get in trouble and want to kick you out and make you run away, you make them put up or shut up. I thought it was a good form of trolling, right?

You know, like Fetterman has not backed down from this. But then there was another story this week about Cameo that made me kind of change my views about how this app could be fun. Apparently, they are also being used in Russian disinformation, that Russia has used celebrity Cameos to distort them and make it look like celebrities are anti-Ukraine and undermining Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, and that they can take these cameos, they can request a cameo, and they've been asking celebrities to send a message to their friend Vladimir, which sounds like Volodymyr, asking him to get sober, get off drugs. This is part of a Russian disinformation campaign against the Ukrainian president. But all these celebrities have unwittingly been part of a Russian disinformation campaign,

and it's involved actors like Elijah Wood, who was in The Lord of the Rings, But all these celebrities have unwittingly been part of a Russian disinformation campaign. And it's involved actors like Elijah Wood, who was in The Lord of the Rings, the actress who played Meredith on The Office. Oh, my God. Again, not exactly like super big stars, but people you know and recognize, right? So this is not AI. They like willingly accepted this. They actually did these cameo videos because you don't really know who you're doing it for. Like that's the trick with cameo.

Like you kind of put yourself up and if someone sends you the money and says, hey, I could buy one for you, Asma, and say, send Asma a happy birthday greeting, and they'll send you a video message. So Russian disinformation agents have been getting celebrities to make these cameos and then repackaging them as anti-Zelensky efforts. So be careful of those cameos. I'm worried about TikTok. I'm worried about cameo. But George Santos has another career. George Santos has another career and another way to pay off those legal bills. He's going to need a lot of money.

He's going to need a lot. Okay, that is all from us this week. Our executive producer is Mathoni Mottori. This podcast is edited by Casey Morrell and produced by Jung Yoon Han. Thanks to Christian of Calamer and Lexi Schipitel. I'm Susan Davis. I cover politics. I'm Asma Khalid. I cover the White House.

And I'm Deirdre Walsh. I cover Congress. And thanks for listening to the NPR Politics Podcast. I'm Asma Khalid. I cover the White House. And I'm Deirdre Walsh. I cover Congress. I was just about to read your line.