We Can Do Hard Things with Glennon Doyle - Elon’s Email Power Grab, What to Do & Why to Have Joy: Calm News with Jessica Yellin

Episode Date: February 26, 2025

Elon’s Email Power Grab, What to Do & Why to Have Joy: Calm News with Jessica Yellin  Award-winning journalist, Jessica Yellin, breaks down the latest news unfolding in the US and world. Today, Amanda and Jessica discuss Elon Musk’s unprecedented power grab—and what it means for democracy, national security, and your everyday life, as well as Germany’s recent elections, the relationship between the US, Ukraine, and Russia, and a little good news about a recent medical discovery to restore our faith in humanity. -The new demand from Musk that panicked federal employees—and why some consider it a national security crisis -What members of Congress are (and aren’t) doing to stop DOGE -Two urgent actions you can take today to hold government officials accountable  -Why joy is a powerful tool of resistance and how to find some today  On Jessica: Jessica Yellin is the founder of News Not Noise, a pioneering, Webby award-winning independent news brand. Over 1M+ subscribers and followers across Instagram and other digital media rely on Jessica and News Not Noise to understand what matters, which experts to trust, and to manage their “information overload.” She is the former chief White House correspondent for CNN and an Emmy and Gracie Award-winning political correspondent for ABC, MSNBC, and CNN. Follow her on Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook @JessicaYellin. You can also find the News Not Noise Newsletter on Substack. To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Oh goodness gracious me. Welcome to We Can Do Hard Things. Today, this is Amanda and I am here with our beloved national treasure, Jessica Yellen. This is calm news. We are deciding with calm news not to put our head in the sand and also not to ride the chaos roller coaster. Instead, we are going to care enough to stay calm, clear-eyed and action-oriented. This is our goal. We are here with Jessica Yellen.

You know her, you love her. She is the founder of News Not Noise, a pioneering Webby award-winning independent news brand. Over one million subscribers and followers across Instagram and other digital media rely on Jessica and News Not Noise to understand what matters, which experts to trust, and to manage their information overload. She is the former chief White House correspondent for CNN

and an Emmy and Gracie award-winning political correspondent for ABC, MSNBC, and CNN. Follow her on Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook at Jessica Y-E-L-L-I-N. You can find the News Not Noise newsletter on Substack. Jessica, how the hell are you? Hi. What a nice intro. I am well. I'm going to tell you something I didn't warn you of in advance, which is-

Great. It's my birthday today. Shut! I know. Oh, Jessica, happy birthday to you. Thank you. I didn't know that. No, you wouldn't know. I didn't know that.

But I just have a commitment today to be happy and chill no matter how wild the news is. And that's my gift to everyone listening too. Is that cool? And my gift to you is I will join you in that. All evidence to the contrary, I will commit in honor of your birth to not losing my mind.

Amazing. If we can do it, everyone can do it, right? This is correct. This is correct. How are you? How is your week so far? Well, I am in DC, right outside of DC, and so over here in terms of all of the Doge reverberations everywhere, I feel like for the past all weekend and then through Monday, I was talking to all of my friends who were deciding, do we send the email back that has, you know, they got this

crazy email from Musk and asking them to list the five things they did in the last week, extensively to decide whether they should still have a job. And then they were all getting this conflicting stuff from their supervisors, either not saying anything or saying, yes, you need to respond. No, wait, don't respond. Then yes, do respond, but don't put anything in it that anyone could find out. But then they couldn't say what they did if they couldn't put anything in it that was confidential or a potential security risk. So it's just chaos and people don't know what the hell is going on. I mean, that's totally normal at work, right? And it sounds very efficient. Right. Super high efficiency here, the very least.

Exactly. Everyone's spending all the time deciding whether or not to respond to an email. It's the height of inefficiency from the person who's supposed to lead us to efficiency. So it's chaos over here. I know. DC is so, it's so interesting. I used to live there. I don't anymore. And I just remember you have this, as a reporter, you have like this one level of understanding of what's happening at a systems level, doing the work all day. And then you go home and you run into people who are actually living the thing you're covering and you're like, oh my gosh, the human piece of this is just so painful or it can be beautiful or whatever. But in this case, it's painful and confusing. And you see people struggling.

The point of this, right, is to make life so miserable for these federal servants that they leave. And I see that everybody's struggling with that. I mean, there's people on my street who have, you know, they've been working in divisions of protecting rights for 20 years, since college, since law school, and they just left because it's just too untenable. And then there's people who are trying to stick it out because they know the work that they're doing is important. So you really see like the effects happening.

It's icky. Yeah. It's so wild because I put my contact information on Signal out to the public. Signal's a secure messaging app where it's encrypted. And it's the way journalists are doing a lot of reporting now where you can feel that you're doing the most you can to protect your sources.

So I put that out on my newsletter and I say, if you have information or you're a federal worker, tell me what's going on. And people are sending me, partly they're giving me tips and it's super interesting we can talk about them. And then sometimes people are just sharing like, I'm having a mental health crisis. I've been in this job. I think my work is vital. I'm protecting a lot of people's lives in various ways.

And I'm scared for what happens if I lose the job, what happens to the people who are my responsibility right now. But also I can't take this personally, they're saying. It's just, it's brutal. There's so many dimensions. So what exactly happened with that? What is this?

I know, right? Okay, so here's the news. Over the weekend on Saturday, Elon Musk, in a very familiar fashion, anybody who has worked for him, especially at Twitter most recently, says, oh yeah, we went through this exact thing. He sent an email, or Doge sent an email

from some rando email address they created with government address to all 2 million federal workers minus those they recently fired saying, please respond by X and such time Monday in an email listing five bullet points detailing what you accomplished in the last week. Please be sure to CC your manager. That went out to everybody on a Saturday evening and then he followed it up with a post on

X saying failure to respond to the email we sent will be taken as a resignation. So that wasn't even in the email? Correct. So now X is the source of information for federal workers? Apparently government assignments come through X. I mean, okay, okay. Obviously that's not legal, but it's also one of these things where I keep thinking we're a little bit like in those Roadrunner versus Bugs Bunny cartoons where the Roadrunner

runs off the cliff and keeps running until he looks down and sees there's no ground under him. That's a lot of what Elon Musk is doing. And they're just like going so fast, they keep going. But at some point they're going to be like, no, there's gravity. So we're a little bit in that. Like, gravity is maybe starting to hit, but not yet. So right now, government workers are like, okay, do I have to, like, what does this mean? And so as you lived through, I was hearing this as a reporter, people were reaching out to their managers all weekend,

what do we do, and getting conflicting messages. All of the agencies that deal explicitly with national security matters, classified material, and intelligence told their staff by email, do not respond to this message. In other words, if you worked for the FBI run by Kash Patel now, if you worked for ODNI, the office of the Director of National Intelligence run by Tulsi Gabbard, You got an email saying, do not respond to this. Those agencies understood quickly that this was a deep national security threat and it would be dangerous for their employees to respond. And even though these people are Trump loyalists, they broke with Musk and said, don't. Other agencies like

social security administration said, do comply and then change their guidance Monday. So some people were told over the weekend to comply, did so. Learned Monday, it could be a national security threat that they did so. One person wrote me and said, I feel sick to my stomach that I replied. Then a lot of people got conflicting guidance. In many cases, it ended up with employees

directed to reply if they want to, it's voluntary, and directed to be very generic if they do reply and not describe in any specific detail what they really did, but more broadly, the kinds of things they did. Why is it a national security risk or why did those agencies determine that this was too much of a risk for their people to respond? Great question. It's because think about it, like if every single person in the government sends in a description of the work they do and copies in who their manager is, these emails create a map of our entire federal

government and show what work is done within which agencies, who's working on Africa classified information, who's working on Russia matters, who's working on cybersecurity in the US, where cybersecurity loopholes lie inside the Social Security Administration. Not only does it map all this information, it then clarifies these employees working on these things report up to this manager who reports up to that manager who reports on and on. So, you've created now a map of all the workings of the government and you're taking that map and directing it to a single email address, which means any one individual who can hack that email now has a map of our government. One person who works in intelligence said to me, this is doing the bidding of China and Russia for them. This is the

information our adversaries and threat actors have wanted for all of time. And in fact, HHS, run by RFK Jr., put out an email on Monday telling staff, if you reply to this, use coded language and assume anything you write will be obtained by threat actors. Wow. So when you put it like that, so Musk writes to everyone in the CIA and says, tell me everything you worked on, including your manager. When you think about that, that's insanity.

It's also, I think, instructive because it gives the lie to his claim that what he's really interested in is efficiency and rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse. Because if you think about it, this is a guy who's brought in, as we discussed, these kid hackers to obtain the data from every agency, right? Presumably, because they're using that data because they're so smart, they can use AI to assess where the waste fraud abuse is and which workers are doing a good job and which aren't. If their access to the data isn't telling them which workers are showing up to work and which aren't and who's lazy and who isn't and who's good and who's not, why do they

need all that data? And if he's acting in the best interests of our government, why would he send out a mass email without coordinating it with our agency heads who are also loyal to Trump and doing it in a way that protects the security of the nation? He's not doing any of the above. So it raises a question, why is he accessing that data and why is he shooting from the hip so recklessly when it comes to such sensitive material about the security of our government?

I have some theories, you know. And also not to lose sight of, he is not the government. He is a private, for-profit, billionaire tech dude who is unvetted and unrestrained in terms of any kind of actual oversight. And he personally has this information. Yeah. I mean, this is why I think it's going to come crashing down because at some point, this is just offensive to even the most conservative Republicans loyal to Trump. This just flies in the face of what our standards and values and rule of law is. We can talk about what regular people have to do to help get leaders to do that. But to answer your question first,

I think that we could postulate, is he doing this so that he, Elon Musk, has all this information so that he can get government contracts and advantage? Well, to answer that question already today, there's news that Starlink, well, that Doge decided that certain contracts the FAA had were not being well executed. And now Starlink has those contracts, a company run by Musk. Yes. Wait, Doge said that these contracts with these other companies weren't working

and gave them to himself? I have to just be careful. I can't necessarily say it was Doge that made the assignments, but Doge decided that there's all this waste and inefficiency inside the FAA and fired a lot of people. We don't have transparency to understand the inner workings of exactly how the decisions are being made.

There's lawsuits to get that transparency. The result of a lot of decisions led to these contracts being awarded to Starlink. Did Doge make those decisions? Did someone else? Wow. We do know Doge entered, said there's problems. Elon Musk ends up with contracts.

That's just one example. Wow. Then, you know, Doge, when it started, to give it like legitimacy, it merged with this thing. I'm gonna bungle the name, but it's like Office of Digital Strategy inside the government. It's basically like the IT efficiency entity

in the government. And it merged with that. And a bunch of the staffers who had been there before just resigned in protest for some of the things Doge is doing. And some of the ways they're getting info and stuff. So should I pause? I think we should all pause.

I think we should collectively pause. Hey, should we do one of our breaths? I think that's a great idea. Should we do an inhale and then a slow exhale? Inhale. Maybe we should. Hold. Exhale for seven or eight.

Exhale for seven or eight. Exhale for seven or eight. Exhale for seven or eight. Exhale for seven or eight. Exhale for seven or eight. Exhale for seven or eight. Exhale for seven or eight. Exhale for seven or eight.

I do find that helpful. I do too. Like reminding yourself that we're all spinning into what could be, which is important because it gives you the context to understand why these actions matter. But it's also good to remember that all of the worst hasn't happened. We're sharing this knowledge now so that everybody can take action. What happens when fear and prejudice are ignited by the hysteria of war? I'm Sharon McMing, host of Here's Where It Gets Interesting. I answer that question in my new series, 9066, and dig into the stories of more than 120,000

people of Japanese ancestry who were imprisoned in the United States during World War II. Find here's where it gets interesting in the free Odyssey app and everywhere you get your podcasts. What with regard to this specifically, what are the reactions from anyone who theoretically is supposed to be stopping this kind of thing? And also what can we do if we are horrified by this overreach and this national security threat? So a couple things.

I mean, we're starting to see, there's judges who are starting to say, we need to know what Doge is doing and how. We need as a court to have transparency into these activities. And I'm sure there'll be a legal battle on that, but that'll be important. And also to see if they comply once the courts rule. There's also, it is meaningful to see that even the most diehard Trump loyalists stood up to Musk

and said no. Cash Patel, you can't get a bigger Trump loyalist. He said no, right? I mean, it's true, but I'm wondering, is that because it's sort of an ego contest where it's like, this is my little fiefdom and you can't do this? Or is it that? Sure. where it's like, this is my little fiefdom and you can't do this? Or is it that? Sure.

I mean, even if it's for bad motives or not the most noble motives, one thing that happens in these environments is you get these clash of egos. Like when you're not governed by rules and law, but by personality and dominance, the clash of egos is part of what just makes them fall apart because it's not a functional system, right?

Right. So it isn't necessarily an integrity thing, but regardless, the outcome is the same. They were willing to go against Musk in this case. And say, no. And so it proves that his power is limited or has limits for now. Right. Also, after he did that weird scene last week where he held up a chainsaw at a conference and what what. I think that a lot of, even conservatives have started to say around the country, I don't like that, who is that guy?

Why is he in our government? Why is he wearing his black hat and his black sunglasses and his gold chains and holding a chainsaw on the stage? WTF. And then there's this random video showing as he left the stage, he just hurried off, like he just had the best performance of his life and was jacked on something and left his toddler son wandering around alone on the stairs. Okay.

Yeah. And that crosses party lines. Right. So there's a couple things we could say. One is, first we should note that the other piece of this is what is he doing with the data? Where is that data going? He's in all these agencies. You know, I think Tim Snyder, who's written about authoritarianism, said, if in another country you saw tanks roll up to the government agencies and people run out with guns to steal their files, you would call that an attack on the government.

In this case, it's hackers getting the key to our files, which is digital. We don't know what they're doing with them. It is also an attack on our institutions, quite reasonable to argue that. And Musk is creating an AI right now called Grok and has set on the record that AIs are running out of new information, new data to train on. You know, AI runs on this collection of data that you can then ask questions and it spits back the information it got from that data.

They need new data to grow and be big. Government data is the most trusted, valuable data that there is. Is there a possibility he's using this to train his AI? We don't have transparency, so we don't know. There's not Congress people aren't talking about this people there's no vocal pushback other than the court cases. So there is something going on in Congress. Democrats are pushing back to varying degrees, some quite heatedly like Chris Murphy of Connecticut, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar. I even saw Gillibrand.

Many are, you know, ringing the alarm. Others are being quite quiet. And so are a lot of Republicans, especially Republican senators who are traditionalists, true institutionalists. It causes me to wonder why they're all being, those people are being quiet. And it's my belief that they are kind of holding their powder, keeping their powder dry while this all goes on

to see what the impacts are. And saving it for a moment when they actually get to the work of legislating and they have some leverage, and it would be my expectation that at some point those people will say, you want our votes, you need to put boundaries around Doge. Okay, okay. All right, well, there we go.

There's that. Happy birthday, Jessica. Wait, I'll say one happy thing, which is I do remember we all flipped out about Steve Bannon in the first administration. Yes. And granted, he did not have the power to exfiltrate our data and save it. And to me, that's a different kind of risk and a unique one. But he also caused hair on fire anxiety as well.

And he was out of the White House within nine months because of ego clashes. Right. So. Okay. All right. One can hope. All right. We just have to hold on until Jessica's half birthday and we can say goodbye to you lot.

What is happening elsewhere in the world? Okay. Should we talk about foreign policy for a minute, then we can go to Congress? Let's do it. I'm trying to think of a happy thing that's happening first to talk about, but we can just go to the news. Is there a happy thing we could talk about? I don't know.

Okay. So the happy news that I saw that was very exciting in your newsletter was that a brilliant woman named Ava Ramon Gallegos came up with a treatment for HPV, which is the virus that causes cervical cancer. And it doesn't have these terrible side effects like chemotherapy, et cetera. So good job, Ava. Way to keep our faith alive in humanity. That's the good news. I love that. Yeah, she said that it has been proven to totally cure the illness in 29 women. That's real news that doesn't suck.

That is real news that doesn't suck. Okay, so moving right along to things that suck, what's going on in the world? That was a nice palate cleanser. It was. I feel good about that. 30 seconds we had. Nice. Thank you, Ava. Very good.

Okay, so let's go to the UN. So this week, it was the three-year anniversary of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. And the UN held two different votes that amounted to a call to condemn Russia for invading Ukraine. And in a shocking move, the US refused to sign on to that and instead sided with Russia in an effort inside the UN calling for peace, but without casting blame for the war at all. That's weird. It's really weird. That's really weird. This is as clear cut a case as it is.

You have a sovereign nation with established internationally respected borders, and you have another nation crossing those borders to claim that land as their own and killing people and instigating a war. There is not a more clear cut case for like this isn't allowed under international law and just general morality. Right. It's the definition of an invasion. Exactly. What was the reaction to that around the world? What was the explanation from the White House as to why we would embrace an imperialist way of being? It follows on Trump last week calling Zelensky a dictator.

He was this week asked if he also thinks Putin is a dictator and wouldn't answer the question, wouldn't use the word again. He also last week said that Russia did not invade Ukraine. Republican senators disagreed with Trump and said Russia did invade Ukraine. At one point, Trump sort of walked it back. The fact that the US as a policy wouldn't vote to agree that Russia invaded Ukraine is enormously meaningful, striking. I can't remember another time the US sided with Russia over a war that they've started.

It's just a total breach of US foreign policy and tradition. Some people have sort of darkly joked, is Russia now our ally? Are we now in the axis of powers with Russia and China against Europe? Europe's, you said, what's been the reaction? Macron, the French president, came to the White House and did the most elaborate courting of Trump and sort of flattering him and we're your friend and we adore you. All the personal stuff you need to woo Trump in order to get him to the position they want. But Europe is holding an emergency summit on March, I think it's March 6th, to decide how to proceed with European security now that they feel the US may not be their ally or may not be in their corner if Russia chooses to invade a European nation.

Okay. So I find it curious that they're saying that like it's a joke of, could it be as outrageous as we're allies with Russia? I don't think that's what it is. Okay. I think that what Trump's doing is, I think there's two pieces to it. One is he does have this historic affection for Putin. Obsession with desire to emulate strong rules with an iron fist. That's how I would like to view myself. Yes. And has a specific history of getting financing from Russian interests and a history of doing business with Russian interests.

And a history of election interference in his favor from Russia. He loves strongmen and has a specific affection and affinity for Russia and Putin, it seems. Right. Remember Helsinki in his first term where he took this private meeting with Putin and said, he believes Putin over America's own intelligence community. Yeah, it was a sort of signal moment in that administration. So we're sort of seeing echoes of that. I will remind everybody that even though we saw that happen during the same term, the Trump administration also sanctioned a lot of oligarchs and Russian diplomats.

So they did take action against Russia. It wasn't a sudden allyship. There were just these inconsistent messages. And we don't know what else, right? So is it possible that what Trump's doing is, his own mind at least negotiating with Putin, flattering him, playing to his ego in order to get the deal that he wants to bring a peace to Ukraine? That's possible. What's remarkable is the way he's going about trying to reach that peace is by sort of demanding of Ukraine that it make the concessions Russia wants at the outset before negotiations begin without demanding any similar concessions from Russia.

And also making an extreme demand of Ukraine that's bizarre, which is that they give us, the US, 50% of their rare earth minerals, which is a vital natural resource for them that Zelensky says would take 250 years for his descendants to repay. And I'll just circle back and close the loop here. Rare earth minerals are essential to building AI. So if we were to plunder Ukraine for these things, it would be presumably to make the US the AI capital of the world, which is what Trump announced he wants Along with Musk and Sam Altman and Larry Ellison the tech bro-ligarx around him Holy shit, so it all circles back

to that Yeah, okay one way to think about this that may or may not help is There's this term cacistocracy, which is a form of government that's all about plunging to enrich oligarchs. What he could be doing is trying to create American oligarchs, basically. Right. Well, I mean, that's why they were all standing behind him at the inauguration, right? They know something we don't, which is why they all got on board very quickly and enthusiastically. So also just from like a world order standpoint, didn't he also say that any resolution of

the Ukraine-Russia war would not result in Ukraine having its original borders? Yeah. So country A invades country B that has, country B has its established borders. And the results of that is that country A gets part of country B. The invader is rewarded with part of country B. That is a crazy dangerous way to reward invaders. It is. And the idea is that Russia would hold the area it already occupies. I will say that the Obama administration set Ukraine up for this by failing to engage when Russia first invaded Crimea.

And by sort of allowing the invasion, you have a Russian occupation. In order to push Russia out, it would require sort of ongoing war, force, a lot more leverage than Europe and the US seem, even prior to now, were willing to bring, right? At the time when the Biden administration was flowing all those weapons to Ukraine, Russia was still occupying that land and they couldn't get them out of that part of the country. So Russia's been there, I guess it's since 2014, they've been occupying part of that land. Oh, so that's the border that he's talking about. They've expanded beyond that during this

war, but it is around the port and the water around Crimea. Yeah, and Donetsk and that region. So it's the part of the territory that Russian troops already hold and have been holding for some time. I'm sure there'll be border disputes, but what they're basically saying is, no, we're not backing you to have some like intensified period of combat to push Russia out.

Got it. Okay. And the main complaint from Ukraine really, like if we're being practical and strategic, is I'm going past what the actual reporting is, but stick with me. It's basically Ukraine's position is a little bit like, sure, sure, we might have to give up this land, but don't say that going in. Let us hold that as negotiating position to give it up to get something. Yes, that is the art of the deal, isn't it? Correct. I mean, he wrote the book, he's not being very artful.

So that's what's happening there. And then we also said that Ukraine should not be part of NATO, which would be the body that would help protect it from future invasions. Because isn't the idea that, okay, this is this time with Russia, but then they get this and what prevents them from coming back and completing the job and just taking the whole thing if they don't have NATO. Yeah. And this has been, you know, the US has been conflicted on whether Ukraine should be admitted to NATO or not for years because Ukraine wasn't admitted previously because the West was concerned Russia would take that as a provocation and then invade. Now that they've invaded, it's a little like, do they get protection or not? The big sticking point at this stage, I mean, JD Vance already, or was it Hegseth, said the US will oppose NATO membership for Ukraine.

But when the big questions is, will Russia accept either EU or NATO peacekeepers inside Ukraine as part of a peace? So somebody's gotta hold the peace. If you're not stationed there to rebuff Russian troops, what's going to keep Russia from invading further after everybody withdraws? So what they're negotiating now is like,

will EU or NATO peacekeepers be allowed in? And Trump, after saying no, has now said yes, and it's all very uncertain at this stage. Okay. What the hell happened in Germany? Do we want to talk about that? Yeah. Do you remember that? You said Vance and it reminded me. JD Vance went to Europe and met with that leader of the AFD, the sort of far far right

extremist party in Germany that's seen as, you know, the farthest right party they've had since the Nazis. It's not Nazis, but it's sort of like Nazi-like, worryingly leaning that way. of like, worryingly leaning that way. So JD Vance met with them and sort of extended their support to them. And Elon Musk gave this actual virtual address to their conference and basically endorsed them. So the AFD won second place in German elections that just happened, but actually less of a win

than they had hoped for. But more than they've ever had, right? More than a far right party has had since the Nazis were in power. So Germany was deeply concerned about this. And the biggest winner is the conservative party. So right now Germany is governed by a center left party. This is a change of the guard.

The conservatives will be in charge. They have a coalition government, so you have to make deals with other parties, so it will be conservatives and centrists. One thing that's a huge relief is all the parties agreed that the AFD, that far right party, will not be allowed in the coalition. So they will not have a governing voice in that way.

And the conservative leader, when he accepted Mertz, when he accepted the win, in his acceptance speech basically said, we can't rely on America to be our ally. Europe needs to come together for Europe's own defense and announce the summit that's gonna be happening on March 6th that we spoke about earlier.

Okay. So, I mean, it is extremely worrying shift to the right, but it's also reassuring that Germany internally decided to ice out the AFD. Yes. Yes. And I will say that after Vance and Musk endorsed the AFD, their poll numbers fell because Germans were like, yeah, no, we don't like your interference. Nah.

So it actually hurt. Ah, that's fascinating. Okay. Do you want to talk about Congress? No, I think it's worth acknowledging Congress. I mean, this might actually be a cause for some levity. The Republicans, you might note, have done almost no legislating so far. Most of what Trump has, they passed one bill, I think, small bill, but most of what Trump's

done has been by executive order or by Doge just steamrolling in. So if Congress had to give us five bullet points on what they did last week, they would not be able to do it. So they are... Watch the overreach of power and the taking away of congressional power with total passivity. Check. Check. Check. Oh, that's a good line. Feed that to your AI. You could write it. Yeah. So this week, the House is considering and trying to pass a budget, the first step of their budget measure. And the big bill they want to get done is one big budget

bill that the House wants to pass. Trump has called it a big, beautiful bill that basically crams many of their top priorities into a single bill. And it would include lowering the corporate tax rate, extending the tax cuts Trump had from last time, new measures on all sorts of Trump priorities, and they will have to find, I think like two billion dollars in savings. In part, they don't say this exactly, but it's very clear that it's gonna include cuts to Medicaid. They've directed one specific committee to find eight hundred billion dollars of cuts, and the only place they could do that is Medicare or Medicaid. If they cut Medicaid, it's going to be wildly unpopular.

So wildly. I mean, think about that really hurts Trump voters. And so they have the smallest majority in Congress in, I think, 100 years. And so they're struggling to find a majority. Long story short, their conservative members want steeper cuts. Their members who live and work in swing districts don't want Medicaid touched.

They can't afford any defections. It doesn't look like they're going to be able to get this passed with their own votes. The Senate will try to pass, has a different bill that they've moved with. They're going to have to figure out a solution. But one possibility is if they don't get something done in the next week or so, we face a government shutdown.

They're going to be desperate. The Republicans might have to say to the Democrats, hey, can we make a deal with you? And if they get to that point, Democrats will say, well, if you do, here are some of our priorities, which presumably would include limits on Doge, transparency around Doge, and protecting Medicaid and these other things. That's why I think some members, going back to the beginning of our conversation, have been keeping their powder dry so that they can come to negotiations with, you know, some friendliness to cut a deal. And this is why voting matters at every level, right?

Because if they did not have such a small majority, they would just be able to pass all of these. Ram it through. Ram it through, okay. Kind of like a la Elon and executive order. Okay. One other thing also why people who live in blue districts, it's worth contacting your members too,

to say that you want them to fight for this and you will get their back if they do. Yes. Yes, this is an important takeaway that if you are hearing all of this and you're like, what do we do as people sitting in our homes? You need to find out your local regional congressional offices. Find out where your people are in your congressional district and visit that office. Sign up for their newsletters so that you know when they're doing their town

halls, show up at the town halls, call them and say, you are my representative, you need to curb this overreach of executive power, I put you in this job to do that, stand up for us and for the checks and balances of our government. And when you do, you will have my back. And if you don't, you will not. And do that whether you are a Democrat and you have a Democratic leader, or if you're a Republican and you have a Republican leader, you can say the same thing. I voted for this Trump. I did not vote for Elon. I voted for a small government. I did not vote for chaos and for national security threats.

Do something about this. And I'll say, as a journalist, I don't have a problem weighing in on this because fighting attacks on our government is not a right left partisan endeavor. It's an all Americans endeavor. I don't think right-left partisan endeavor. It's an all-Americans endeavor. I don't think this is a partisan call. And I just want to make it really easy.

Every single representative has a Washington office, but they also have a regional office. So wherever you live, there's an office near you that is for your member of Congress. So what you can do is Google your zip code and who is my member, if you don't know, Google their name and contact local office. And your senators will have multiple local offices and your representative will too. You can call those office numbers or get their email and you say, I want to be added to your email list or I want to know when you're holding town halls.

email and you say, I want to be added to your email list, or I want to know when you're holding town halls. And you want to get on a system that notifies you when they're having town halls, and then get with your friends and show up at those things. You don't have to be wildly well informed or anything. You just want to be present because what's going to happen is there's a congressional recess coming up soon for spring break. And what they do is go back to listen to their constituents. And when members start getting earfuls

and start saying like, my constituents are going wild, that gives them leverage to push back on the White House and say, hey, this isn't me. I'm just letting you know what I'm hearing from home and I'm gonna lose my seat if you don't help us compromise in some way that makes my constituents happier. Honestly, that all makes a difference. It also leads to social media content that goes viral, you know, all of that. So these are important things everybody can do. Yes, and Republicans and Democrats,

Democrats need to not just, they need to figure out and do their job. They need to just not sit there and be like, well, we're not doing it. No, you need to be an equal and opposite force and figure out what you need to do to stop this. Totally. And there's one thing I thought I'd ask you, Amanda, which is, some people have said to me, like, I want to convene,

I want to get together with my friends. And I've always wondered if there's, in this moment, a need for people across the country to form their own circles, where they can get together and like talk about the news, get informed, plan together to go to these things, solve together how to find those emails. So you're not in it alone. Yes. I think that that's right. I've been thinking a lot about how much easier it is to break things than to make things,

and how much work isolating and depressing us does, and how when the whole effort is to overwhelm, make numb, depress, and have us not know which way is up, then resistance to that is connecting with each other, feeling relief and joy with each other, building those connections. Because all of this is trying to destroy connections. And when you don't like your life,

there's a lot less to fight for in your life. And so what I think we should be doing, whether it's for civic purposes or not, is really leaning into connections with our neighbors, with our community, with our friends of like holding on to the things that give life and that make us have something to fight for and that the only solutions to any of these things are gonna be in community. So making sure that we're building strong that community base. So I love that idea. I love that idea. That's beautiful and you know what's so interesting is I interviewed this woman named Anna Applebaum, who's a Pulitzer Prize winning historian.

She's written about Eastern Europe and Russia. Her expertise is authoritarianism. And when I asked what can regular people do to protect democracy, she said two things. Get involved in your local politics and connect with community to do that. So build community locally, which is exactly what you're talking about. And the other thing is make sure you practice joy in your life. It's literally what you're saying, that part of the project of authoritarianism is to crush your spirit. And if you can continually fuel that fire of enjoyment, creativity, pleasure, wonder at the world,

and especially in community with others, you're in the mindset of defense. And that itself is a form of resistance. Defensive joy. I love that. I love that. I love that. That's so beautiful.

Thank you Ann Applebaum and thank you Jessica. We did it. We did. Happy birthday, calm news. I feel calm. Even when it was hard. And I feel a desire to go get my joy right after I call my Senator and my representative.

Good priorities. In fact, I might take a little joy in the calling of my representative and my senators. Go for it. We can do hard things, y'all. We can go get accountability from our government and we can go get our joy. We can do hard things. Stay calm and clear and take your action. See you soon. If this podcast means something to you, it would mean so much to us. If you'd be willing to take 30 seconds to do these three things. First, can you please follow

or subscribe to We Can Do Hard Things? Following the pod helps you because you'll never miss an episode and it helps us because you'll never miss an episode. To do this, just go to the We Can Do Hard Things show page on Apple podcasts, Spotify, Odyssey, or wherever you listen to podcasts, and then just tap the plus sign in the upper right-hand corner or click on follow. This is the most important thing for the pod. While you're there, if you'd be willing to give us a five-star rating and review

and share an episode you loved with a friend, we would be so grateful. We appreciate you very much. We Can Do Hard Things is created and hosted by Glennon Doyle, Abby Wambach, and Amanda Doyle in partnership with Odyssey. Our executive producer is Jenna Wise Berman and the show is produced by Lauren Legrasso, Alison Schott, Dina Kleiner, and Bill Schultz.