0:00

Today we're going to talk about Trump's

0:02

threats to the legal community and the

0:05

implications for the rest of us. And

0:07

I've got two interviews I speak with

0:09

Congressman Jamie Raskin about Trump targeting him

0:11

by trying to withdraw Biden's pardons for

0:13

all members of the January 6th Committee,

0:15

and I sit down with Potsave America's

0:17

John Lovett to discuss Elon playing the

0:19

victim over vandalism of Tesla's. I'm Brian

0:21

Taylor Cohen, and you're listening to no lie. So

0:23

Trump is doing something right now that he

0:25

knows is going to fly under the radar

0:28

to the radar, but will have massive, massive

0:30

implications. He's begun extorting law firms,

0:32

wherein he threatens the lawyer's ability

0:34

to work within the government, he

0:36

intimidates their clientele, he risks their

0:39

reputation, unless those firms decide to

0:41

bend the knee and do it a

0:43

firm, for example, called Paul Weiss, opted

0:45

to do, which is to offer $40

0:47

million in legal services to conservative causes

0:49

that Trump approves of. This is, for all

0:51

intents and purposes, an extortion

0:53

racket. And of course, the cop on this

0:55

beat normally would be the Department

0:58

of Justice. which under Pam Bondi

1:00

will never investigate this, meaning basically

1:02

that Trump gets to do it. But Paul

1:04

Weiss wasn't without options. Trump also

1:06

attacked another firm called Perkins Kui, which

1:08

opted not to bend the knee, and

1:10

instead sued Trump in court. They decided

1:12

to put their values ahead of a

1:15

strong man's desire to force his opponents

1:17

into submission. And so I bring this up

1:19

for a specific reason. It's not necessarily

1:21

to pick on Paul Weiss. Paul Weiss

1:23

doesn't care what some YouTube or thinks

1:25

about them. And I'm sure that they've...

1:27

heard from their own clients who actually

1:29

pay their bills and that probably stings

1:31

a lot more than anything that I

1:33

could say. But I bring this up

1:35

because this isn't just about one law

1:37

firm. It's about the lesson that Trump

1:39

learns when he gets one big law

1:41

firm to capitulate, because then it makes

1:43

it impossible for the rest of these law

1:46

firms to put up a unified fight and

1:48

actually fight back. If Trump shows that he

1:50

owns one law firm as big as Paul Weiss,

1:52

then what hope do the rest of them have?

1:54

The same way that if Trump can show

1:56

that he owns Mark Zuckerberg at meta or

1:59

shoe at ticked then the rest of the

2:01

social media platforms know that there will

2:03

be no unified front in tech companies

2:05

against Trump. If Trump can show that

2:07

he owns Bayesos's Washington Post or the LA

2:10

Times, there will be no unified front in

2:12

newspapers against him. If Trump can show that

2:14

he owns ABC News or CBS by getting

2:16

them to settle frivolous lawsuits in his favor,

2:19

then there can be no unified front in

2:21

the media against him. There's a reason that

2:23

he goes after the big fish in all

2:25

of these sectors. It's because once he

2:27

topples one or two. then it destroys

2:30

this illusion that there will be collective

2:32

action against him. It sends the message that

2:34

it's basically no use standing up to

2:36

him because eventually they'll be going against

2:38

the President of the United States and

2:40

the rest of the U.S. government and

2:42

they'll be doing it with no support. But

2:44

this really is a microcosm of the broader

2:46

issue of our time, the thing that we

2:49

need most and the thing that we are

2:51

in the shortest supply of. And I'm not

2:53

talking the usual question of do we need

2:55

a tack left like Bernie Sanders or do

2:57

we need a tack right like Marie Glusin

2:59

Campres? It's not about where you land on

3:01

the ideological spectrum that people are focused on

3:03

right now. It is whether you're willing to show

3:05

some fight. We've watched big tech and big media

3:07

and big law all bend the knee. None of them

3:09

have figured out the advantage of standing tall

3:12

side by side. None of them have prioritized

3:14

their integrity over the whims of a despot.

3:16

None of them have showed a willingness to

3:18

fight. And then we watch the Democrats last

3:21

week, after months of promising to fight

3:23

and never back down, do exactly that

3:25

with the continuing resolution. We are in

3:27

desperate need of some courage, of some

3:29

spine. And if the media won't do it, if

3:31

the tech companies won't do it, if

3:33

lawyers won't do it, if our elected officials

3:36

won't do it, then it's going to be

3:38

incumbent on all of us, incumbent on regular

3:40

people to take the lead. That means showing

3:42

up at town halls when there are

3:44

town halls. It means showing up to

3:46

elected officials offices. It means calling, it

3:48

means going to marches, it means taking

3:50

to the streets. And I promise you

3:52

if there is one thing that will

3:55

move everyone, I'm talking to the

3:57

government, businesses, the media, that's

3:59

when pop... populations rise up. They will

4:01

operate with a sense of impunity until

4:03

it becomes clear that there won't be

4:05

impunity. So if there's an opportunity to show

4:07

up, take advantage of it. Again, if there

4:09

are town halls or protests or marches, go

4:12

to them. I know that with all this

4:14

shit bearing down on all of us, the

4:16

last thing that you might feel is empowered,

4:18

but I guarantee you that showing up en

4:20

masse is the single most powerful tool that

4:22

we have. It has the power to topple

4:24

dictatorships and autocracies, and autocris, and that includes

4:26

the one burgeoning right here in the United

4:28

States. If no one else is going to come

4:30

and save us, recognize that we are going

4:32

to have to do it ourselves and

4:34

that we can. Next up are

4:37

my interviews with Jamie Raskin and

4:39

John Lovett. Noly is sponsored by

4:41

Better Help. Therapy should feel accessible, not

4:43

like a luxury. With online therapy, you

4:45

get quality care at a price that

4:48

makes sense and can help you with

4:50

everything from anxiety to everyday stress. I

4:52

myself have gone to therapy, it has

4:55

helped me immensely, it has helped me

4:57

immensely and I highly recommend that everybody

4:59

else do the same. And for better

5:01

help, with over 30,000 therapists, they are

5:04

the world's largest online therapy platform having

5:06

served over 5 million people globally. It's

5:08

convenient to any time. Your well-being is

5:11

worth it. Visit betterhelp.com/no lie to

5:13

get 10% off your first month.

5:15

That's better help help.com/no lie. I'm

5:17

joined now by Congressman Jamie

5:19

Raskin. Congressman, thanks so much

5:22

for joining. Psych to me, Brian.

5:24

Obviously, some big news that was just

5:26

revealed by Donald Trump is this idea

5:28

that he is making null and void

5:30

any pardons that were granted by Joe

5:32

Biden to members of the January 6th

5:35

committee. Obviously, you sit on this committee.

5:37

So can I have your reaction to

5:39

both the legality and just in general

5:41

him deciding to try and attack, attack

5:43

members of the January 6th committee?

5:46

One president cannot revoke. or

5:48

veto another president's pardon. So that

5:50

simply doesn't exist. He's complaining

5:52

that Biden used an auto

5:54

pen, although there's no evidence

5:56

for the fact that he

5:58

used an auto. of them. In

6:00

any event, the Constitution doesn't say

6:03

you can't use an auto pen.

6:05

The president is the power to

6:07

pardon and commute sentences. So let's

6:09

hope that this is a passing

6:11

fancy and just a little drizzle

6:14

in the summertime and that he

6:16

doesn't press it too hard. Look,

6:18

we know he was running around

6:20

threatening to prosecute Liz Cheney and

6:22

Benny Thompson, the chair of our

6:25

committee and the vice chair of

6:27

our committee. And that's why this

6:29

general pardon was issued to members

6:31

of the committee. But for all

6:33

intents and purposes, it's a valid

6:35

legal pardon. And that is within

6:37

the unilateral power of the president.

6:39

If not, a lot of people

6:42

would be challenging the idea that

6:44

he could pardon. actual insurrectionists who

6:46

he incited to try to overthrow

6:48

an election to keep him in

6:50

office. Does the fact that he's

6:52

trying to do this the legality

6:54

notwithstanding signal that it is indeed

6:56

his his desire to go after

6:59

his political opponents who sat

7:01

on the January 6th committee?

7:03

Oh, well, there's no doubt about that.

7:05

I mean, he's been tweeting against

7:07

us and vilifying us. You know, ever

7:09

since the bipartisan January 6th

7:11

Select Committee, which he calls

7:13

the unselect committee, has been

7:15

in business. But here's the

7:17

thing, Brian, they haven't laid

7:19

a glove on a single

7:22

factual finding or determination that

7:24

we made in the report.

7:26

of the bipartisan select committee. They set

7:28

up a whole subcommittee on the House

7:30

administration committee under Congressman Lauder Milk to

7:33

try to go after Liz Cheney and

7:35

to try to find stuff wrong. They

7:37

couldn't find anything. They literally have not

7:39

contradicted a single factual statement. Now they

7:41

would like to come up with some

7:44

alternative story that oh it wasn't really

7:46

the proud boys the oathkeepers and the

7:48

mobs that were incited by Donald Trump

7:50

it was Antifa they would love to

7:52

be able to say he was really

7:55

the FBI that did it but all

7:57

of that is nonsense and it's been

7:59

debunked by the factual record and we

8:01

interviewed more than a thousand people

8:03

and we looked at you know

8:05

more than a million pages worth

8:07

of documents and we had all

8:09

of these interviews and everything is

8:12

scrupulously documented in the report and

8:14

they just haven't touched any of

8:16

the facts of it because we

8:18

were looking for the truth on

8:20

a bipartisan basis and that's what we

8:22

did. Congressman you and I both know that

8:24

when Trump issues some edict, that becomes the

8:27

new reality for the people who he's surrounded

8:29

by. And so if he says, for example,

8:31

that, you know, January 6th was some inside

8:33

job by the DOJ, then suddenly that becomes

8:36

the reality for the people who surround him

8:38

and they're going to say, yes, that was

8:40

the, that was an inside job by the,

8:42

by the deep state. And so we have

8:45

to, we have to go ahead and do

8:47

Trump's bidding and do Trump's bidding and do

8:49

Trump's bidding. basically Trump's DOJ following through with

8:52

this witch hunt that's being laid out.

8:54

Regardless of how insane it might be,

8:56

if they do go ahead and and

8:58

follow this trail that's being left by

9:01

Trump, this happens at the expense of

9:03

what? Like what given the fact

9:05

that we have limited resources with

9:08

our law enforcement agencies, what would

9:10

fall by the wayside by virtue

9:12

of basically Trump's DOJ following through

9:14

with this witch hunt that's being laid

9:17

out by Trump? Well, it's not

9:19

a hypothetical. I can give

9:21

you examples of things they've

9:24

already undone. They disbanded, they

9:26

disbanded multiple anti-corruption task forces,

9:28

including one called the Anti-Cleptocracy

9:31

Task Force, which focused on...

9:33

Seems pretty on the nose.

9:35

Yeah, kleptocrats and oligarchs abroad

9:38

in their corruption of American

9:40

public and private institutions. Yeah.

9:42

sacked a dozen prosecutors simply

9:44

because they had worked on

9:47

prosecuting January 6 cases and

9:49

these were the most experienced

9:52

and senior criminal prosecutors in

9:54

the DC U.S. Attorney's office.

9:56

So they've been getting rid of a

9:59

lot of the very best officials

10:01

in the Department of Justice at the

10:03

top levels of the public integrity

10:05

unit has just been like utterly

10:08

gutted. They are and it's true

10:10

of the national security unit. You

10:12

just go down the line. They've

10:14

gotten rid of the leadership. They

10:16

don't want people actually looking at

10:18

these things because they want to

10:21

pave the way for corruption of

10:23

Donald Trump's friends both in America

10:25

and from abroad. Well, in terms

10:27

of disregarding the law in deference

10:29

to what Donald Trump wants, we're

10:31

seeing right now the Republicans die

10:33

on this hill of basically ignoring

10:36

a lawful court order that was

10:38

handed down by Judge Bozburg, and

10:40

this is about migrants being deported.

10:42

And so Judge Bozburg handed down

10:44

this ruling that says that they

10:46

can't be deported because they haven't

10:48

had due process. The Trump administration

10:50

opted to refuse to comply with

10:52

that order. Folks are going to

10:54

look at that and say, how is

10:56

this not a constitutional crisis? I mean,

10:59

this is the moment that we've been

11:01

waiting for, so to speak, where we

11:03

have a lawful court order that was

11:06

handed down by a judge. Trump administration

11:08

outright refuses to comply. They finished those

11:10

flights to Venezuela. And so what do

11:12

you say to the folks who are

11:15

sitting here saying, how is this not

11:17

a constitutional crisis? Well, it's a

11:19

massive constitutional violation. Let's begin

11:21

with that. they picked up

11:24

these Venezuelans and arrested them

11:26

and then without any due

11:28

process at all just began

11:30

the process of deporting them

11:32

to a third party country

11:34

to El Salvador all under

11:36

the purported guys of the

11:38

Alien Enemies Act of 1798

11:40

which permits the detention of

11:42

foreign nationals if we are

11:44

at war with the country

11:46

that they come from. So

11:48

if Congress had declared

11:51

war on Venezuela then Donald

11:53

Trump could be doing that if there had

11:55

been a military invasion by Venezuela Donald Trump

11:57

could be doing that but none of that

11:59

is taken place. This statute's not

12:01

been invoked since World War II

12:04

when it was used for the

12:06

internment of Japanese American citizens as

12:08

well as Japanese foreign nationals during

12:11

World War II after the bombing

12:13

at Pearl Harbor. Well, you know,

12:15

we've got we've got Republicans, we've

12:18

got Trump administration officials, hell, we

12:20

have Judge Janine on Fox News, literally

12:22

a judge who are advocating to continue

12:24

doing this, to continue disregarding court orders,

12:27

to continue disregarding the very concept of

12:29

due process. And so what's your message

12:31

to those folks? You know, this is

12:33

a political party that has spent decades

12:36

beating its chest about being law in

12:38

order, about the importance of following the

12:40

law, following the Constitution, following statutes that

12:42

are now really, again, the hill that

12:45

they're dying on is that we shouldn't

12:47

have due process in deference to the

12:49

fact that they want to expedite these

12:51

deportations. I mean, they make a mockery out

12:54

of the rule of law. I had a professor

12:56

who started one of my classes

12:58

by saying, what are the two most

13:00

beautiful words in the English language?

13:03

And he said, due process. Because that's

13:05

where we can figure out if,

13:07

first of all, they've got the right

13:09

person, right? They may have the wrong

13:11

person with the same name. They may

13:14

have somebody who looks like the other

13:16

person. They might just be sweeping up

13:18

an entire family. There might just be

13:20

sweeping up. undocumented people so

13:22

nobody even knows because there's no due

13:25

process and then there's no opportunity for

13:27

evidence to be heard on both sides,

13:29

for people to be legally represented, for

13:31

people to sum up their case and

13:34

have a conclusion. That's what due process

13:36

is all about. In the rule of

13:38

law, if you think about what the

13:40

American Revolution was all about, there was

13:42

law obviously under the kings, under the

13:45

monarchs. The rule of law is that

13:47

it abines people in power as well.

13:49

It applies to the rulers as well

13:51

as to the rabble. Do you think that

13:53

the Trump administration maybe using this as

13:56

a pretext to be able to carry

13:58

out their broader deportation plan? by kind

14:00

of normalizing us to this idea

14:02

that they don't have to abide

14:05

by, you know, the constraints of

14:07

due process, and they can lean

14:09

on the, you know, the statute

14:12

from the late 1700s. knowing full

14:14

well that yes everybody who's contained

14:16

within their their their their roundups

14:19

are not gang members but they

14:21

can still use that as a

14:23

pretext to be able to carry

14:25

out you know their their broad

14:28

deportations of really just vast numbers

14:30

of migrants. I mean the

14:32

historical precedent for that is

14:34

the alien and sedition acts

14:37

of the 1790s where it established

14:39

this landmark precedent that laws

14:41

like these would be used to

14:43

go after immigrants and then they

14:45

would quickly be used to go

14:48

after citizens too who engage in

14:50

speech which is seen as dissident

14:52

or subversive speech and so in

14:54

those days it was the dangerous

14:56

subversive Frenchman who were being swept

14:58

up around the country and newspaper

15:01

editors who were being too friendly

15:03

to the French Revolution and that's

15:05

been the history of this that if

15:08

you allow The government says there's going

15:10

to be a whole category of people

15:12

millions of people who have no rights

15:15

and no due process. It is inevitably

15:17

going to sweep citizens up into it

15:19

as well. And do you think that

15:22

there's posed some risk to citizens now

15:24

or political opponents of this administration given

15:26

the slippery slope that the Trump administration

15:29

would be engaging in? Well, they mean to

15:31

take the guy Kaleel that they picked up

15:34

in New York, right? So... He first, they

15:36

went looking for him on a student visa.

15:38

He didn't have a student visa. He's a

15:41

permanent resident of the United States. He's got

15:43

all the First Amendment rights that you and

15:45

I have. There were no criminal charges

15:47

against him. He'd never been arrested. He'd

15:49

never been convicted of anything. All they

15:51

had on him is that he had

15:53

gone to protests against the Gaza War.

15:56

You know, along with hundreds of thousands of

15:58

other people in the country. And then,

16:00

what do you know, he ends

16:02

up on an airplane and then,

16:04

you know, he's moved to a

16:06

completely different part of the country.

16:08

So, yeah, like, that's the road

16:10

we're going down. We already see

16:12

what President Trump is doing in

16:14

terms of unleashing the FCC on

16:17

ABC, on CBS, on MSNBC, which

16:19

he calls MSDNC. You know, he

16:21

actually, he repeatedly said the other

16:23

day when he showed up at

16:25

the Department of Justice and completely

16:27

desecrated the values of that institution.

16:29

that he felt like the news media

16:31

should be illegal because of what

16:33

they say and what they do

16:35

and because they oppose him. And

16:37

he says that with a straight

16:39

face, thinking that just because they

16:41

have a different political view than

16:43

him, that he should be able

16:45

to make them into criminals. And

16:48

that is absolutely the short road

16:50

to authoritarianism. Well, look, Congressman, we see

16:52

all of this happening and it

16:54

really deserves an urgent response. And

16:56

I think the problem is that

16:58

now... A lot of folks in the Democratic

17:01

base are not seeing that from our

17:03

elected officials. And that's really coming into

17:05

particular focus in the last few days.

17:07

And you have a base that largely

17:09

views the Democratic Party as unwilling to

17:12

exercise power when it has it, and

17:14

unwilling to exercise leverage in the rare

17:16

instances where even from the minority, we

17:18

can use it. And look, you have

17:21

been somebody who's been wholly willing to

17:23

stand up and fight and really exercise

17:25

the power that we have. And so I

17:27

guess what's your message? to the Democratic

17:29

base more broadly in seeing what

17:31

they view as a political party

17:33

that's really not meeting the moment

17:36

with the urgency that it deserves. Look,

17:38

I'm perfectly willing to believe that

17:40

there have been all kinds

17:42

of tactical and strategic errors

17:44

in the Democratic Party. I don't think

17:46

it's fair to say that the

17:49

Biden administration and the Democrats in

17:51

Congress did not use the power

17:53

we had in the last administration.

17:55

We had... narrow majorities to start

17:57

off with and then we were

18:00

in the congressional minority, we

18:02

still passed an historic infrastructure

18:04

investment bill. I sat there

18:06

for four years under Donald

18:08

Trump with, you know, infrastructure

18:11

week, infrastructure month, infrastructure barbecue.

18:13

They never gave us anything.

18:15

And the Democrats got that

18:17

down to $1.2 trillion investment

18:19

in roads, highways, bridges, ports,

18:21

airports, you name it. Hot

18:23

prescription drug prices and inflation

18:25

reduction act. We had a

18:27

record historic investment in climate

18:29

action and solar and wind

18:31

and alternative energies and so

18:33

on. But I think. It's, to

18:36

me, it seems perfectly fine to

18:38

say that the Democrats have been

18:40

slow to figure out how to

18:43

deal with this nightmare of a

18:45

full-blown fascist assault on every democratic

18:47

institution. I mean, if you go

18:50

back and look at what happened

18:52

in World War II, it took

18:54

America four or five years, you

18:57

know, at least to get serious. about

18:59

what was happening in Europe, right? Not

19:01

four or five weeks, four or five

19:03

years. And, you know, the thing about

19:05

democratic parties, I think Churchill observed this,

19:08

was that the democratic parties, the freedom-loving

19:10

people of the world, have lots of

19:12

other stuff going on in their lives.

19:14

They've got family lives and they've got

19:16

other things they're doing, and it took

19:19

a while to get the democratic countries

19:21

focused on the real peril of... Hitler

19:23

and Mussolini and what was taking place

19:25

in Europe. All of which is to

19:27

say, yeah, we need to get our

19:30

act together to be focused. I think

19:32

it's ridiculous that House Democrats and Senate

19:34

Democrats didn't get together and say, what

19:36

is our plan for the joint session

19:39

of Congress? So some people were boycotting

19:41

and some people were waving little signs

19:43

and some people were walking out and

19:46

it just looked like chaos. That's not

19:48

a unified coherent message. And the same

19:50

thing. on what I think was this

19:52

terrible continuing resolution, which inflicted a lot

19:55

of damage on our people on

19:57

health care on Medicaid. And also,

19:59

I think. retroactively validated

20:01

what Doge was doing. But in any

20:03

event, whether you think that was worse

20:05

or it was worse to go into

20:07

the long dark night of a shutdown,

20:09

I can see arguments on both sides.

20:12

Let's have that argument up front and

20:14

let's figure out a game plan. We've

20:16

got to go into these things with

20:18

a game plan and the ability to

20:20

call audibles and leadership that's going to

20:22

be on it as opposed to everybody

20:24

do whatever they want. To that point

20:26

then, like, clearly there is an

20:28

uproar right now, and so has

20:30

the decision then been made? I

20:32

mean, bring us behind the curtain

20:34

a little bit in terms of

20:37

what that looks like now, because

20:39

I don't think that folks are,

20:41

I mean, look, they're not willing

20:43

to accept it in that it

20:45

just passed. I mean, Democrats are,

20:47

the democratic base is angry, and

20:49

so moving forward, does it look

20:51

like it's going to be different?

20:54

Will there be unanimity? I don't know

20:56

the answer to that question. I mean,

20:58

I hope yes, I will be fighting

21:00

for it. Yes, I mean, and I

21:02

know that Hakim Jeffries and

21:04

Chuck Schumer live in the same

21:06

neighborhood. I mean, they're from the same

21:09

congressional district that Hakim represents. They

21:11

should be able to get it

21:13

together and get all of us

21:15

together to say, let's move into

21:17

these things with a united focused

21:19

front. on how we're going to

21:21

navigate this. I mean, we're in

21:23

the minority in the House, we're

21:25

in the minority in the Senate,

21:27

we're in the, we're on the

21:29

Alps in the White House, and

21:32

we're in even in the minority

21:34

in the Supreme Court. So we've

21:36

got to be organized and cohesive as

21:38

an opposition force that it's planning on

21:40

taking back Congress in 2026 because we've

21:42

got to cut this reign of terror

21:44

in half. That's our job. We've got

21:47

to do that and we've got to

21:49

be organized and cohesive and if anything

21:51

like this happens again I guarantee you

21:53

that the sentiment will be overwhelming that

21:55

there needs to be new leadership. Well

21:57

look that that that that sensified I

22:00

think exactly what a lot of people

22:02

are looking for here. So I appreciate

22:04

that and I appreciate your time today.

22:06

Well, I appreciate that. And the final thing

22:09

I guess I would say about it, Brian,

22:11

is look, we need powerful, aggressive,

22:13

creative new leadership all over

22:15

America. And I'm not just

22:17

talking about in the legislative

22:19

or parliamentary context, I'm talking about

22:21

in cities and towns and counties

22:24

and states and civic society, business

22:26

and labor, like now is a

22:28

time for us. to lift up

22:31

creative new leadership that's willing to

22:33

fight for strong democracy in America.

22:36

Perfectly put. Congressman, thanks for your

22:38

time. You bet. Thank you, Brian. No

22:42

lie is sponsored by Acorns. They say money

22:44

can't buy happiness. That might be true,

22:46

but money sure can make you feel

22:48

a lot of other things, like stressed

22:50

and guilty and overwhelmed. That's because when

22:52

you're not in control of your money,

22:54

your money can control you. Acorns is

22:56

a financial wellness app that helps you

22:58

take control of your money with simple

23:00

tools that make it easy to start

23:02

saving and investing for your future. You

23:04

don't need to be an expert. Acorns

23:06

will recommend a diversified portfolio that matches

23:08

you and your money goals. You don't

23:10

need to be rich. Acorn lets you

23:12

get started with just the spare

23:14

money that you've got right now,

23:16

even if all you've got is

23:19

spare change. Basically, Acorns does the

23:21

hard part so that you can

23:23

give your money a chance to

23:25

grow. And look, at a moment

23:27

right now, where things do seem

23:29

so tenuous, having control where we

23:32

can get it is especially important.

23:34

with acorns. Head to acorns.com/BTC or

23:36

download the acorns app to get

23:38

started. Paid non-client endorsement, compensation provides

23:40

incentive to positively promote acorns, due

23:43

to compensation provided, investing

23:45

involves risk, acorns advisors, LLC,

23:47

and SEC registered investment advisor,

23:49

the important disclosures at acorns

23:51

dot com, slash, BTC, I,

23:53

C, registered investment advisor, the

23:55

important disclosures at acorns.com, slash

23:57

PTC. And by the way, loving. I'm

24:00

sure they're going to send some

24:02

comments. Tell us we look great.

24:04

Hi. Hi. OK. So we are

24:06

now in a moment where we're

24:08

watching these Tesla's be set on

24:10

fire across the country. Elon has

24:12

been using this as an opportunity

24:14

to present himself as the victim.

24:16

What do you make of the

24:18

fact that? even as this guy

24:20

is responsible for overseeing cuts to

24:22

lifelines that the American people need,

24:24

responsible for cutting USAID and food

24:26

programs that impoverished people need, and

24:28

HIV prevention programs, and the Consumer

24:30

Financial Protection Bureau, which only exists

24:32

to help people that are the

24:34

victims of predatory financial institutions, that

24:37

he is going on national television

24:39

and yet again presenting himself as

24:41

the victim in all of this.

24:43

Look, there's nothing. more dangerous than

24:45

a bully that thinks he's a

24:47

victim. Donald Trump is a bully pretending

24:49

to be a victim. The modern

24:52

Republican Party is a bunch of

24:54

bullies pretending to be victims. That's

24:56

the core of their appeal. And

24:58

I think what's dangerous about Elon

25:01

is currently doing is He's going

25:03

on television and saying Democrats are

25:05

committing these acts. It was reported

25:07

that it was one person in

25:10

Las Vegas. The reason political violence

25:12

is dangerous, the reason it is

25:14

dangerous when protests turn violent, even

25:17

if the vast majority of protesters

25:19

are peaceful, is because it puts in

25:21

the hands of a few random actors,

25:23

the direction of the news, the direction

25:25

of our politics. We don't believe in

25:28

ceding control of our politics to random

25:30

people deciding that They get to tell

25:32

us what happens in our country. That

25:34

is wrong when Elon does it at

25:37

Doge. That is wrong when somebody takes

25:39

a shot at Donald Trump during the

25:41

campaign. That is wrong when people try

25:43

to take a protest. I mean, in

25:46

these cases, these are just acts

25:48

of vandalism happening all over the

25:50

country, but in other cases, when

25:52

you have protests where a few

25:55

actors decide to take it upon

25:57

themselves to make those protests destructive.

26:00

I don't agree with that. I

26:02

don't think that's a good thing

26:04

to do. But this is why

26:06

democracy is important. This is why

26:08

it is important that we have

26:10

a constitution in which Congress,

26:12

based on the votes of

26:14

the people that sent them

26:16

there, decide how the money

26:18

is directed. And then the

26:20

president executes that money. Yes,

26:22

through his... appointees through

26:24

his administration, but also

26:26

through the oversight of

26:29

Congress and with the

26:31

approval of judges making

26:33

sure the law is being followed. The

26:35

danger of what we are seeing

26:37

is if in one arena... A

26:39

group of people decides the law

26:41

doesn't apply to them. It makes

26:43

a lot of people feel powerless.

26:45

It makes a lot of people

26:48

feel as though the rules don't

26:50

matter anymore. It makes a lot

26:52

of people feel as though we

26:54

don't live in a country of

26:56

laws, that people won't be held

26:59

accountable, that democratic accountability will allude

27:01

us. And that is not just

27:03

a recipe for the country at

27:05

large. We all collectively benefit from

27:07

a system. in which people trust

27:09

that leaders will be held accountable to

27:11

the voters and to the constitutional order

27:13

that has made us the envy of

27:15

the world. You know, there's been a

27:18

lot of debate lately about whether or

27:20

not we're in a constitutional crisis. A

27:22

lot of legal experts are pointing to

27:24

the fact that, okay, we're not technically

27:26

in a constitutional crisis until there has

27:28

been a court order that wasn't followed.

27:30

It was appealed up to an appeals

27:32

court, it was appealed up to the

27:34

Supreme Court, and then if the Supreme

27:36

Court issues ruling that runs counter to

27:38

what the administration wants to do,

27:40

and yet the administration barrels

27:42

ahead anyway, that's technically a

27:45

constitutional crisis. And then you have,

27:47

you know, a broad swath of the rest

27:49

of the base, of which I would probably

27:51

include myself, where what we're seeing right now

27:53

is so obviously counter to everything the Constitution

27:56

says and so clearly a crisis, and I'm

27:58

curious what your thoughts are. on this

28:00

as this parsing of words and

28:02

definitions kind of plays itself out.

28:04

I think it's so fucking stupid.

28:06

As you were coiled. I felt

28:08

this long before. I feel like

28:10

the question, are we in a

28:12

constitutional crisis is the wrong question

28:15

to be asking. First of all,

28:17

I think it's a distinction without

28:19

a difference. Like we're in a

28:21

big crisis. Yeah. I think you

28:23

can just take the word constitutional

28:25

and make it mean big. Are

28:27

we in a big crisis? Absolutely.

28:29

There's no moment at which Donald

28:32

Trump, like first of all,

28:34

Donald Trump and the people

28:36

around him are smart enough

28:38

to know that you don't just

28:40

on a random day decide

28:42

to stop following brazenly a

28:45

constitutionally valid order from a

28:47

judge. You slowly erode those

28:49

protections. Already. We have

28:51

Donald Trump. reporting people to El

28:53

Salvador without so much as a

28:56

hearing, a judge says, hold on

28:58

a second, the Trump administration says,

29:00

too late, the plane was already

29:02

over international waters. The president of

29:04

El Salvador says, oopsie, the secretary

29:06

of state doesn't defend an American

29:09

judge, doesn't offend the American system,

29:11

but just simply reposted. He's on

29:13

the side of El Salvador's president.

29:15

You have other examples of the administration claiming,

29:17

oh, we just did it. You said

29:19

it in court, but we didn't see

29:21

it in writing or it happened too

29:23

late. There in some cases saying that

29:25

they don't have to follow rulings and

29:28

other cases saying they are following them,

29:30

but it was just too late. In

29:32

others saying that the judges have no

29:34

right to rule on these issues. There's

29:36

not going to be a day, a

29:38

bright line that we cross, and we

29:40

say now we're in the constitutional crisis.

29:42

We are slowly getting into a deeper

29:44

and deeper crisis in which the President

29:46

of the United States, who is

29:48

at root instinctively and authoritarian, is

29:50

slowly and deliberately eroding the guardrails

29:52

that protect us from those abuses.

29:54

Does that mean we're in a

29:56

constitutional crisis or just a big

29:59

fucking crisis? I don't know. I

30:01

don't care. And I think that's such

30:03

a good point, that I think everybody's

30:05

waiting for the day, that we switch

30:08

from a democracy into an autocracy, but

30:10

it is inherently the fact that they

30:12

are normalizing a lot of what we're

30:14

seeing right now, that the Overton window

30:17

is shifting day by day, that expressly

30:19

gets us to the point where we

30:21

won't even notice that switch as it's

30:24

happening. like we've seen it even with

30:26

with Elon has been peppering this idea

30:28

of impeaching judges whose rulings don't

30:30

comport with his political ideology and

30:32

so rather than just you know

30:35

abide by the law rather than

30:37

just follow the regular judicial process

30:39

maybe appeal a ruling that you

30:41

don't like he's like get rid

30:43

of the judges, just go right

30:45

to the root and just eliminate

30:47

people who exist in positions of

30:49

power that don't redown to my

30:52

political, financial, or personal benefit. Here's

30:54

another part of this. We're already

30:56

so far down this road. What

30:58

is the rationale that Chuck Schumer gives

31:00

for why he... decided to vote

31:02

in favor of a continuing resolution

31:05

to keep the government open when

31:07

Democrats have the ability to say

31:09

no and prevent a bill from

31:11

being passed without concessions or causing

31:13

a government shutdown. One of the

31:15

arguments was, I am worried about

31:18

what happens if we go into a shutdown

31:20

because it won't have an end, there's

31:22

no off-ramp. And Elon and

31:24

Trump continue their rampage

31:26

across the federal government,

31:29

this extra legal, unconstitutional

31:31

defiance of Congress, ignoring

31:33

of the law. As

31:36

if it's not happening

31:38

right now. First of all, as if

31:40

it's not happening right now,

31:43

but second of all, hold on

31:45

a second. What you're saying is,

31:47

and this is the danger of

31:49

what fascism loves. What

31:51

fascism loves. If there are

31:54

places where institutional rules and

31:56

procedures are a counter to their

31:58

plans, they ignore them. If there

32:00

are places where the institutions can

32:02

help them, they'll use them, right?

32:05

Donald Trump loves to have a big

32:07

inaugural where he is held up,

32:09

where he can march. He loves

32:11

being on Air Force One. He

32:13

loves the powers of the presidency,

32:15

the lawful, real constitutional powers of

32:17

the presidency. But if what we're

32:19

saying already is that Donald Trump's breaking

32:22

of the law over here creates

32:24

leverage over here when he's following

32:26

the law. We are already conceding

32:28

to the rise of authoritarianism. We

32:30

are already saying that Donald Trump's

32:33

lawlessness is working. That to me

32:35

is the biggest problem, right? And

32:37

that, and like, regardless of the

32:39

debate, and I think it's a

32:41

hard debate, but regardless of that,

32:43

we are already conceding that Donald

32:46

Trump is taking us into authoritarianism,

32:48

because just by admitting that Donald

32:50

Trump's doge lawlessness is leverage, we

32:52

are conceding that the authoritarian

32:54

takeover is basically kind of unfolding

32:57

in front of us. Right, that it's

32:59

legitimate. It's happening. You know, a lot

33:01

of what we're seeing is that as

33:03

he continues to do this. It's making

33:05

him and Republicans obviously less popular. And

33:07

we're seeing that play out at town

33:10

halls across the country. We're seeing it

33:12

play out in poll numbers for Trump

33:14

and Republican Party. But at the same

33:16

time, there aren't Democrats stepping in to fill

33:19

that, like, to fill that void. I

33:21

think Democrats largely view this as, okay,

33:23

things are moving in the right direction,

33:25

but when Democrats are simultaneously not doing

33:27

anything to help their own poll numbers,

33:29

then we don't take advantage of the

33:31

rare opportunity that we have here to

33:34

kind of exploit his weakness, because we're

33:36

getting as unpopular, we're continuing to decline,

33:38

even as Republicans are continuing decline. So

33:40

how do you think of this in

33:42

terms of... this moment right now where

33:44

we should be taking advantage of the

33:46

precipitous decline in the popularity of

33:49

this Trump Republican Party and

33:51

instead Instead we're again like I

33:53

think the latest CNN poll show

33:55

Democrats as the least popular they've

33:57

been since the polling polling began

34:00

Right and so what's what's driving

34:02

that right part of it is

34:04

going to be the toxic brand

34:07

that Democrats have that is a

34:09

little bit the the aftermath of

34:11

the election in which voters basically

34:14

and is something that's true around

34:16

the world were fed up with

34:18

rising costs are I think like all

34:21

we are all still collectively dealing

34:23

with the trauma of the pandemic

34:25

and the changes that it accelerated

34:27

and incumbents paid a price for

34:30

that. Democrats were the incumbents. We

34:32

were paying a price for that. I

34:34

also think we have a massive credibility

34:36

issue with voters. That is because we

34:39

got behind a president who was too

34:41

old because we didn't have an alternative,

34:43

there wasn't enough time to define a

34:46

new path. So what does that tell

34:48

us? I think one, people want to

34:50

see us fight. I think that's why

34:53

some one reason the numbers so low

34:55

is the Democrats are angry. That's the

34:57

other reason they're so low. So we need

34:59

to fight. We need to push back against

35:02

this deeply unpopular agenda. People did

35:04

not sign up for lower

35:06

people signed on to attack

35:08

the rising cost of living.

35:10

They did not sign on

35:12

for dismantling cancer research Medicaid.

35:14

The parks department. the call

35:17

centers for people to get

35:19

help with their social security.

35:21

We need to fight that

35:23

everywhere. Elon Musk is not

35:25

a popular figure. Unleashing a

35:28

billionaire to slash social services

35:30

and government services is not

35:32

a popular position. There's

35:35

just, that is still reality.

35:37

But and by the way, just fighting

35:39

those things might be enough to

35:41

bring out the people we need

35:43

in 2026 to take back. the

35:45

House prevent Donald Trump from passing any

35:47

more of his agenda through Congress if

35:50

he still gives a fuck about Congress

35:52

then. But it still leaves the problem

35:54

that in the coming years we need to

35:56

figure out how to appeal to more people

35:58

both to win the presidency. and to

36:00

win Senate seats outside of

36:02

the progressive and liberal places

36:04

and moderate places we already

36:06

are barely hanging on to

36:08

47 seats like Democrats in

36:10

the future especially because as

36:13

states like California lose population

36:15

to states like Texas and

36:17

Florida we won't even be

36:19

able to win the presidency

36:21

with the with the states

36:23

that gave Joe Biden the White House

36:25

so like Donald Trump goes to New

36:27

York and says, we're going to

36:30

win New York. Obviously, that's bullshit.

36:32

But then you see a big shift in New

36:34

York. Towards Donald Trump,

36:36

this craving, ignorant, gut-instinct

36:39

politician, has the wherewithal

36:41

to imagine a future in which he

36:43

can win 40 states. Why can't we?

36:45

Right? If we're losing to the dumbest

36:47

motherfuckers on earth, what does that make

36:50

us? Well, you know, I think one point

36:52

that was especially potent that you made was

36:54

that we need people to fight. It's been

36:56

our misguided view or intreparty battle for so

36:58

long that like which which is the right

37:00

ideology? Is it going to be, you know,

37:02

do you want to have candidates who are

37:04

more progressive? Do you want to have candidates

37:06

who are more moderate? My view on this.

37:08

I've tried to take a nuanced view on

37:10

this as like, you need both, right? This

37:12

isn't like rocket science here. You need people

37:14

like Jared Golden who are going to win

37:17

in Maine and with, and you're just not

37:19

going to get, you're just not going to

37:21

get Bernie Sanders to win in Jared

37:23

Golden's district, right? But at the same

37:25

time, I don't necessarily feel like that's

37:27

on point right now because It's what

37:29

I've seen more and more of is

37:31

that people just what regardless of their

37:33

political ideology where they land on the

37:35

spectrum people just want Democrats who are

37:37

willing to go in there and fight

37:39

and and it's been so long I

37:42

mean even since I've been involved in

37:44

digital media for politics I've I've watched

37:46

as Mitch McConnell who I believe we'll

37:48

spend the rest of eternity in the

37:50

depths of hell alongside the worst people

37:53

of humanity for all that he has

37:55

wrought onto this country and the ways

37:57

that he has dismantled and fundamentally

37:59

damaged our democracy, you won't find a

38:02

single Democrat who's going to say, well, we

38:04

don't see how effective he's been. And the

38:06

fact that he can go in there and

38:08

he knows how to win. And Democrats just

38:11

aren't willing to do that. And the example

38:13

that I like to use is the parliamentarian.

38:15

And Democrats will get a bad ruling from

38:17

the parliamentarian and they'll say, well, the parliamentarian

38:19

says we can't do that. And so what

38:22

could we possibly do? And the Republicans are

38:24

like. The parliamentarian says we can't do that,

38:26

so let's get a new fucking parliamentarian. And

38:29

they've literally just replaced the parliamentarian.

38:31

And that's a microcosm for the broader

38:33

fight. And I think that we're just

38:35

at a point, regardless of political ideology,

38:37

regardless of whether you are a Jared

38:39

Golden Democrat or an Ilhan Omar Democrat

38:41

or anywhere in between, that what we

38:43

are missing in this party is just

38:45

some sense of fight of conviction of

38:47

actually going to the wall and making

38:49

sure that what you are in office

38:51

to do, you're able to accomplish. Yeah. I

38:53

think that was good. What do

38:55

you think? I think that was

38:57

good. I mean, I'm just curious

38:59

where you stand on this because

39:02

it for so long has been

39:04

an issue of, well, we're not

39:06

progressive enough or we're not moderate

39:08

enough and we have to, you

39:10

know, lefties say that we have

39:12

to go more to the center

39:15

and vice versa and I just

39:17

don't think that that's where we

39:19

are right now. There is left, right.

39:22

And I think that one is the

39:24

one where we spend most of our

39:26

time debating. But why? Well, partly because

39:28

it has been in recent years the

39:30

left of the party that's been the

39:33

most aggressive, the most competitive, the most

39:35

adept at social media, and that has,

39:37

I think, had the most backing from

39:39

kind of more engaged online younger progressives.

39:42

Though, we now have data from this

39:44

election that shows the millennials. continue

39:46

to be America's progressive generation.

39:48

We're the only one that

39:51

hasn't gotten more conservative. That

39:53

George W. Bush was a

39:55

vaccine against right-wing politics and

39:57

Brock Obama was the booster

39:59

shot. to put it in a way that will

40:01

push off every room for sure. For

40:04

sure. For sure. But the, like, if

40:06

you look at Democratic politics

40:08

overall longer, like let's say the

40:10

last 30 or 40 years, who are some

40:13

of the most successful Democratic

40:15

politicians? They have been

40:17

Bernie Sanders. They've been

40:19

Barack Obama. They've been Bill

40:21

Clinton. And what did they offer?

40:24

They offered an attack on the

40:26

status quo and on the establishment.

40:28

from Bernie Sanders, it's for the

40:30

left. For Bernie Sanders, it's from

40:33

the left. For Barack Obama, it's

40:35

against DC. From Bill Clinton, it

40:37

was from the center, right? Each

40:39

of them ran against an establishment,

40:42

and that's what people were really

40:44

looking for. So what does that

40:46

tell you? So what are the

40:49

other two axes? It's fight, which

40:51

is what you're talking about. George

40:53

W. Bush wins handily in 2004 despite

40:55

the ongoing chaos in Iraq. Again, it

40:57

was supposed to be this big realignment.

40:59

Democrats figured out over the next two

41:01

years had a fight back and win

41:04

the House. And I was there, it

41:06

was huge. It was exactly what we

41:08

needed to put us in a position

41:10

to believe we could really win in

41:12

2008. How did we do that? Well,

41:14

one, it was just running against the

41:17

chaos and extremism of the Bush. agenda.

41:19

They had the ongoing fiasco in Iraq.

41:21

They had an effort to privatize Social

41:23

Security. They had a failed effort

41:25

to pass immigration reform, which today

41:27

would be the liberal bill, to be

41:29

honest, and they had Katrina, and

41:32

they had a bunch of corruption

41:34

in Congress. People like Jack Abramoff,

41:36

there was this scandal involving a

41:38

guy named Mark Foley. For most of

41:40

that campaign, for most of that season,

41:42

you're really just running against Republicans, but

41:44

in the closing months, there was this

41:46

agenda. It was this reform agenda. It

41:48

was anti-corruption. It was campaign finance reform.

41:50

It was pro-union. It was raising the

41:52

minimum wage. It was pocketbook issues, like

41:55

simple policies that the whole caucus could

41:57

get behind. Yes, there were some people that

41:59

were more progressive. there were some people that

42:01

were more centrist. By the way, this

42:03

was back in the day when there

42:05

was a Democratic Senator from Nebraska and

42:07

there was a Democratic Senator from Montana

42:09

that were much more conservative, that became

42:11

actually the limiting factor in Barack Obama's

42:13

agenda a few years later. But we

42:15

were able to build this big coalition

42:17

with a clear critique of the Republicans

42:19

plus a simple unifying agenda everybody could

42:21

get behind. And I think right now,

42:23

my question is, is that the right

42:26

in this environment, like, is it the right thing

42:28

to do now to wait to wait? as we

42:30

would normally do, right? You would say, you don't

42:32

want to put out an agenda now, you want

42:34

it to be there in the fall of next

42:37

year, which feels like, can't believe it's only been

42:39

two months, or do we need to start now?

42:41

putting together a vision for what we're going to

42:43

do by listening to what we're hearing from people,

42:46

which is they just don't know what Democrats stand

42:48

for. Like, did we pay such a price for

42:50

having Joe Biden being completely unable to communicate what

42:52

Democrats stand for basically the second two years, second

42:54

half of his administration, and for Kamala Harris, I

42:57

think being hamstrung by having to defend

42:59

the administration, and being hamstrung by some

43:01

of the positions she took in 2020,

43:03

leading people to have no fucking idea

43:05

what she stood for, have we paid

43:07

a heavy price for the politics. of

43:09

2024 that we have to now get

43:11

ahead of that with a clear agenda?

43:13

I don't know the answer. I think

43:15

Bernie Sanders right now, I think, is

43:17

incredibly effective in this fight over a

43:19

garky tour, which is mostly geared around

43:21

the enemies of our democracy, but does

43:23

have his progressive politics at its center.

43:25

You have people like Chris Murphy and

43:27

Brian Johnson and others that are out there

43:30

trying to do this in their ways that

43:32

I think is helpful. I agree with you

43:34

that we kind of need them all. I

43:36

don't have an answer. Let's finally finish off

43:38

with this. I don't know if you've seen

43:41

the latest Fox News appearance from Mike Johnson.

43:43

I'm going to put it right up here

43:45

on the screen. I would like your initial

43:47

reaction to maybe some bronzer being used by

43:50

Mike Johnson and other members of the Republican

43:52

Party. I have many substantive critiques

43:54

of Mike Johnson and the Republican

43:56

Party, but I think it's important

43:58

that we as progressive... always remember

44:00

that we are not just fighting

44:03

for the liberation of of queer

44:05

people and marginalized people but we

44:07

are fighting for Mike Johnson's liberation

44:09

too and if what he feels

44:11

he needs is a kind of

44:13

gender affirming care kind of to

44:15

help express his masculine identity if

44:17

what he is trying to do

44:20

to be his best self is

44:22

make these kinds of changes, I

44:24

support him. And I want him

44:26

to know that even though he

44:28

lives in a political world of

44:30

rigid division and expectations that lead

44:32

him to have to make these

44:34

kinds of changes, we support him

44:36

however he wants to look, but just

44:38

know that in a future where

44:41

everyone can be themselves and

44:43

we celebrate. difference and nuance

44:45

in how people express their

44:47

gender, maybe he wouldn't feel

44:49

so much pressure to look

44:51

a certain way. The way

44:53

I think about it is,

44:55

you know when dogs and

44:57

their owners start to look

44:59

the same? That's a really

45:01

good point. Well, you know,

45:04

there is a certain kind

45:06

of right-wing aesthetic taking hold.

45:08

It is extreme, it is

45:10

conformist, it is hyper real, and...

45:12

People get their faces they deserve. Love it.

45:14

Thank you for taking the time. Thank you.

45:16

Good to see you. Thanks again to Jamie

45:19

Raskin and John Lovett. That's it for

45:21

this episode. Talk to you next week.

45:23

You've been listening to No Lie with

45:25

Brian Tyler Cohen. Produced by Sam Graber,

45:27

Music by Wellsey, and Interviews edited for

45:29

YouTube by Nicholas Nicatera. If you want

45:32

to support the show, please subscribe on

45:34

your preferred podcast app and leave a

45:36

five-star rating in a review. And as

45:38

always, you can find me at Brian

45:40

Tyler Cohen on all of my other

45:42

channels, or you can go to Brian

45:44

Tyler cohen.com to learn more.