Inauguration Interviews: Trump's Talent, Democratic Rebrand & more with House Whip Emmer, Reps Swalwell & Khanna

Summary

Podcast Summary: All-In with Chamath, Jason, Sacks & Friedberg

Episode Title: Inauguration Interviews: Trump's Talent, Democratic Rebrand & more with House Whip Emmer, Reps Swalwell & Khanna
Release Date: January 20, 2025

---

The All-In Podcast hosts—Chamath Palihapitiya, Jason Calacanis, David Sacks, and David Friedberg—delve into the political landscape following Donald Trump's second term inauguration. In this special episode, they engage with key political figures, including House Whip Tom Emmer, Representatives Eric Swalwell and Ro Khanna, to dissect the state of the Democratic Party, fiscal policies, immigration, and the regulation of emerging technologies like cryptocurrency and TikTok.

---

1. Democratic Party's Struggles and Rebranding

Discussion Overview:
The hosts express disappointment over the Democratic Party's performance in the recent elections, critiquing the lack of a competitive primary and the perceived rush to endorse Kamala Harris without sufficient vetting of her capabilities.

Key Points:

• Primary Process Concerns: Jason Calacanis criticizes the Democrats for not conducting a robust primary, suggesting it led to supporting a candidate perceived as "in cognitive decline."
• Leadership Corruption: Tom Emmer accuses Democratic leadership of being influenced by superdelegates and wealthy donors, undermining genuine democratic processes.

Notable Quotes:

• Jason Calacanis [01:28]: "Why has the Democratic Party left me, somebody who voted Democrat two out of three times?"
• Tom Emmer [04:55]: "It's done to Cabinet picks now, just like it was with Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas, and Kavanaugh."

Insights: Emmer highlights a top-down approach in the Democratic Party, contrasting it with the Republican Party's bottom-up strategy, epitomized by Trump's populist appeal. Chamath Palihapitiya adds that both parties seem to operate with an influential cabal, but asserts that the Republican Party, under Trump, has maintained a more grassroots connection.

---

2. Fiscal Responsibility and National Debt

Discussion Overview:
The conversation shifts to fiscal policies, emphasizing the national debt and the Republican approach to budgeting and reconciliation.

Key Points:

• Budget Balancing: Tom Emmer outlines a plan to balance the budget by cutting expenditures between $1.5 to $2.2 trillion over the next decade ([10:59]).
• Reconciliation Strategy: Emmer describes an aggressive timeline to pass a reconciliation bill, aiming to reduce the deficit significantly by Memorial Weekend.

Notable Quotes:

• Tom Emmer [10:57]: "First, we got to balance the budget. You have to quit bleeding."
• Jason Calacanis [10:46]: "This requires sacrifice. Representatives from each city in each state have to explain trade-offs to their constituents."

Insights: Emmer emphasizes the necessity of fiscal austerity and government efficiency to restore economic stability. The discussion underscores the ideological divide on how best to manage national finances, with Republicans advocating for significant cuts and balanced budgets.

---

3. Social Security and Government Programs

Discussion Overview:
The panel explores the future of Social Security and the need for innovation in government programs to ensure their sustainability.

Key Points:

• Program Reform: Emmer suggests offering a voluntary program allowing younger Americans to choose between traditional Social Security and private retirement options with federal oversight ([13:28]).
• Efficiency Improvements: Emphasis on making Social Security more financially viable without dismantling existing structures.

Notable Quotes:

• Tom Emmer [13:28]: "You have the greatest economy in the world. It hasn't been performing where it could."
• Chamath Palihapitiya [14:05]: "We need to change Social Security and when do we have to change it by?"

Insights: The discussion reflects a bipartisan recognition of the challenges facing Social Security, proposing reforms that balance honoring existing promises while introducing flexibility and private sector involvement to future-proof the system.

---

4. Cryptocurrency Regulation and Security Concerns

Discussion Overview:
The hosts debate the regulation of cryptocurrencies like Dogecoin and the security implications of platforms such as TikTok.

Key Points:

• Crypto Deregulation: Chamath Palihapitiya advocates for clear regulatory frameworks to integrate crypto into the financial system safely ([15:49]).
• Security Risks: Concerns about foreign influence and data privacy with apps like TikTok, citing potential for espionage and misinformation ([16:04]).

Notable Quotes:

• Tom Emmer [15:49]: "We can protect the existing two-tier legacy system and allow it time to move into the 21st century."
• Jason Calacanis [17:52]: "Yolo. You only live once. Just go for it."

Insights: Emmer underscores the importance of balancing innovation with security, suggesting that regulated environments can mitigate risks associated with decentralized financial technologies. The conversation highlights the tension between embracing technological advancements and safeguarding national security interests.

---

5. Immigration and Border Security

Discussion Overview:
A significant portion of the episode is dedicated to immigration policies, particularly focusing on border security and the challenges of deporting large populations of undocumented immigrants.

Key Points:

• Deportation Plans: Jason Calacanis cites statements by Steve Bannon and Stephen Miller advocating for the deportation of 15 million illegal immigrants on day one ([20:21]).
• Economic Impact: Chamath Palihapitiya raises concerns about labor shortages in agriculture due to deportations and the broader economic repercussions ([21:05]).
• Policy Implementation: Emmer argues for prioritizing the deportation of criminals while maintaining a secure and efficient immigration system ([23:32]).

Notable Quotes:

• Tom Emmer [23:32]: "I don't think you should be here if you're illegal."
• Chamath Palihapitiya [21:05]: "Agricultural labor costs have climbed by probably 3x in the last four or five years."

Insights: The panelists discuss the complex interplay between immigration enforcement and economic needs, particularly in sectors reliant on immigrant labor. Emmer emphasizes the necessity of enforcing existing laws while Chamath highlights the unintended consequences of mass deportations on vital industries.

---

6. Role of the House Whip and Legislative Processes

Discussion Overview:
Tom Emmer elaborates on his role as the House Whip, navigating the legislative process amidst a polarized Congress.

Key Points:

• Vote Coordination: Emmer describes the Whip's responsibility to ensure party unity and secure votes for key legislation ([27:00]).
• Legislative Challenges: Acknowledges the increasing partisan divide and the difficulty in reconciling differing viewpoints within the party.

Notable Quotes:

• Tom Emmer [27:33]: "We're going to let everybody participate in the process. We're going to take all of your ideas."
• Chamath Palihapitiya [27:46]: "Jason is about to implode."

Insights: Emmer highlights the strategic efforts to maintain coherence within the Republican Party, leveraging Trump's mandate to push forward legislative agendas despite internal disagreements. The role of the Whip is portrayed as pivotal in balancing diverse party interests to achieve legislative goals.

---

7. Rebuilding the Democratic Party

Discussion Overview:
The conversation shifts to the Democratic Party's need for renewal and redefining its platform to better connect with voters.

Key Points:

• Economic Renewal: Eric Swalwell emphasizes the need for a compelling economic vision that includes government investment in new industries and infrastructure ([70:15]).
• Policy Prioritization: Calls for the Democratic Party to focus on economic issues like job creation, healthcare, and reducing reliance on outdated economic models ([75:36]).
• Leadership and Strategy: Ro Khanna discusses the importance of strong leadership and effective governance to rebuild trust and appeal to a broader electorate ([76:07]).

Notable Quotes:

• Eric Swalwell [70:45]: "We need to have economic renewal instead of blaming the dental hygienist in my district."
• Ro Khanna [73:58]: "We have to have thoughtful, strong people on our side. Understand people care about public safety."

Insights: Swalwell and Khanna argue for a shift towards pragmatic policies that address economic disparities and promote sustainable growth. The need for clear communication and prioritization of issues that resonate with everyday Americans is highlighted as crucial for the Democratic Party's resurgence.

---

8. Wildfires and Government Efficiency

Discussion Overview:
The panel addresses the impact of wildfires in California, critiquing government preparedness and response.

Key Points:

• Fire Management Failures: Ro Khanna criticizes the lack of federal support in managing forest resources, which exacerbated wildfire conditions ([31:46]).
• Policy Implications: Chamath Palihapitiya points out the tension between environmental regulations and practical measures needed to prevent disasters.

Notable Quotes:

• Ro Khanna [31:46]: "The federal government told him he couldn't do it. And of course, we've had fires. Right. California. This is tragic."
• Chamath Palihapitiya [21:38]: "How do we get to address both the economic demand for labor in this country and address this kind of immigration challenge?"

Insights: The discussion underscores the necessity for efficient government intervention in disaster prevention and management. The interplay between environmental policies and practical measures for safety is debated, highlighting the need for balanced approaches that protect both the economy and public well-being.

---

9. Technology and National Security

Discussion Overview:
Concerns about national security related to technology platforms like TikTok are examined, alongside broader issues of data privacy and foreign influence.

Key Points:

• TikTok Ban Debates: Representatives discuss the potential security risks posed by TikTok, weighing them against the platform's economic and social benefits ([43:00]).
• Data Privacy: The conversation touches on the vulnerabilities of various technologies and the importance of robust regulatory frameworks to protect user data.

Notable Quotes:

• Jason Calacanis [43:48]: "How is that not a security risk?"
• Chamath Palihapitiya [46:42]: "They continue to make assumptions about security."

Insights: The panel debates the extent to which foreign-owned technologies pose genuine security threats versus being scapegoated for broader systemic issues. The need for comprehensive regulations that address data privacy without stifling innovation is emphasized as a critical challenge.

---

10. Closing Remarks and Future Outlook

Discussion Overview:
As the episode concludes, the hosts and guests reflect on the ongoing political dynamics and the prospects for future legislative and electoral battles.

Key Points:

• Political Polarization: The conversation highlights the deepening divide between the two major parties, with both sides struggling to find common ground on key issues.
• Prospects for Collaboration: Despite tensions, there is a recognition of the necessity for bipartisan efforts to address national challenges effectively.

Notable Quotes:

• Jason Calacanis [104:03]: "Do you have the economy? I think safety's up there for folks."
• Eric Swalwell [104:18]: "It's supposed to be an advisory capacity."

Insights: The episode concludes with a call for pragmatic solutions and a focus on governance that prioritizes the nation's pressing needs over partisan agendas. The guests express optimism that through strategic leadership and policy innovation, both parties can work towards meaningful progress.

---

Conclusion:
This episode of All-In with Chamath, Jason, Sacks & Friedberg provides an in-depth analysis of the current political climate, scrutinizing the Democratic Party's challenges, Republican strategies under Trump's leadership, and critical policy debates surrounding the economy, immigration, and technology regulation. Through candid discussions and expert insights, the podcast offers listeners a comprehensive understanding of the multifaceted issues shaping America's future.

Transcript

[Jason Calacanis]

Foreign, everybody. Welcome to the All In Inauguration special. We are here in town to celebrate and or commiserate the second term of Donald Trump, depending on where you sit on the political spectrum. And we are extremely lucky to have a partner in Spotify who has given us a box. Yes, we're in a glass box on the street. They really splurged and got a trailer. It's absolutely fantastic. But we thank them for their hosting us. It's very cool with me today. Of course, my co host Shamath Palihapitiya and David Freeberg, who is a little under the weather because let's be honest, Freeberg, you've been out there. You and Lex took on the town last night.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

I had a good time with Lex Friedman last night. It was good.

[Jason Calacanis]

Let's leave it at that.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Let's leave it at that.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yeah, that sounds great.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

It's been a couple nights in a row. I'm pretty beat.

[Jason Calacanis]

Chamath, you have a very busy social schedule.

[David Freeberg]

Schedule.

[Jason Calacanis]

And you've been just bouncing around town with the who's who and taking credit for Donald Trump's victory. How's the victory lap going here? Because you played such a key role here by coming out and being even more unlikable in our hometown of the Bay Area and supporting Trump.

[David Freeberg]

I'm a small bit player.

[Jason Calacanis]

A bit player. But as you said to me in the car over here, you were the fulcrum that started the Boulder that created the win.

[David Freeberg]

I said none of that. But I think more changes are coming, Jason, maybe to our home state of California. Let's see, let's see. Phase two.

[Jason Calacanis]

We're extremely honored to have Tom Emmer here. He is the US Representative from the amazing state of Minnesota, home of Bob Dylan, Prince and the Coen brothers and Tim Waltz. And Tim Waltz. Don't be coming in hot already. Well, let's start there. Let's start there. How much of a disaster was the Democratic Party? And when you watched what happened with Biden, in all seriousness, do you think there was a cover up in terms of his mental acuity? And what do you think of Kamala's job out there not doing podcasts and essentially being anointed and not having a primary? The Democratic Party seems lost. Crooked and crooked. Okay. Yeah.

[Tom Emmer]

I mean, I mean, the leadership, I got good friends who are Democrats, so I'm not going to disparage them. But first, Jason, all of you, thank you. It's nice to be on All In. I heard everybody's heard about it. Everybody wants to be here. So it's just nice.

[Jason Calacanis]

And you promised you'd listen to it after this.

[Tom Emmer]

That's right. Actually, I listened last week. Sadly, it was about the fires. But the, the way they did this was, if you think about it, ballot access is a big thing. You have to run for months and you have to get delegates and you have to make your case state by state and you have to meet certain requirements to actually end up on the ballot. How the Democrats are able to remove Joe Biden literally in a coup a back room couple and install Kamala Harris in a matter of hours or days and avoid any convention like real democracy taking place where people are debating their candidates and where they're at. And then to your, your other question, that, that's wrong. But your other question was Joe Biden, was there a cover up? A cover up is when you don't see it, when you don't know know about it, when you're totally unaware. This wasn't a cover up. This was a conspiracy. Everybody in this town for four years watched when he came in, he was already diminished. And watch him continue to diminish over the course of his, over the course of his term. It was the mainstream media that refused to actually comment on it. And then it was amazing. Overnight, when he has the debate last June, it's like, oh my gosh, this is terrible. Look at this. And suddenly it was like they'd never seen it before. This was a conspiracy by a left wing media that they're littered with people who have a partisan view and they write about it, they create stories about it and they don't tell you the whole story.

[David Freeberg]

If you were here, let's go down this, pull this thread a little bit more because you said the, the Democrats themselves are good people, some of them, many of them, you know, but then the leadership you said was corrupt. So just can you help us understand who is the leadership? And then how does the corruption play out? What does the corruption look like?

[Tom Emmer]

Well, remember, I'm on the Republican side.

[David Freeberg]

Yeah, no, but I'm sorry, but I.

[Tom Emmer]

Can tell you what I watch, what I watch is there were two times that they literally, whoever they are, it would be the super delegates. It would be a lot of people would say it's the Obamas, it's the Clintons, it's the, you know, original.

[David Freeberg]

That's the, that's the boogeyman, for what it's worth that people point to, at least when you're not in D.C. like if somebody said who are the leadership elected or otherwise, that runs a Democratic Party, a lot of people would point to the Obamas and then some of these super donors. Is that sort of your perception of how it works?

[Tom Emmer]

It is. And the reason I go back, as you'll remember, Bernie Sanders is marching towards the Democratic nomination and they get to South Carolina and all of a sudden, Amy Klobuchar from my state, it's just one after another. I'm out, I'm out. I support Joe Biden, clearly the, whoever that is. Because you're right, they were not in the room to see, is it the Obamas, is it consultants like Carville or Axelrod or whoever? Yeah, but whoever's in that room, they have a plan when it gets to the end. And I never thought Joe Biden was going to be the candidate.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

And that's not how the Republican Party operates. Because I think some people in the public have this perception that both parties operate that way, that there is a cabal of the most influential and ultimately they end up getting to pick and the other party does the same thing. Is that not the case?

[Tom Emmer]

No.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

And clearly that wasn't the case with Trump. Right?

[Tom Emmer]

Yeah. No, ours. I would say that watching from the outside, again, we're not on the inside of the Democrat machine, but watching from the outside, that's a top down process. On the Republican side, that's a bottom up process. And Donald Trump is the best example.

[David Freeberg]

Best example.

[Tom Emmer]

Because people in this town, you know, especially in the House where I serve, are like, you know, we, we got the American people, we have a mandate. And you got to remind them. Yeah, no, no. Donald Trump has a mandate. He got 77 million votes. We got a little less than 75 million. So if you're looking at who literally is expanding this party and pulling this party over the line, it's one guy.

[David Freeberg]

Well, so, so to your point, you.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

View him the party leader?

[David Freeberg]

I do. So to your point, this was a, almost like a Donald Trump hostile takeover of the Republicans. Meaning if you look at the establishment rhetoric of what Republicans stood for, I don't think Trump really cared. He had a point of view and he had his own intellectual agenda and ideology. And to your point, 77 million people said, I go with that. Do you think that that's possible on the Democratic side as well? Do you think that there's a different ideology that needs to be born there?

[Tom Emmer]

I can only tell you the experience I've had with one of my Minnesota colleagues who I won't name him, but he might have run against the sitting president. We were talking on the House floor One day and I was complaining to, or giving him a hard time, I should say, about some of the off color remarks coming from the squad. And he made a point of telling me.

[David Freeberg]

Off color, Sorry, off color how?

[Tom Emmer]

Well, let's just say there were some anti Semitic comments all about the Benjamins, this stuff. And there was a censure that was being worked on.

[David Freeberg]

Oh, wow.

[Tom Emmer]

Yeah. And it was public. But the point is, when I was saying, boy, you've had quite a week, he goes, oh yeah. He says, that's a very small group of people in our party with very large voices. And my response to him was, okay, well, that might be true, but then people like you have to stand up and speak up and take my grandfather's Democrat party back. And so, no, I think they've got a problem. Identity politics, which they've perfected and been playing for years. It has now come back to bite them. And there's. Where is the way out? They don't have a brand, they don't know who they are. They're fighting about things like men participating in women's sports. I mean, it just, it isn't resonating with the American people. So they're going to have to figure that out for the future. But on our side, we're going to have to figure out Donald Trump is the one that pulled this across the line. Here's the problem with the Republican Party. For me, the last 30 years we've had great people representing us, but the public has been very frustrated because it seems like government and the bureaucrats always get a better deal than the average citizen in this country. We're talking about Main Street. We're not talking about Silicon Valley, which has its own Main street, but I'm talking about just good old Main street, usa, where it's rural country. It's people who are just trying to live their lives. They feel like their government hasn't been listening to them for years. This is what spawned the Tea Party. This is why we had this over and over. And Donald Trump, you got to give him credit, this energy was out there and he actually grabbed it and he showed us what it looked like when he ran in 16.

[David Freeberg]

Well, he took the time to understand.

[Tom Emmer]

It or he just innately has an ability to read people better than I've ever seen.

[David Freeberg]

Yeah, I mean, I think he is a generational retail politician.

[Tom Emmer]

A generational. I think he's a 1 in 150 year.

[David Freeberg]

Yeah.

[Tom Emmer]

Leader.

[David Freeberg]

Yeah.

[Jason Calacanis]

Freeburg, you have a lot of thoughts on fiscal responsibility and have been banging the drum on the national debt. Tom, you also have a passion for fiscal responsibility. Maybe you have some thoughts on that.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Freebird, or maybe you can tell us your point of view on how much of an impact Doge can have. I don't know if you've talked and.

[David Freeberg]

What you think reconciliation is going to look like. I mean, this is going to be a very gnarly pitch battle here. How do we get 2 trillion out of the.

[Tom Emmer]

Why are you stopping at 2?

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Exactly. Why are you stopping at 2'?

[David Freeberg]

Well, actually, let's ask that question. Is 2 even possible? And if so, how do you think you can get $2 trillion out of it?

[Tom Emmer]

So I'd rather. Let's do it two ways. I'd rather look at what could we put on the table. And we do this privately. So you won't get me to say what it is, where it is. But I'll tell you, there's a list that we've sat down with that reaches somewhere between 5 and 7 trillion a year over the next 10 years.

[David Freeberg]

Okay.

[Tom Emmer]

That's what that 2 trillion would be over the next 10 years.

[David Freeberg]

Okay.

[Tom Emmer]

I mean, listen, if, if you're.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Budget. 7.2.

[Tom Emmer]

What's that?

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

The budget, the annual budget. 7.2.

[Tom Emmer]

Yeah.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Right. So.

[Tom Emmer]

And the goal is, first we got to balance the budget. You got to quit bleeding. 1.5 to 2.2 trillion.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Oh, it's another trillion.

[Tom Emmer]

Yeah, whatever you got to balance. Second thing you got to do is start to bend the curve down. We got the greatest economy in the world. It hasn't been performing where it could. I think with Donald Trump, we can put it in place. Where can. You can see those revenues start to go up again. And if you have this, so you're controlling it, you could pay that, you could pay that down rather quickly. I mean, if you're talking in terms.

[Jason Calacanis]

Of a decade, this requires sacrifice. And it requires representatives from each city in each state to then go to their constituents and say, hey, we fought to get you X, Y and Z, and you're only going to get X and Y.

[Tom Emmer]

Be careful. Some tell you they fight, but they're not really fighting. This thing is going to happen because of Donald Trump. I think I leave it to Mike Johnson. He's the speaker. He will make these decisions. I'm not, I'm the whip. Whatever you tell me, my job is to make sure we get it done and that's what we'll do. But I think you're going to see a two track process. Mike Johnson, for reconciliation has set a deadline. He wants to vote on a budget resolution by the first week of February. Why is that important of the budget resolution you have to have before you can even move forward with reconciliation. That's usually pre negotiated with a Senate. So if we can keep with that aggressive timeline, you'll have that back to the House. So sometime in February, once you have that, that allows your 12 subcommittees to get their allotment and start to build out their 12 appropriation subcommittees, build out their budgets. Jason Smith, our Ways and Means chair, believes we can have that process done by the end of March. Mike, again, our speaker in this very aggressive timeline, if that's possible, he would like to vote on it in the House in the first two weeks of April. This includes the tax permanency extensions, et cetera, from the Trump tax cuts back in 2017. If we're able to keep to that schedule, then you could, you could realistically have a reconciliation bill to President Trump's desk by Memorial Weekend.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Let's just talk about the other long term challenge and your point of view on the solution. What's going to happen to Social Security by 2030, 2032, 2033, where's this headed?

[Tom Emmer]

Well, I think people are going to have to innovate and I think you got to honor the promises that have been made. There are many different things out there that are being looked at like a voluntary program that people in a certain range and this is above my, my pay grade. A certain range, age range.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Yep.

[Tom Emmer]

Like, I don't know, 18 to whatever it is that are just coming into this system, that it would give them a choice. They would have a choice to stay in Social Security as we know it or to pursue a private route that will have federal parameters. So you can't just be putting it into a retirement account, taking it out. It would serve the same purpose.

[Jason Calacanis]

But when like Australia system, the super.

[Tom Emmer]

System, it would obviously. And then it would grow. The private side.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yeah.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

And sorry, is that ultimately necessary? We need to change Social Security and when do we have to change it by? And now that the election is over because every politician is scared to talk about Social Security because everyone's got an election coming up. Are we going to hear something different this time around or is it always going to be to kick the can down the road with Social Security and whatever. It's just such a golden goose. No one can talk about it, no one can touch it.

[Tom Emmer]

Donald Trump was elected for three reasons. One, to fix our economic woes, the inflation that's killed people, get energy moving again, seal the southern border and create peace and stability around the globe. If we perform. And I'm going to change that because that's not really my attitude. When we perform, you start to build credibility with the American public. Then and only then can you start talking about. Because nobody believes this, right? So. And the media plays games. They try to pit us against each other with these different ideas. The key is you have to honor the promises that have been made to Americans since Social Security was created. And then you have to look forward. And again, we've said we're not going to touch Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. That was the president who said that. I got that. But there are some efficiency things, reforms that you can do around these programs that actually will make them not only more viable financially but more efficient.

[Jason Calacanis]

Should Americans be able to trade cryptocurrency freely without regulations? Or do you think those regulations are in place for a good reason?

[Tom Emmer]

Well, you're talking. So you remember Animal House with the evil and the good shoulders?

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

I had that last night. And the evil one?

[Tom Emmer]

Well, I got the libertarian and the Republican with a small R. Either one.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Libertarian always wins for me, but you know.

[Tom Emmer]

Well, and it used to for me, but I realized that I was a Republican with a small R when I was doing a radio show with an anarchist for several months and all he ever said was shut her down, she's pumping mud. And it's like, no, I must be a Republican. I. The libertarian says, absolutely, okay. The Republican with a small R. I think the key is going to be we have the greatest financial system markets here in the United States, in the world. We have an existing legacy two tier banking system. It needs to come into the 21st century. The beauty of crypto to me is not just that it's crypto one, it's going to help us if Congress does its job, if we put some parameters up, market structure, you know, give people rules of the road so they know what they can and can't do and who's going to be having responsibility for oversight. We can protect the existing two tier legacy system and allow it time to move into the 21st century. I think the key is, and this is why the central bankers are so worried this is so disruptive and potentially destructive that they're scared to death. It's not just losing their power. They're afraid that this decentralization is going to somehow send finance back to the.

[Jason Calacanis]

I suppose they're also concerned that consumers maybe who are not super sophisticated or new to it might lose their money and Yesterday, Trump launched a $30 billion coin, which we refer to on the Internet as a coin or a meme coin. Are you troubled by him doing something like that? Was that a wise decision on his part?

[Tom Emmer]

I don't know. Time will tell about that. He seems to make some pretty good decisions.

[Jason Calacanis]

They've got to work on the regulations for that.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

We do.

[Jason Calacanis]

If he can do that, can we all just do it and take any.

[David Freeberg]

Oh, you could have done it too.

[Jason Calacanis]

Well, it was the SEC previously would have actually gone after you for taking money from retail investors.

[Tom Emmer]

Ding dong, the witch is dead. Now we're going to be moving forward with a new sec.

[Jason Calacanis]

Got it. Okay. So yolo.

[Tom Emmer]

What's that?

[Jason Calacanis]

Yolo.

[Tom Emmer]

Yolo.

[Jason Calacanis]

You only live once. Just go for it.

[Tom Emmer]

My staff gives me a hard time because, I don't know, all those cute quality whips.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yeah, but you're cool with it? You're cool with doing a coin 24 hours before you.

[Tom Emmer]

I have no problem. Did you see the meme that said Baron apparently had his dad's phone last night? Made a billion dollars?

[Jason Calacanis]

So funny.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

I love the Baron meme. They're my favorite.

[David Freeberg]

I mean, they call him the Lizan Al Gaib, which, if you like, if you watch Dune, is like, he's the savior that's sent in Dune to basically save all of us.

[Jason Calacanis]

It's definitely gonna be an interesting four years. Let's talk about right now.

[David Freeberg]

Jason is about to implode. Congressman, what you're seeing is him melting down.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

And Jason has a big, like, negative bias against these coins.

[Jason Calacanis]

No, no, no. And I have a bias against stealing from.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Meanwhile, you want every. You want every retail investor to have access to buy startups and. Because that'll benefit you, but when it comes to coins, you're like, oh, no one should be able to do that.

[Jason Calacanis]

I think there should be a sophisticated investor test where people learn about things like diversification. They learn who owns 80% of the coins that have just been dumped on retail and under what circumstance they can sell them. And, you know, there is a legitimate issue here that foreign adversaries could just buy these coins that influence the President. I think that's a real concern that people should have. So you can diminish it.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

No, no, you're actually Rocket.

[Jason Calacanis]

It's actually a real issue.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

I actually agree with you. Like, securities regulations require, when you do an IPO, you file an S1.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yes.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

And you disclose who owns the shares.

[David Freeberg]

Yes.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

And it has to go on a regulated exchange. So you know who the buyers of the shares Are. So I do actually think your framework is pretty reasonable.

[Jason Calacanis]

I thought you were just mocking.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Well, I do mock you generally. Yeah.

[Jason Calacanis]

Let's go to the next one, then.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

No, I do think that's right.

[Jason Calacanis]

You brought up the border. Steve Bannon says I did. You did. You said the border was one of the most.

[Tom Emmer]

Oh, yeah, yeah. In his mandate. Yeah.

[Jason Calacanis]

So let's talk about that part of the mandate that you brought up. Steve Bannon says he's doing a great job.

[David Freeberg]

Today's moderator.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

I think he's the only one that's good.

[Tom Emmer]

They knock you down and then they build you up.

[Jason Calacanis]

It's all good. I'm not paying attention to them. I'm paying attention to you.

[David Freeberg]

This is home management.

[Jason Calacanis]

Steve Bannon said he wants all 15 out day one.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

So what's going on?

[Jason Calacanis]

Steve Miller says America is for Americans and Americans only. Do you believe 15 million people should be dragged out of this country day one? Like Steve Bannon and Steve Miller, I.

[Tom Emmer]

Think we should look at what the American people think. So New York Times of all outlets had a poll that said it's like 80% believe that criminals, terrorists, people who have committed bad offenses should be the hell out of here.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yeah. Easy one to have consensus on. You.

[Tom Emmer]

No. But then it starts to drop down, which is. The next one is. Oh, I forget what the second one is. It drops down about 60. But 55% of Americans believe any illegal immigrant should be out of here.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

How many? 55%.

[Tom Emmer]

55%. This is in a New York Times poll.

[Jason Calacanis]

What do you think that'll do to the economy? You brought up inflation, and we have to tame that. We have 4% unemployment, the lowest of our lifetimes.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Can I just tell you, agricultural labor costs have climbed by probably 3x in the last four or five years. And there's not enough labor to address kind of agricultural production needs in this country, particularly in specialty crops. Because the world I work in, how do we get to kind of address both the kind of economy, economic demand for labor in this country and address this kind of immigration challenge?

[Tom Emmer]

You don't fix your labor problem with illegal immigration. You fix it by fixing your immigration system and making sure that it's working the way it's supposed to. By the way, I come from the state of Minnesota. The two primary drivers of our state's private economy are manufacturing and ag. I mean, I've got huge operations of families that have bound together as a co op that they literally have to bring in foreign workers. And they built a village, housing, they have teachers. But there's the solution, this idea, and I come from Minnesota, which is why you made the hair on the back of my neck stand up. The argument is, oh, illegals. People who are here illegally. And their advocates are bracing for Trump's arrival. And then they write an article that says if they remove all these people, our economy is going to tank. Stop it. You've got laws for a reason. You got to enforce the laws that.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Are on the books.

[Tom Emmer]

And if they don't work. This is why we passed the strongest border bill in 20 years, with 222 members in the last Congress, which Chuck Schumer never looked at. They wanted to say that Trump killed the bipartisan bill. You realize the House bill did five finish the wall, reform the parole process, reform, asylum, end, catch and release and restore, remain in Mexico. Those were the five pillars that so called bipartisan bill actually codified. Catch and release said that if you don't have emergency authority on the border until you have 5,000 plus one coming across a day. So we said that's the answer.

[Jason Calacanis]

We seem to have, you know, pretty solid consensus here and in the country. Criminals who are basically committing two crimes, whatever crime they committed here and coming across the border illegally, they have no standing. They go. But you seem to be punting and not answering the question of should the 14.5 million other people be dragged out of the country in year one. So maybe you can answer that one.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Jeffrey's a journalist.

[Tom Emmer]

I'm telling you right now, Trump was elected to get this done.

[Jason Calacanis]

What do you think, though? You are from a state where that's gonna be highly unpopular.

[Tom Emmer]

I don't think you should be here if you're illegal.

[Jason Calacanis]

So all 15 million gotta go in year one.

[Tom Emmer]

I don't think you should be here if you're illegal. Now, you're painting with a pretty broad brush.

[Jason Calacanis]

I know.

[Tom Emmer]

I'm using what specific situation Bannon and.

[Jason Calacanis]

Steve Miller have said. So I'm just quoting their words again.

[Tom Emmer]

I think the, the goal is to.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Make sure Kitty Vance came on our show and he said, hey, you got to do the first thing first. And, you know, then the second thing second. It's not all going to happen on day one, but, yeah, it's going to be.

[Jason Calacanis]

Well, I'm trying to interpret that, but you're straight, so.

[Tom Emmer]

Well, actually, I resent that I am being straight. I will tell you straight.

[Jason Calacanis]

No, I just want to know if this is. I think there's a lot of Americans who want to know if 15 million people are literally going to be dragged Out. This is a big question for the American people. Are you going to drag 15 million people out of the country or not? Because Stephen Miller, who seems to be a big part of this administration, and C. Bannon, who was the architect of the previous administration, say that's actually going to happen. People are actually nervous about that.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

This is when we need Sachs here to check you, to fact check you on whether those guys have said that.

[Tom Emmer]

And the problem is you're using terms like dragged them out. No, I mean, they're going to start with the worst of the worst. In JD's answer, you start with those because you know that this is going to have an emotional aspect to it. And guess what? If you start doing it the way you're supposed to do it, I'm going to suggest to you that a lot of them are going to leave voluntarily. And then if we fix the system that we have, then we can start to restore this.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

By the way, that's already happening because I've heard from a lot of agricultural leaders, they're seeing labor depart the country right now in anticipation of the administrative change. And a lot of labor is very scared of what's happening. They don't want to be caught. They just came here for work. These are individuals who came to this country to work. They are employed, whether legally or illegally, to do work that's in demand in this country. And they're worried they're going to go to jail. So they're leaving. And that there's a massive outflow right now, particularly in rural areas. There's a massive outflow right now of labor that's really critical to a lot of those farming economies. And a lot of people in the agricultural sector are very nervous about what's about to happen in the impact. But let me ask you another question. Do you think, and align with Elon's point of view and some of the stuff that's been promoted, that there's a big push by the Democrats to keep the borders open, to create more voting Democrats in this country, that that's a big reason or rationale for the alternative of, you know, having illegal immigration, then converting everyone to legal.

[Tom Emmer]

I think it's more basic than that. I do think there's a political element to it. States like Minnesota, where the, where the traditional educated, what entrepreneur is leaving, they're being replaced with, in many cases with illegals. Right. Because we are a sanctuary state. So they come into Minnesota whether they vote or not. That there is a big, there is a big argument that, yes, many of them are But I think the bigger issue is how Congress is divided up. You're losing. You're hollowing out. Whether you're Illinois or you're New York, you're hollowing out your state. They bring illegals in and incredibly, our census calculates them in the numbers.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

That doesn't make sense.

[Tom Emmer]

No. So you got these blue states that.

[David Freeberg]

Could gerrymandering cartel just to try to reverse.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

But how does that. Yeah, I guess that's a longer conversation. We probably need to wrap up in a minute. I never understand.

[David Freeberg]

I have a totally different question. Something more fun. The job of whip was totally romanticized after House of Cards.

[Tom Emmer]

Is that romantic? You got to kill people?

[David Freeberg]

Well, no, because you had. You had spacey. You had spacey. In this really famous scene, you got an interesting calling the whip and saying, when I was whipped, my job was to whip the votes. And then he was screaming into the phone, whip the votes. And I just remember this thinking now that seems like a really cool job.

[Jason Calacanis]

His nickname is Chairman Dictator. Just so you know. He was voted like number one commentator by Xi Jinping Chinese Communist Party in the first year.

[David Freeberg]

I have a lot of important people that make up to me.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yes, but.

[David Freeberg]

But just the job of whip. Is it as enjoyable as it sounds?

[Tom Emmer]

So everybody likes to say to me, you've got the worst job in Washington DC. I think the speaker has the worst job in Washington DC. That guy can be having a great day, and he's got all kinds of people that are just throwing sandwiches at him all the time. The majority leader does a calendar, manages the floor, works with the chairs. Great job. The whip, you don't get to do anything those guys want to do unless we can actually get it across the board.

[David Freeberg]

Exactly.

[Tom Emmer]

And the world has changed. You know, they.

[Eric Swalwell]

I think.

[Tom Emmer]

Well, I know they elected me because they thought my personality is very direct. I am from Minnesota.

[David Freeberg]

Well, I get the sense that you're incredibly effective. You could whip the votes, but you.

[Tom Emmer]

Just gotta be honest and you gotta respect everybody. And it's a different world because we probably have 40% of our members who will vote for whatever Mike Johnson says we're gonna put on the floor, but we got 60%. And this is what's been changing, I think, over the last couple of decades. It keeps getting larger. They didn't come here to follow somebody.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

They came here to lead, to represent their people.

[Tom Emmer]

And they need to be involved in the process. And what I tell them all the time, I don't care if you like each other. I don't care if you despise one another. I don't care if you socialize together or the second you walk out of here, you run to two polar opposite places. When you're here, the American people elected Donald Trump and we have the benefit of a majority.

[David Freeberg]

You see, you're whipping the votes, but.

[Tom Emmer]

That'S what it is. And I tell them, you gotta get over yourself. We're gonna let everybody participate in the process. We're gonna take all of your ideas. We put the more centrist part of our majority and the more right wing part of our party together. And that list of savings cuts offsets I was talking about, we privately run that through small groups, one at a time so that they can talk to each other. So that if you come from a ruby red district down south and I come from a, you know, swingy, swingy district in New York, we can have a conversation about why I can and can't do something and why you will and won't do something. And at the end of the day, this is how you're successful. Everybody wants to be involved. It's hard only from the aspect that you, you can't afford to leave anyone.

[David Freeberg]

Last, last question. When you saw the last week was pretty prolific in terms of the Senate confirmation hearings that started, I think we're still waiting to figure out when Bobby's going to come up. Like, do you see any pushback? Who do you think?

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Who might not make it?

[David Freeberg]

Who might not make it?

[Tom Emmer]

I think everybody's making it. I think anybody that listens to you guys or anything, that interview where they start bringing this up, we got to remind people this has been the left's playbook since Robert Borkman. Yeah, they started it with Robert Bork, they took him out of his Supreme Court appointment. They did it to Clarence Thomas, they really did it to Kavanaugh. And look at this. Now they've moved it to Cabinet picks. And Pete Hegseth is a great example. None of us is perfect, but all of that was anonymous. And I think once it started going through the process and somebody asked me this question a few weeks ago, I said, yeah, they're starting with Pete. Pete's going to get, he's going to get through the process. They'll move on to Tulsi, then they'll move on to Bobby Kennedy Jr those will probably be their three biggest ones that they'll attack.

[David Freeberg]

I mean, my, my perspective on this is that to your point, in the absence of somebody being compromised, it's not an ideological difference that should stop Cabinet picks on either side, whoever is the president should get to pick their team, put the team on the field. That's the mandate he was given by the people. And then the people should get to vote it up or down.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

It's supposed to be an advisory capacity. Right. I mean the congressional.

[Tom Emmer]

It is. But the beauty of what Donald Trump is doing, you can't fix what's broken with people that broke it. He's going outside of this God forsaken place and bringing people in that have, have completely new ideas, whether you like them or not.

[David Freeberg]

Right.

[Tom Emmer]

Come on folks, let's see what this does. We've been doing the same thing now.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

For years, which by the way, is what happened 250 years ago when this.

[David Freeberg]

Okay, wait, Congress and last point. Okay.

[Jason Calacanis]

This is the last Congressman last.

[David Freeberg]

Give us the last one an opinion. You said you listened to the fire episode. That we did. But just general, from the outside in, as a Minnesotan looking at California, just diagnose what's going on there.

[Tom Emmer]

It's more complicated than the right and the left want to make it seem. But there definitely is a problem. It's not just limited to California, it's across this country with not managing our resources the way we should. We had this problem in Northern Minnesota probably 20 years ago, 25 years ago we had a blowdown in the BWCA, the Boundary Waters Canoe area. You had all those trees laying down. They were kindling. Right. And I think our governor at the time, Jesse Ventura said he was going to go in there and he was going to log it. Right. So we could protect the citizens and their property and we could actually make use of these trees that have been destroyed in the storm. The federal government told him he couldn't do it. And of course we've had fires. Right. California. This is tragic. My brother in law sent me a picture. He lives in Woodland Hills. He sent me a picture of flames at the end of his cul de sac above the block.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

That's where my parents live. They probably live a couple blocks from each other in Woodland Hills. The fire stopped two blocks from their house.

[Tom Emmer]

That's the picture he took.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Yeah. They might live right by each other.

[Tom Emmer]

Did the winds just take. No.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

So the Ventura county line comes up to right there.

[David Freeberg]

Yeah.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

And the fire department didn't. And I, I cal Fire and fire department are incredible. They stopped it from entering the neighborhood.

[Tom Emmer]

That's amazing.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

It was amazing. Yeah.

[Tom Emmer]

I don't know how his house is still standing based on the picture he sent.

[Jason Calacanis]

Thomas has been amazing. You fit right in here. Appreciate the honesty and candidness, and we'd love to have you back anytime.

[Tom Emmer]

I appreciate the conflict. I love that.

[Jason Calacanis]

Well, I mean, the American people have.

[David Freeberg]

This is why we love Jacob.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Well, he got. He got motivated. We went to a Spotify dinner last night, and they were talking about journalism. He's like, I'm a journalist. I'll show you guys I can be journalism.

[Jason Calacanis]

Well, I think it's a really important conversation. And, you know, I. The one thing I'm a little concerned with is just some clarity, because Trump has an ability to say things in a bold way, in an effervescent way, and then, you know, sometimes these things actually affect people and they want a little more clarity.

[Tom Emmer]

Well, and the whip has to find clarity amongst 219 people.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yeah. Good luck with that job. Appreciate it.

[Tom Emmer]

Thank you.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Thank you.

[Tom Emmer]

You guys are fun. Thanks.

[Jason Calacanis]

Okay, everybody, welcome back to the all in podcast. We're here for the inauguration of Donald Trump and his second term, and we're delighted to have Eric Swalwell with us today. He is obviously the House representative from California and the Democratic Party. You guys.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

East Bay.

[Jason Calacanis]

East Bay, yeah.

[Ro Khanna]

Yeah.

[Jason Calacanis]

You guys got shellacked this time around.

[Ro Khanna]

It wasn't great. It wasn't good.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yeah. What are the lessons that the Democratic Party can take from this? I will insert myself into this a little bit. I'm a moderate who's voted Democrat two out of three times. I was absolutely, really disappointed. I'll just leave it at that. That you didn't have a speedrun primary, that Biden was put up when he was clearly in cognitive decline. And I'm absolutely disgusted by the Democratic Party's hatred of successful entrepreneurs in this country. You've kind of lost me as somebody who voted two out of three times. Why has the Democratic Party left me somebody who, you know, two out of three times would vote Democrat? And now you hate, as a party, entrepreneurship winning, and you seem to hate democracy, and you won't even have a primary.

[David Freeberg]

Jesus Christ.

[Ro Khanna]

Donate democracy.

[Jason Calacanis]

No, but this is my perception. I think a lot of Democrats feel this way.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

We didn't just lose you Silicon Valley Democrat like a lot of flippers.

[Jason Calacanis]

I mean, this is across the board.

[David Freeberg]

There's a lot of middle of the road folks that just.

[Ro Khanna]

Yeah, yeah, we. We need a story that connects with everyday Americans. I think when you look at a lot of the policies that we, like, believe in, and you look at polling and focus groups, people will be like, oh, yeah, I like that. I like that. I like that. But our story right now, I Don't think we know who we are and who we're fighting for now. So it is to me exciting that we can go through this reset and renovation to find that story that connects. I'm a blue collar kid. I was raised by a cop and a mom who had six different jobs. I was the first of my family to go to college.

[David Freeberg]

I like to think you were raised by two Republicans.

[Ro Khanna]

Yeah, I was. They, they, they were, they are, were and are two Republicans. And I've got three little brothers who are cops. And I grew up in Dublin, California. Everyone called it Scrublin until we invested there and we saw success.

[David Freeberg]

What was your ideological change growing up in a Republican household of cops?

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Essentially, yeah.

[David Freeberg]

To becoming a, you know, you're a bit of a Democratic poster boy.

[Ro Khanna]

Well, that's only because I've gone after Donald Trump. But if you look, I ran against the most liberal member of Congress, Pete Stark. I have been a pretty independent vote in Congress and I root for success of entrepreneurs and business and want to connect that success to the people who work hard at those businesses. So everyone does well. And I think if we're just perceived as rooting against success overall and vilify people who are successful, then no one can be successful. If that's the case, did you like.

[David Freeberg]

Or not like, did you agree with Biden's framing as he was leaving about this tech oligarchy?

[Ro Khanna]

It's only an oligarchy if working class folks don't benefit from it. So if that's what it becomes, then that, that's a problem. What I want to see, and I think what you all are rooting for is that anyone, if you work hard, work your ass off, you should do better for yourself and dream bigger for your kids. And I think we have an opportunity to do that. The President, the President elect has an opportunity to make that happen. And where he tries to do that, he'll find a partner in me. But do we have this branding issue? Yes. No, I think that's what is the branding issue.

[David Freeberg]

Yeah, let's attack the branding issue, the wokeism. Is it the judgmentalism? Is it the sanctimonious pandering? Is it the moral grandstanding?

[Ro Khanna]

You have to be perfect and pure is what the perception is right now.

[David Freeberg]

But nobody's perfect.

[Ro Khanna]

No, no, no. That's the perception of people who like.

[David Freeberg]

Like we're all riddled with errors and faults.

[Ro Khanna]

Of course we're not perfect and pure. But I think the perception is that to be a Democrat, you have to check all these purity boxes, and then you can be a part of the party. And right now, the Republican Party is like. I think the exact opposite. It's like, do you like Donald Trump? Great. Come to the party. And so, by the way, they're even.

[Jason Calacanis]

Like, if you don't like Trump, can we get you on these three policies? And you can still come to Peter Thiel's party. I have never been more courted by a political party than Trump's, and I have never been more hated than I've been by the Democratic Party.

[Ro Khanna]

That's wrong, and it shouldn't make people feel that way.

[Jason Calacanis]

Chamath feels that way. I think he was a major donor. You guys are talking about having. You guys are saying you should have a Joe Rogan equivalent. You had Joe Rogan.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

He wasn't.

[Jason Calacanis]

He's a Democrat.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

If you watch the shows, they were all.

[Jason Calacanis]

He had Bernie Sanders on. He wanted to have Hillary.

[David Freeberg]

You guys fumbled it.

[Jason Calacanis]

You guys had Elon Musk. You fumbled it.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Yeah, well, say the party fumbled it. Maybe you can comment.

[Jason Calacanis]

Well, you represent the party.

[Ro Khanna]

And we have.

[Jason Calacanis]

Let's talk about rebuilding.

[Ro Khanna]

And we have. We have an opportunity to rebuild now and so on. For example, the Department of Government Efficiency, like, we should root for government to be more efficient, and we should try and enable that. But, like, if that effort goes into an area where it's going to cut Social Security or cut, you know, Medicare, then I think you'll see us be guardians against that. But, like, most small businesses think it's pretty hard to start a small business. And then even once you do, you don't have the resources that bigger businesses do. And they see regulations as what gets in the way. So we should try and knock those out.

[Jason Calacanis]

What's happening in the party? Like, what are you guys doing? Or is it just headless as an organization?

[David Freeberg]

Who runs the Democratic Party, I would.

[Ro Khanna]

Say in the House right now, Hakeem Jeffries has been pretty effective at uniting us. And even in the last Congress, you saw something that you've never seen before in any Congress in our country, any parliament in the world, which is the minority party, delivered the majority votes on every vote of consequence. So keeping the government open, lifting the debt ceiling, which the incoming president now supports, which we welcome that, and we would love to get rid of it, by the way, you know, the funding of. Even the funding, you know, to Israel, that. That move forward, because Democrats were unified on that front. So I think Hakeem has shown himself as like a practical negotiator, someone who.

[David Freeberg]

Can work with John But I think the other fair commentary is he's young and he's inexperienced. What I mean by leadership is.

[Ro Khanna]

Yeah.

[Jason Calacanis]

Who.

[David Freeberg]

Who is the elder statesman that can help push and cajole and influence the Democratic Party to find a more solid ground?

[Ro Khanna]

I think one of our best thought leaders is Mark Cuban. I think he's.

[David Freeberg]

Mark Cuban.

[Ro Khanna]

Mark Cuban.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yeah.

[David Freeberg]

He.

[Ro Khanna]

He's very influential. He has a lot of relationships with my colleagues and myself. He has business experience, but I think he's also not lost touch of, like, what regular people care about. And I thought he was an effective surrogate for Kamala being out there on the trail, but I. I go to Mark on a lot of stuff, and I think he understands where most people are.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

How did Kamala get selected?

[Ro Khanna]

How did she get. So she was vice president, and the Runway was about 100 days, and I. We can go through the different scenarios. I don't think any of them were good. And as you said, if. If your premise is that President Biden should not have run for reelection, making that decision that close to the election. You know, I don't know if any candidate did.

[David Freeberg]

You know, Eric, should there have been.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

A speed primary like Jake?

[Ro Khanna]

I. We could go through 100 scenarios. There are a bunch of great candidates. I still think all of them would have probably been set up to fail.

[David Freeberg]

Did you to.

[Ro Khanna]

Too short of a Runway in your.

[David Freeberg]

Interactions with the president? Did you say to yourself, gosh, what's going on here?

[Ro Khanna]

I didn't. And my colleagues and I. I don't think we interacted with him that much that often. And we kind of, you know, we started his presidency in Covid. And so the Joe Biden that I knew when I was in a baby, you know, child in The Congress in 2013 was very engaged and, you know, love meeting with Congress. And the meetings would go an hour over the time allotted, and it was kind of that Bill Clinton charm offensive that he could put on. And I will just tell you, like, the first two years with the COVID restrictions that we had, we didn't see that because we, you know, we would have remote meetings with the White House, and so they hit him.

[Jason Calacanis]

They hit him.

[Ro Khanna]

I. I don't. Yeah, again, I don't know. I know. I know where we are now.

[Jason Calacanis]

The reports are he was gay kept.

[Ro Khanna]

Yeah, yeah. Like I said, I'm.

[Jason Calacanis]

They managed him.

[Ro Khanna]

Focus on the future.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Let's talk about Doge. So you mentioned.

[David Freeberg]

Wait, wait, hold on. Before we talk to Doge.

[Ro Khanna]

Yeah, yeah.

[David Freeberg]

Eric, you were on the House Intelligence Committee. Yes. Let's talk about TikTok.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yes.

[Ro Khanna]

Yeah.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Okay.

[David Freeberg]

Done and dusted. What. What do you think might be back tomorrow? Might, might not. Yeah, you're, you're in the room. When these things happen, there are these off the record, I guess, intelligence briefings that happen. And this was a 90 unanimous Supreme Court decision. It was an overwhelming majority in Congress. Can you just help us understand what needs to happen for something like those two events to happen? Yeah, just be general. You don't have to say specifically, obviously and disclose anything that you know. But we're just trying to understand how does something. When it's such a rancorous Congress which can't seem to agree on anything, or a Supreme Court which tends to be 5, 4 on every issue finds a 90 and a supermajority in Congress. Can you just help us understand?

[Ro Khanna]

So the Supreme Court was not saying whether we should ban or not ban. They were saying that Congress voted President signed.

[David Freeberg]

Correct.

[Ro Khanna]

And there's no way around. Yeah, this ban. So they, I think they were just following the law. I voted against the ban. I think China is the place where you ban things. And the problems that I have with TikTok, as a father of like three little kids are the problems that I have with Meta and the problems that I have. Yeah, it also.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

So you don't view it, you don't view it as a security risk for the United States?

[Ro Khanna]

And I look to Jim Himes, who is the senior Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, the ranking member. He's in what's called the Gang of Eight. He has the most exquisite access to intelligence. And Jim voted against the ban. And I thought, you know what if this guy has not seen anything on.

[David Freeberg]

The national security level, there was an off the record or confidential briefing to the House Intelligence Committee. So you think in that meeting there was nothing that was very meaningful that was disclosed about TikTok?

[Ro Khanna]

Nothing that I had seen. Is it owned by the Chinese government? Absolutely. But is there a national security risk? I have not seen that at all.

[Jason Calacanis]

Hold on a second though. I mean, if the Chinese government owns 100 million plus American phones, their location data, access to their microphones, access to their cameras, how is that not a security risk? And where. I mean, that seems incredibly naive to say that.

[David Freeberg]

I want to build on what Jason is saying. We know that there are security vulnerabilities. For example, in WhatsApp, it's riddled with stuff. So, you know, you could send a PDF before then you could send an image. Now you can just send a message and you can Route your phone. The difference is WhatsApp is owned by an American citizen. I really. And so what. Which is to say all these apps are compromised. It's just that the TikTok is owned by a Chinese owner who is out of the reach of the United States government.

[Ro Khanna]

Yeah.

[David Freeberg]

And is that fair or unfair to you?

[Ro Khanna]

It is out of the reach of the United States government. But what I will say is most of what we buy, as far as you know, what's in our basket at Walmart is.

[Eric Swalwell]

Has a component.

[Jason Calacanis]

What's in our basket doesn't have a microphone or your gps.

[Ro Khanna]

A lot of it does.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Have you seen a lot of stuff? You buy drones.

[Ro Khanna]

Chinese made drones.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

There's a whole website now. There's a whole website now that breaks down modern consumer electronics from China.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yeah.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

That actually have these hacking devices built into them. I don't know if you've seen this.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yeah, no, no.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

I mean like you'll buy like a USB charger that's like 8 bucks on or something. And it's inside, it's got like an IP address and it actually finds WI fi. It connects and it transmits. Yeah.

[Jason Calacanis]

This is incredibly dangerous.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

And like there's so many. And I bought this like cheap drone for like Christmas someone for like anyone. One of my little nephews brought it and I'm like, dude, this thing is like 149 bucks. And I looked it up online. It's like got camera, connects your WI fi and then asked for access to your phone.

[David Freeberg]

No, Dave.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

And I'm like, I'm not doing that.

[David Freeberg]

Like, I tweeted this a few months ago.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

I don't think TikTok's the issue.

[David Freeberg]

The USBC charging cables.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Exactly.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yeah. Those can be hijacked.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Yeah, they're rooted.

[David Freeberg]

The charging cables.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yes. This is more reason to ban. This is more reason to ban it.

[David Freeberg]

Not ban.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

But I don't think TikTok.

[Ro Khanna]

I guess my point is like we. Yeah, TikTok, you want to ban everything that's main chat.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

That's great.

[Ro Khanna]

You'll destroy the economy.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Exactly.

[Jason Calacanis]

But one thing has a hundred million people in an algorithm that could interact, influence people's perception that, you know, that Hamas is being harassed by the Israelis. Like they literally can change how Americans, especially young ones, perceive the world, even if they're not doing it currently. Do you not see how obvious it is that they can use it nefariously?

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

That's a censorship point of view. Which is.

[Jason Calacanis]

No, no, I want to hear.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Let's get his.

[Ro Khanna]

Let's get his answer Yeah, I guess I'm the only one of the of us that doesn't want to ban speech.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Yeah, no, I'm not.

[Jason Calacanis]

I want to. I want either reciprocity, where we can put our apps in China, or I want it gone.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Well, now you're making a different case. Now you're saying it's like reciprocity as opposed to controlling. First you were saying it's security, then you're saying it's like controlling our point of view. Now you're saying reciprocity. You're like, those aren't the same thing. Here's the security. Security risk likely lies everywhere on security. I'm controlling the point of view of stuff.

[David Freeberg]

I think you guys have to separate. Look, TikTok. There are three things in TikTok, okay? There's the content and the content creators. That's one thing. Then there is a network effect, and then there is the vessel, which is the app. Okay? Which is the code. My very specific point of view is the content creators. And the network effect can easily be replicated in other places. The vessel itself is corrupt. And I think if you can't technically see that, it's probably because you just. You're not steeped enough in the technology.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

The Intelligence Committee doesn't technically see that, so.

[David Freeberg]

Oh, no, they clearly.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

They're not agreeing.

[Jason Calacanis]

They've been caught tracking Intelligence Committee here.

[Ro Khanna]

Well, but I also looked at the small business owners who use that as a platform. I understand how you just. The buckets that you just created, the.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

People depend on it.

[Ro Khanna]

And more people in the. What I was telling the White House was more people watch President Biden's State of the Union address on TikTok than anywhere else. And the President Biden had just gone on TikTok right before this.

[David Freeberg]

But that you're speaking to is the content and the network.

[Ro Khanna]

Sure. No, I get.

[David Freeberg]

So my point is across meta or across X, my preference would be X. You can replicate the network effect and you can create a mechanism for those content creators who are already on those platforms anyway, to shift. My point is the vessel itself is easily rooted. I told this to President Trump when we were sitting down. I was like, that phone, the microphone on that iPhone can get turned on remotely. You can choose what state actor wants to do it. But I will bet you dollars to donuts it is inconceivable to me that the NSA did not find that capability. And the reason is not because TikTok is bad or good. The reason is all of these apps are rooted. The only difference is that Most of these apps are controlled by American citizens.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

So there is fallout.

[David Freeberg]

And this app is not.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yeah.

[Ro Khanna]

I mean, I think Donald Trump is going to allow TikTok.

[Jason Calacanis]

Well, he got a $50 million donation.

[Ro Khanna]

From Jeff Yass that. And I think he also recognized, I think, super PAC.

[Jason Calacanis]

50 million.

[Ro Khanna]

Yes. And I think the reason he cares is because he knows a lot of his followers are on there. And for whatever reason they didn't, they have not chosen.

[Jason Calacanis]

You know what else is very popular exported from China? Fentanyl.

[Ro Khanna]

Yeah.

[Jason Calacanis]

And we should probably ban that, too.

[Ro Khanna]

Yeah.

[Jason Calacanis]

Like, I mean, the fact that it's popular should not be why we are doing. That's why I think you're framing Fentanyl popular, Jason.

[Ro Khanna]

What I'm saying is it's a dick and it's popular back in the two. And so you're. You're going to take away a platform that is people on it.

[Tom Emmer]

Yeah.

[Ro Khanna]

By Americans.

[Jason Calacanis]

It's a weakest, not weak.

[Ro Khanna]

Chosen to go to those other ones. And I just don't think we ban things in America. I think.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yeah, but this is the Chinese Communist Party, Jason.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

If you, if you actually.

[Jason Calacanis]

Did they spy on their own citizens.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

If you're. Just think about this for a second. If your business depended on you using TikTok, how would you feel about the TikTok? And you're not wealthy.

[David Freeberg]

I have the most important thing. You guys have to assume that if it is true that the CCP uses the Chinese version of TikTok as a mechanism to surveil their own people, the idea that for an extra few units of resources, they wouldn't spy on the most important powerful nation in the world, to me seems pretty illogical and dumb. They would do it. And separately, it's not to say that President Trump is using TikTok per se, or, you know, important people, but it is true that when you have enough people use an app and those people come into contact with other people, like, look what happens today. How do you exchange contact information with an iPhone? You touch one another.

[Ro Khanna]

Right.

[David Freeberg]

There's an NFC capability to pass code from one to the other. I mean, I just think it's really naive, guys, for us to not assume that technology is very deterministic. There are so many good things that happen, but there are people that are paid to find every single edge and to push it because the stakes are high. And I just think that this is an assumption that we have to live with.

[Ro Khanna]

I'm just very cautious when it comes to bans. That's fair.

[David Freeberg]

That's an Ideological thing. And I generally agree with you because.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Chamath, where this goes is you're like, well, I don't want to import Korean cars because they've got electronics that are connected to the Internet in every Korean car. Now the Koreans can spy on where we are. I mean, you can very quickly see how this can open up a floodgate of banning, because foreign adversaries could take advantage of us, which is.

[David Freeberg]

Exactly.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Including. Including what we do.

[Jason Calacanis]

Which network.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Including banning chip imports, including banning router imports. You could very quickly make this a whole.

[Jason Calacanis]

Literally, the number one thing we can know is like.

[David Freeberg]

Like once we literally already have telecom.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Equipment, we're going to go down a very nasty place. Like, if.

[Jason Calacanis]

No, but we're going down an intelligent route, which is to not give access to all of the personal information of the sons and daughters of representatives of military experts to the Chinese Communist Party.

[David Freeberg]

There is a reason why Huawei is banned in America.

[Eric Swalwell]

Yes.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Yeah. Security vulnerabilities were found.

[Jason Calacanis]

They don't have our best.

[David Freeberg]

And all of a sudden you think that it stopped there. China, like, gave up and said, okay.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

I'm saying there's a different queen.

[David Freeberg]

Let's go watch the dance videos now.

[Jason Calacanis]

It's great.

[David Freeberg]

Let the Americans dance.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

By the way, it does seem a little confusing. Come on. Isn't because US revenue for Tik Tok for Byte Dance, like 5%.

[Jason Calacanis]

If it wasn't about the Chinese government, they would have divested.

[David Freeberg]

I think it's a 30 year.

[Jason Calacanis]

And they would give up their golden share.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

The US is 30, 40.

[Jason Calacanis]

Let's move on to the border.

[Ro Khanna]

Yeah.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Wait, wait.

[Eric Swalwell]

Doge.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

We're going to do Doge. Okay, let's do Doge. Because tell us your point of view on Elon Viv coming in, what they're going to do, what's good about it, what you really don't think is good about.

[David Freeberg]

Do you have concerns?

[Tom Emmer]

Yeah.

[Ro Khanna]

Well, so I do think it's funny that a committee about efficiency has two people running it. That's. But I think it's quite efficient. It just cut itself in half with. If Vivek's running, you know, for governor. So that is their first success, I guess, you know, to cut, you know, the size of the committee.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

But they got a lot of people that they've recruited.

[Ro Khanna]

I got it. Yeah. As I said, knock yourself out. If you want to make it easier for small businesses, you know, to start a business, if you want to save, you know, money and federal employees not.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Showing up to the office.

[Ro Khanna]

Look, my staff shows up and we benefit from people being in the office. We show a lot of flexibility for people who have family issues kind of on a case by case basis and people with disabilities have more access to work. But I generally, I see the benefits of having everybody at the office. And we were one of the first offices to come back on the Hill, you know, during COVID because I saw the benefit of that. And if they can draw a straight line between, you know, benefiting our constituents and people being in the office, I'm open minded to that.

[David Freeberg]

Eric, tell us about how you think this reconciliation bill, the budget. Yeah, it's going to be a very knockout drag out kind of a process. We're going to hit the debt ceiling tomorrow.

[Ro Khanna]

Yeah.

[David Freeberg]

And so you guys are going to be back to work right away. What do you expect?

[Ro Khanna]

What I'm going to be asking my constituents, you know, as tax cuts are proposed and regulations, you know, potentially our cut is, you know, what did you get out of this and what have you lost? Because if it's just, as I said, if it's just kind of a broligarchy that benefits and you don't benefit, then I won't support it. But if you can draw the line and say, you know, this business getting this benefit or this corporate tax rate going down means that, you know, you're going to do better and dream bigger, I can be for that. And so that's what I'm going to be looking at.

[David Freeberg]

Do you think generally that governments should generally just have less tax receipts and be forced to spend less to be more ingenious and less over reliant on overpowering things with money?

[Ro Khanna]

Yes. And frankly, a lot of that starts with the Department of Defense. I mean, look at where the cost drivers are.

[David Freeberg]

Is that where you.

[Ro Khanna]

Yeah, yeah, I think that. But that means you need to have alliances in the world. Right. You're going to have, if you're going to reduce what you spend on defense, you better strengthen your partnerships.

[David Freeberg]

Some people on the Republican side, so I think it's a wonderful point. Some people on the Republican side say this is why energy is so important for us, because when we have resource independence, it actually allows us to forge and recast many of our relationships abroad that then create a very different security envelope.

[Ro Khanna]

I just, I chair the, the Rare Earth Minerals Caucus and for this reason, and it probably surprises people that a Bay Area Democrat wants to get the U.S. you know, back into mining. And that's because we're getting our ass kicked by China on the, you know, not just the mining, but the Processing and the magnetizing. But we do have allies who have these resources so we can do it. In the United States, there's Mountain Pass where they're doing it with almost 100% recycled water. So you don't have the acid pond issue, but you also have countries that you could have.

[David Freeberg]

So I, I, I help fund Jim to get that thing off the ground. I've been out there and going, it's an incredible thing. But even he, he will tell you doing these kinds of projects in America today is almost next to impossible. And the reason he was able to do it, I mean he has support from folks like you, which are forward thinking, but the reason was because it had already largely been built.

[Ro Khanna]

Right.

[David Freeberg]

And he said if he had tried to get it permitted and it's just a question, you know, less money for the government, less regulation. It, it almost seems like sometimes if the Republicans say yay, the Democrats say nay. And if the Democrats said yay, the Republicans would say nay. But if you ask everybody privately, everybody agrees the government should have less and to your point, business people should just have more of a wide berth to.

[Ro Khanna]

Actually go and work and then be held to account. As I said, if the wealth is only concentrated at the top.

[David Freeberg]

Right. So your issue is to make sure we don't point to people at every part of the economic spectrum. That's like, but that's a very reasonable thing to say what you're saying.

[Ro Khanna]

Well, I hope that's how we govern in this next.

[David Freeberg]

But it doesn't come out that way.

[Jason Calacanis]

Well, I think this is a key point that what you lead with and what you talk about and what you make a priority that will be people's perception of your focus and the perception that I have as somebody who again has voted Democrat 2 out of 3 elections is that you're focused on and talking about things like dei, things like having trans kids get surgery. And no parent agrees with this, Nobody agrees with this. They're banning it around the world and you guys lead with that. That shows a lack of prioritization that is palatable to the voting populace. What they want is effective leadership. And when you look at what happened in Southern California, it is the height of arrogance that they're working on things like DEI and saying this is important when the reservoir is not filled, when they're not clearing brush and you have to make trade offs in the world and you guys don't seem to be able to communicate that. It's incredibly frustrating for me. You can hear it in my voice that you can't say, you know what? We care about nature. We care about the trees. But you can't have trees on the floor around homes in a fire jungle.

[David Freeberg]

You said floor. You didn't say ground. So, no, I'm gonna not listen to you.

[Ro Khanna]

Yeah.

[Jason Calacanis]

Or we can't get minerals that. We're gonna be dependent on China for minerals. We need those minerals. We cannot be dependent on foreign adversaries to make important weapon systems, to make important things like electric vehicles. And you guys are concerned about the cranes and trans kids being able to get surgery that nobody wants. That's the problem with the party.

[Ro Khanna]

We need a better story. And I don't think.

[Jason Calacanis]

Stop focusing on those weird things.

[Ro Khanna]

Lead that story with the concerns people have with dei. Although I would argue now the new DEI is Don, Eric and Ivanka, and people probably won't like that approach to it either.

[David Freeberg]

Is that you floating the trial?

[Tom Emmer]

You're trying to.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yeah.

[Eric Swalwell]

I'm not sure, but. Okay.

[Ro Khanna]

We need a better story, and I look forward to being the first time.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

We can workshop.

[Ro Khanna]

Did you work recently?

[Jason Calacanis]

We can workshop it.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Yeah.

[David Freeberg]

Yeah. You're going to have to workshop that one.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yeah. I mean, listen, there's a long tradition in these parties of the kids being grifters. Hunter, everybody's getting in on it. But let's. Let's close on the borders.

[Tom Emmer]

No, no, hold on.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Before we do that, I just want to ask you about should the United States spend $200 billion to acquire Greenland from Denmark?

[Ro Khanna]

I don't give a. If he tries to acquire Greenland. I just want the cost of eggs to go down. That's what my constituents are promising.

[Tom Emmer]

Knock yourself out.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Don't get Greenland mineral rights account.

[Ro Khanna]

Of course there's. There's benefits there, but I. I just. I want to know. You said you're going to lower the cost of eggs. Eggs are pretty expensive. What. How are you going to do that? And if you can tell me that, you know, spending $200 billion to get Greenland is going to help lower our costs, great. But I think people want to see costs come down.

[David Freeberg]

I have a question about today. I just want to actually go back in time today. Are there any of President Trump's nominees that really give you Ajita? And if so, who and why and who's inspiring?

[Jason Calacanis]

Give some credit if there's something like inspiring.

[David Freeberg]

Yeah. Who do you like?

[Jason Calacanis]

Sure.

[David Freeberg]

Give us one that inspires you and give us one.

[Ro Khanna]

I think Rubio is going to do a great job as Secretary of State. I think he has the gravitas and the Experience to do it. And I want to see that happen. Kash Patel is the one that I think could destroy the president's agenda because.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Can you say more?

[Ro Khanna]

Well, what I see. And I may be a little bit biased because the guy wrote a book. He listed 100 enemies. I'm not in that hundred. I'm actually in the preamble. He starts it with, of course, Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell are the most dangerous.

[David Freeberg]

Well, you were part of the House, the Russian investigation.

[Ro Khanna]

But I do believe if the president focuses on going after his enemies, he's going to lose the ability to bring order to the border.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yep.

[Ro Khanna]

To get the most violent, you know, the most violent undocumented immigrants out of the country and make people feel safe in communities where they don't feel safe.

[David Freeberg]

What do you think about Jason's comment? Do you think that we should systematically work through a process to deport 15 million illegal?

[Ro Khanna]

I. I think you should focus on violent offenders.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yeah.

[Tom Emmer]

No brainer.

[Ro Khanna]

Sexual.

[David Freeberg]

So let's say you got that done in six months. What do you do after that?

[Ro Khanna]

Well, you also need order at the border.

[Jason Calacanis]

Right.

[Ro Khanna]

I mean, and I. I support surging resources to bring that, but 40% of my constituents were born outside the United States. We are the 8th wealthiest district in the country. No thanks to me. I'm not contributing to that wealth. There is a straight line between those immigrants and that wealth. And so if we can find a way to address, you know, shortages in the workforce, in agriculture, hospitality, food and beverage, of course we see it in biotech and tech. I think we can have the best in the world. I'll just leave it. Leave you with this. A foreign minister in Asia said to me in the past year, he said, eric, he said, you know, the population of the United States is 3 billion people. And I looked at him and I said, no. You mean it's like 300 plus million? I thought he misspoke. He said, no. He said, there are 3 billion people in the world who would give up everything to come to the United States. And he said, if you get it right, he said, you can pick the best.

[Jason Calacanis]

That's right, absolutely. Recruitment as opposed to immigration areas. Better framework.

[Ro Khanna]

Yes.

[David Freeberg]

Go back, please. You mentioned this. The House Russia investigation created a lot of talking points on both sides that I think are still lingering. And in the spirit of sort of putting it to bed, any regrets about that whole process? Was there anything substantive that came out of it ultimately, or was it the beginning of this more politically directed kind of action reaction, which is now why people are afraid about what happens.

[Ro Khanna]

You know, Russia had a preferred candidate and they did a lot to try and get that guy to win. I think he could have, and I think he may regret that. In a lot of his trolling, he made himself look guiltier when he probably could have shown us that the concerns we had weren't there. But I don't, I'm not going to dwell on that. I'm not going to, you know, focus on the fact that he was impeached twice and sent a mob that, you know, could have killed many of the people in the Capitol with me on January 6th. I'm going to focus on if he wants to bring order to the border, make our communities safer and raise wages and lower costs, I'm going to work.

[David Freeberg]

What I meant, what I meant.

[Jason Calacanis]

I think that's a great message.

[David Freeberg]

Do you think you and Adam work backwards from an outcome or do you think you and Adam actually just followed the facts?

[Ro Khanna]

And I was a Alameda county prosecutor in the same office Earl Warren, you know, worked in. And we were trained that it's not about wins and losses, it's just about doing justice. And I approached it just trying to follow the facts.

[David Freeberg]

When you were watching some of the other things that happened post all of this.

[Ro Khanna]

Yeah.

[David Freeberg]

Like what's happening in New York and whatnot. What were your thoughts as a prosecutor on the legal veracity of some of the things that were going on to Trump leading into this election?

[Ro Khanna]

A lot of people around him went to jail and it felt like, well, if Michael Cohen went to jail, like why the is this guy not being held to account? Like, Michael Cohen went to jail for being a part of that hush money settlement. So again, just being a blue collar kid who resents people who think that their position entitles them to be better than regular folks. I just wanted everyone to be treated the same. And so that's the way I was raised. My dad lost his job as a cop when he wouldn't essentially be get bribed when he wouldn't allow a bribe from a mayor to influence him. And he.

[David Freeberg]

Well, that's amazing that that was my experience.

[Ro Khanna]

But we're in a small town in Iowa and he was the police chief. The mayor very publicly tried to like corrupt him and he wouldn't do it. So my earliest memory is that he was willing to lose his job to do the right thing.

[David Freeberg]

But you're saying something very important, which is everybody should be treated the same. So correct. If no one's one of your kids were charged with a Misdemeanor, Would you hope that it was just prosecuted as a misdemeanor, or do you think that folks that may not, like Eric Swalwell figure out a way to now make it a felon?

[Ro Khanna]

The former. Yeah.

[David Freeberg]

Okay.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yeah.

[Ro Khanna]

I mean, as I said, I'm going into this open minded. What we can do. No, I'm just saying into this new year. Open minded, not focused on the past, on what we can do to make the country succeed.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yeah. And on the border issue, I think that's the one where y'all could maybe get some consensus and some clarity because it really does seem to be creating an underlying tension in the country as to what's going to happen.

[Ro Khanna]

And you can't do anything on the workforce issues until the public believes you have secured the border. That's just so that's rational or not.

[Jason Calacanis]

How much of that was why you think Kamala lost was just her not taking ownership of the border?

[Ro Khanna]

I just think she was attached to an incumbent party. Incumbent parties worldwide are just getting pounded, and there wasn't much that was going to change where this thing was going.

[David Freeberg]

What's happening in California? Well, give us the grade on Gabby Newsom and Karen.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Which Republican will be the next governor of California?

[Ro Khanna]

Well, they don't have their together either, by the way. The Republican Party in California. Look, I was in the Palisades on Monday. I have 10 friends who lost everything. I was with a woman who stood on top of a pile of ashes that was her house looking for any memento for her family, and it's awful. And I will also be open minded as to what we could have done to prevent it. To prevent it, why resources that should have been there weren't there. And as a member of the Homeland Security Committee, make sure that we're better prepared next time. And if there is accountability that should have. That should come to be a part of that. But fires are still burning right now, and so I don't want to be that meme where it's like, you know, the guy that, like, last week I was a hostage expert. This week I'm a wildfire expert.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Well, that's us.

[Ro Khanna]

Yeah.

[Jason Calacanis]

That's our function. Yeah.

[Ro Khanna]

My job is to look at, you know, what we could have done, who should be held accountable. But with the fire still burning and families, you know, living with friends and relatives right now, I don't want to hop. I don't want to give this a hot take yet.

[David Freeberg]

Yeah, fair enough.

[Jason Calacanis]

Fair enough.

[David Freeberg]

Thank you.

[Jason Calacanis]

All right, everybody. Eric, we really appreciate your candidness and good luck rebuilding the party.

[Eric Swalwell]

Thank you.

[David Freeberg]

Well done.

[Ro Khanna]

Okay, thanks.

[Jason Calacanis]

Awesome. Great job, brother. All right, welcome back to the All In Podcast at the inauguration of Donald Trump, our 47th president. And we're really delighted to have friend of the pod, Ro Khanna, back on the program. He is the US representative for California's 17th district, aka our hometown, Silicon Valley. How are you, Ro?

[Eric Swalwell]

Honored to be back on. You made it big time. You're now, like, in D.C. inauguration.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Jason's a Republican now. Did you know that?

[Jason Calacanis]

You know, I remain a moderate.

[Eric Swalwell]

Jason, I'm holding, holding on to you as the Democrat in Silicon Valley.

[Jason Calacanis]

I've always been a moderate. I like to vote for what I believe is the most qualified person. And this time around, I was what they call in your business, a double hater. And let's, let's get right into that with the Democratic Party. You guys got shellacked. The candidate who you put up didn't go through a primary. The previous candidate seemed to be in cognitive decline, we can all agree. And it feels like a bit of a mess in the party. What is gonna happen to the Democratic Party going forward? Is there a voice saying, this is the plan, or is it a little Game of Thrones? Right now, we're all wondering, where are the Democrats? It feels like you went dark. And is that a strategy to just sort of let Trump have his moment and then come back and be adversarial or, you know, state a new platform? What's going on inside the Democratic Party?

[Eric Swalwell]

I think crises are times for reform and renewal. And the reality is that this was a huge blow to the establishment of the party. People wanted a more competitive process. They want new voices. They want a new generation of leadership. And now that's going to emerge. And so you're seeing it happening in California with Dan Lurie winning in San Francisco for Mayor Matt Mahan winning in San Jose. You're seeing new people in Congress emerging, new governors emerging. And so I think that there's going to be a lot of reflection. One of the things I've said is the Democrats need to spend as much time understanding why many Americans voted for Donald Trump as we do criticizing Donald Trump. And I think you're starting to see that happen.

[Jason Calacanis]

What do you think the new platform will be if you had to think of, you know, things to remove from the platform and things to prioritize in the platform if you were in charge or Dean Phillips, friend of the pot as well. There are some people who feel, you know, there's more important issues than the ones that maybe you've been focused on that you the Democratic Party has been focused on for this last election cycle. So maybe give us two or three ideas of what you would add to the agenda and two or three things that you might say, hey, this isn't a priority for Americans anymore.

[Eric Swalwell]

I think the whole thing has to be about prioritizing the economy, the economic independence of Americans. How are we going to have economic renewal, economic growth in a stagnant working and middle class? And then let's argue our different visions. Donald Trump says that the way he's going to turn around Johnstown and Youngstown and downriver Michigan is just with a large tax cuts and deregulation. Our view has got to be that it has to involve technology leaders, business leaders, but also strategic government investments to be able to build new industry there, to be able to credential new folks there, to be able to build a workforce. But we have to offer a compelling economic vision and then an economic vision so people aren't dependent on the denials of private health insurance and so that they have childcare. But I think whoever wins the argument that there's going to lead america in the 21st century on the economy and on economic independence is going to win.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

You're saying government investment in building new businesses, building new industries is necessary to achieve that vision. That's a better alternative. What is the historical kind of examples where policies where government was going to go start new investments, start fundamentally supporting new businesses being built that's worked successfully and work better than free markets. Like the Republican argument is the free market is more efficient, the free market works better. Let capital and capitalists find where the capital is best applied. It'll be more efficiently utilized versus government making the decision about where capital should go. It's typically lower roi, very often negative ROI and doesn't actually create sustainable economic growth.

[Eric Swalwell]

I think as we government investment that's market sustainable. But you look at Hamilton, you look at Lincoln and you look at fdr. That is in my view what built America infrastructure. Well, it's infrastructure, but it's also manufacturing. I mean I have a bill to build new steel plants in Johnstown in Ohio. Now you need the private sector, you need Cleveland Cliffs, you need a private steel company. But if we're going to finance that, the scaling of that, the federal government has to have some role. And what we ended up having in free market economics is China last week one trillion dollar trade surplus. Now we are at almost a trillion dollar trade deficit. You know the economics well. So that's financed with a capital account surplus. That means all that money is coming into Wall Street. Wall Street's doing really well. The finance sector is doing really well. But it's hollowed out our manufacturing base, it's hollowed out our industrial base. That is free market economics gone too far.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Globalization is what some of the non neo con Republicans would say is that global trade versus cut off some of the global trade, create a tariff program with China and will reignite manufacturing. That's kind of a counter policy argument. But to your point, it's a different point of view that uses different set of data to make the case.

[Eric Swalwell]

And I'd agree with some of the strategic tariffs. I just don't think that's going to be enough for us to have pill factories here, have the steel factories, aluminum factories, to revitalize these areas and to look at what is the investment.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

We need government programs.

[Eric Swalwell]

I think we need government partnering with.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

The private sector and on D reg. So, you know, do you feel, and does the party feel that there should be no deregulatory effort in the United States to unleash kind of, you know, economic investment and growth or like this, this whole point, you know, it just feels wrong to me to say like we don't want deregulation. Like shouldn't dereg be a thing that we're always cutting back things, Bureaucracy, bureaucratic red tape that we've created to unleash. I mean, even Gavin Newsom is making this claim now in California with respect to the Rebuilding Act.

[Eric Swalwell]

I think you need effective government. I think execution matters. And I think there's fair criticisms to say that the execution of the Chips and Science act, which I helped write, or the IRA wasn't enough. I mean, the money didn't get out fast enough. The bureaucracy in permitting was, was slow. And if there are ways to make government procurement more competitive, that is good. I mean, why is it that five primes are dominating the defense procurement system? So Michael Bloomberg had a plan which I think seems pretty reasonable. Have 15% of Department of Defense spending for startups and innovative technology as opposed to just going for the five primes. That's regulatory reform. But we also have to look at the fundamental. Why is intel not succeeding yet? Asked. Pat Gelsinger was asked to leave in intel. And I said, is it, was it the permitting reform? And he said, no, it's that the capital expenditures to make Wall Street's numbers was very high and there was no, no procurement.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Everything's too expensive in this country. By the way. This Goes back to nuclear energy. It's too expensive to build a gigawatt of nuclear power in this country. It's too takes too long. Meanwhile, China can do it for about a tenth of the price and they're scaling up 300x our rate in terms of new energy production.

[Jason Calacanis]

And they can do it in half the time.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Half the time, a tenth of the cost. And there's a regulatory path for Gen 4 reactors going up in China versus here.

[Eric Swalwell]

I'm for nuclear energy. I'm for smart modular nuclear energy. I'm for looking at how we build nuclear energy here in the United States in a safe way. But in one that I agree that our part my party has been opposed to large.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

So this is really important because I think what happens is the Republicans or the Democrats will come forward with a general policy statement. We need to dereg to unleash economic prosperity or dereg to unleash nuclear. But the other party then says, well we've got to figure out a way to attack them on that vector. And then they take this like diametrically opposed point of view to try and diminish the strength that they're gaining because of their strong policy perspective that may be good for America. And then we end up in this unfortunate circumstance where we can't ever align on the things that really are good for America. That's how I feel as an American. Looking at how the parties attack each other. One party says this is a good thing for America. Why doesn't the other party say you're absolutely right, we all agree on that. Let's move forward.

[Jason Calacanis]

Can you give the win on Doge? Like government efficiency seems like consensus.

[Eric Swalwell]

Well, I've gotten criticized cuz I put out an innocent tweet and have said that if Musk and Ramaswamy have a good idea then I want to look at that. And you know, Musk disrupted the entire Pentagon with Space X. I mean he worked with Ash Carter to do that.

[Jason Calacanis]

The track records there.

[Eric Swalwell]

The track records there. So if he's going to. And you have all of the progressives like me saying the defense budget is bloated, 56% of spending. We need to figure out how to have more competition. We need to look at the waste that is there. I mean spending $150,000 on soap dispensers. And so now if Musk is. It's really Boeing. $150,000, 60 minutes, $1400 for breast pumps. I mean I think it's outrageous.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yeah.

[Eric Swalwell]

And so now because Musk is saying let's look at the Defense Department. You don't want to do it, even though you've been saying to do that for the past five, six years. That's the stuff that drives people crazy. Or I floated, you know that Bob Iger would be a good person to run next time for mayor of L. A.

[Jason Calacanis]

He's considering it.

[Eric Swalwell]

Well, I mean, did he tell you that? Yeah, I don't want to talk about what he. What we've talked about privately. I just think he'd be.

[Jason Calacanis]

You did ask him.

[Eric Swalwell]

I did ask him. And so now I'm getting attacked for. Well, am I for an oligarch? That's literally my Twitter.

[Jason Calacanis]

Bob Igerson oligarch.

[Eric Swalwell]

I said, I want someone who's going to rebuild this place. It would actually be a public service for him.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

After FYI, I want popcorn and lemonade stands on every corner.

[Eric Swalwell]

And, you know, and was fdr, FDR went oligarch. FDR was one of the wealthiest people, John F. Kennedy. So I think there's got to be a bit. There's got to be common sense. How do we actually help people? That has to be the metric. And willingness to work across the aisle on things.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yeah. It does seem, in the wake of what's happened in Southern California, Pacific Palisades and all the other regions that were impacted, that a large number of affluent and voters and people who are active in politics are now saying it's kind of enough. The progressivism went too far left. We need really qualified people in office. And so what do you think is going to happen in California? And what impact do you think these 12,000, 14,000 homes being destroyed, and of course, the 25 people who lost their lives tragically, what impact is that going to have? You think that's a turning point?

[Eric Swalwell]

In some ways I do. I mean, first of all, it's just horrific. And I'm sure, you know, people, I.

[Jason Calacanis]

Have a couple of friends who lost.

[Eric Swalwell]

Who lost their home.

[Jason Calacanis]

They're alive, and that's what's important. But they did lose everything.

[Eric Swalwell]

They lost everything. And I mean, a place that just burned down and it's, it's. It's devastating. And I think it's just a culmination in California of something that's been creeping up, which is governance matters, execution matters. Yes. Keeping places safe matters, making sure that we're pragmatic matters. And that's why you saw Dan Lori win. That's why you saw Matt Mahan win. That's why you've seen sort of reasonable people in district attorneys win. I Think that's. And you're going to see that in la. I think you're going to see that in the governor's race. I. I do think California is saying, regardless of your ideology on issues, we need to be able to govern well.

[Jason Calacanis]

So you have the economy. I think safety's up there for folks. What else do you think's on that short list of things that the party in California could say to the voters in terms of winning them back and letting them understand you're focused on something other than in their perception. Dei maybe environmental overreach. Can't believe I'm saying that. But like the fact that people don't believe in clearing the forest around homes and they're fighting it on environmental grounds. Well, I mean, it doesn't take a rocket science to understand rocket scientists to understand that these wildfires have been occurring for a long time. You got the sultan of science here who can go into the science of it and that if you want to live near a forest in a fire zone, you kind of got to clean up the detritus on the forest floor. Like it feels like we, you know, the leadership in California is kind of pressing. Company excluded has kind of lost the script here, huh?

[Eric Swalwell]

I think it's reasonable to ask why the brush wasn't cleared outside la. I got in trouble for asking that. I said, these are legitimate questions. That's not going after people. And I supported Karen Bass in full disclosure against Rich Caruso. I was proud to do it. But if Caruso asked reasonable questions, the whole point of being in governance is you say, okay, the guy had a good performance.

[Jason Calacanis]

You're disappointed in her performance. The fact that she's out of the country.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Going back in time when you have endorsed Caruso, knowing what you know now.

[Eric Swalwell]

I don't know if I would have endorsed him, but I certainly think it's fair to say that people are disappointed in what's. What's happened in L. A. And I endorse someone like Iger or others. I think there's. I certainly think there needs to be a new mayor.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Do you think there was any reason for her to be in Ghana?

[Eric Swalwell]

Well, she said, she says that she went on the president. The inauguration of the president, the inauguration. I.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

She was in a palace having cocktails.

[Eric Swalwell]

Now, whether. If there were actual warnings before, I think she would probably say she even.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Be going to Ghana as the mayor of a city that has no economic.

[Jason Calacanis]

On vacation, I suppose.

[Eric Swalwell]

No. Well, that. No, look, that's a common thing where the president of both parties ask People, mayors, governors. I haven't been asked as a congressman yet to represent them at a, At a foreign inauguration. Yeah, that's a common thing. And I don't. If there weren't the warnings, I don't think that's a big, big issue. Or she's going to Paris because, you know, the LA is hosting the Olympics. The question is, though, your first priority. And if there were warnings, she should explain why. Why, why, why she didn't go. And I like her. I think she's a good person. But the question is, what is it going to take going forward? But the big point about. One of the points about what we need to do differently, other than the economics, is we've got to also go around the country and say my party is not going to look down on people who we have different cultural or social viewpoints with. I think there was this sense of condescension and that if you disagree with someone, somehow our party is morally superior and that's got to stop.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

And this whole thing about if we disagree, the policy generally is wrong, which is, I think, distinguishing the policy from the party. Do you think California has a chance of electing a Republican governor in 26? Do you think that that chance is now greater than 50% after the wildfires?

[Eric Swalwell]

I still think, and I will support most likely the Democrat. I mean, whoever the good, good Democrat is. There are a lot of good Democrats that can run. But, you know, I mean, Arnold Schwarzenegger was a Republican and can a Republican who is pro choice and take some of the social issues off the table be competitive? Yeah, I think the Democratic Party would be naive to take that for granted. And we need to have thoughtful, strong people on our side. Run and run. Understanding people care about public safety. They want effective government, they want reform. I mean, people like Matt Mahan, who now have had a couple years and have been effective, are the type of Democrats I think that can win statewide.

[Jason Calacanis]

What are your thoughts on TikTok going dark in the last 24 hours here?

[Eric Swalwell]

It's terrible. I've been, I've been Vocal. We had 1.3 million people sign a petition, never had that in orders of magnitude saying keep TikTok because they like.

[Jason Calacanis]

The product or they make a living.

[Tom Emmer]

It's.

[Eric Swalwell]

Yeah, it's. First of all, it's the stories about people who make a living. There was one person, a content creator. Her husband cheated on her, abusive marriage. She leaves. She's got four kids, two toddlers and two people around, two kids around five. And she's broke. She's in a hotel. She's staying in her best friend's living room for four months, and then she starts telling her story. And now she's making 60, $70,000. As a content creator, I could tell you 50 stories like this. So people are actually relying on this for their livelihood. Some people are making it. Making. Using it to make rent. And then you have the issue of free speech and just being able to express it. Now people say, what about China? Well, why don't you pass a broad, broader law that says any interference by a foreign government in algorithms is going to be illegal and criminal?

[Jason Calacanis]

Well, India banned these apps.

[Eric Swalwell]

Yes. And we're not India.

[Jason Calacanis]

They're pretty savvy, though. I mean, these things are an attack vector. You can remotely control these phones. They were caught spying on journalists, and they could shape public policy, so. And they've had years to divest. Seems to me that the Chinese government sees this as a strategic military asset. Do you disagree with that?

[Eric Swalwell]

I do. One, I think the United States has a much, much more robust tradition of free speech than in, obviously, than in India. And so I think our considerations are different. I also think we have far more capability in making sure that we protect our data and protect any foreign interference in algorithms. Now, President Trump has floated this idea that you have 50% US ownership. My understanding is 60% of the investors already are US investors. I will work with him and Mike Waltz, I know very well, we were co chairs of the India Caucus together in Congress. I will work with him in a bipartisan way to figure out how do we have this app operational.

[Jason Calacanis]

If the Chinese government spies on their own people, why wouldn't they spy on their adversary, the American people?

[Eric Swalwell]

Well, certainly they would, but the question is, are they? Can we protect the American people from that happening on this app? We can, as long as we have two clear laws. One, that the data stays here. By the way, a lot of the data that's going to the China Communist Party is through data brokers. There's no law against that. So pass a law that all data of Americans, if it goes to.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Which, by the way, there's US Companies that are selling that data, there's US Companies that are buying that data, and any third party can access that data if they want to buy it in one of the markets. That stuff exists. It's existed for a very long time.

[Eric Swalwell]

And the irony of it is going back to the trade deficit China's got. The same week China announces a $1 trillion trade surplus. They're building more drones than us, more ships than us, more steel than us. We're talking about banning this TikTok app, more electricity.

[Jason Calacanis]

What about the concept of reciprocity? Would you be in favor of requiring that we have our social networks in China if they want to have theirs here?

[Eric Swalwell]

I would be in favor of us pushing for our social media networks to be there just because of free speech. But I would not allow the Chinese Communist Party to be controlling any social media app or having any influence, whether it's on TikTok or whether it's on any other app. I don't want to name another app because I don't want to malign other apps incorrectly, but pass a law that says it's a criminal offense if an executive in this country is found collaborating or overseeing any app that has any influence in the algorithms by the Chinese Communist Party or if our data goes to the. In the hands of the Chinese Communist Party, you could. You could have a law while still keeping TikTok operational.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Yeah, you litigate the outcome. You don't litigate the method.

[Jason Calacanis]

I don't trust China as much as you gentlemen do. Let's talk about.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Jason. It's not about trusting China. And you keep trying to characterize it as, like, people being pro China. If they're pro free speech or they're pro giving people.

[Jason Calacanis]

It's not the only platform you can have free speech.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

You continue to make assumptions about security. When there are security issues with a lot of apps, the security issues with.

[Jason Calacanis]

A lot of phones, they don't have the same scale as TikTok.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Disagree.

[Jason Calacanis]

The scale of TikTok is extraordinary.

[Eric Swalwell]

I'll tell you where we got the politics wrong. I mean, so Donald Trump comes in there and he says, you know what? The Chinese took your jobs, they took your steel jobs, they took your auto jobs, and we're going to have tariffs. And by the way, this TikTok thing, pretty popular app for young people. We're going to keep it. What do we do? We do the exact opposite. We have running ads. We don't want tariffs. So we're telling all these folks in the Midwest that we're opposed to the policies that could save some of their jobs. And then we're telling all these young people that we want to ban TikTok.

[Jason Calacanis]

And in fairness, they didn't take the jobs. We gave them to them.

[Eric Swalwell]

At some point, I think we've got. One of the things the Democrats need to do is stop listening to the foreign policy blob and the Beltway executive, you know, pundits who've got Fancy titles and fancy think tanks. And every time we get these letters, 500 groups, 200 groups. I said, who are these groups? These are 200 groups with 130 people. It's like every person is three groups and we're listening to them as opposed to.

[Jason Calacanis]

I just popped up five groups while.

[Eric Swalwell]

We'Re speaking here, you know, And I think part of what Trump was doing, I mean, I. And I obviously totally opposable. I voted for his impeachment twice. But it was sort of like in the. In our world, ab testing or fast iterations. He put out ideas, he get feedback, he iterates it. He may not call it that, but he's just kind of gauging where people are.

[Jason Calacanis]

Let's talk about one of those ideas. Americans want the border secure, there's no doubt about that. Statistics just show it. 80% of Americans want it kind of shut down and be orderly and legal, maybe even more. But this idea that we're going to drag 15 million people out of the country as Steve Bannon drag.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Because he continues to.

[Jason Calacanis]

No, I'm just quoting Steve Bannon and Stephen Miller, who work. One of them worked in the first administration and architected his first win, and the other one is the most powerful person inside the administration this time. So I'm just quoting people. They say, day one, 15 million are going. So do you think that's actually going to happen? And do you think it should happen?

[Eric Swalwell]

It shouldn't happen. Whether it's actually going to happen or not, I don't know, is the answer whether they're going to try.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

What do you think should happen?

[Eric Swalwell]

I think you should have people who are convicted. First of all, we need a secure border. We need to encourage people to come here through the legal process like my parents did, or like so many.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Do you say encourage? Do you say encourage or require?

[Eric Swalwell]

Require. But to do that, we've got to have reform to make that more possible, because right now, that's a very hard thing to do. And it wasn't as hard, by the way, when my father came in the 1960s, studied engineering, had a green card within months of graduating. So how do we do that? But, of course, require people to come through the legal process and secure the border. I don't deny that there's been a problem on the border. But. And then for those who are criminals here were convicted, convicted of crimes. Fine, deport, deport.

[Jason Calacanis]

Okay, we all agree on that. Those all seem logical and obvious.

[Eric Swalwell]

But. But in terms of. So let me tell you, someone in my district, without telling her name. And you, you tell me what, what should happen to this person? She's a, she's been in the country. She's undocumented. She came to, to see me with a group of people. She's a dental hygienist. Her daughter is going to med school.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

She's undocumented.

[Eric Swalwell]

She's undocumented.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Do you consider yourself to be her representative? She's not a citizen of the United States. She doesn't have a legal right to vote. Are you representing that undocumented non American person?

[Eric Swalwell]

I am supposed to represent everyone in.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

The district that lives there, regardless of their citizenry.

[Eric Swalwell]

I, My, my citizenship. I don't, we don't ask in terms of their citizenship, in terms of just being a representative of the area, if everyone. Now, I won't.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

But as a congressmember, you believe that you should represent non Americans that happen to be domiciled in your region, in your district.

[Eric Swalwell]

I don't think, I don't think that I need to represent their political views. But if they're being abused in terms of the process in some way, and they came to us within the law, we would figure out how they got due process.

[Jason Calacanis]

So you would have empathy and sympathy for the person living in your district, even if they weren't legal, is what you're saying? I think it's quite reasonable, if I may interpret.

[Eric Swalwell]

Yeah, I mean, that's, that's a more eloquent way of putting it. But let me just tell you about this, this person. So she's, her daughter is in med school in Southern California. She drives down once a month and drives back because she can't afford a hotel down there. And the reason she can't afford a hotel is she's being underpaid as a dental hygienist for 20 years. Now, do you really think we need to deport her and what is that going to do to her daughter? Or can we find a path?

[Jason Calacanis]

Sounds like a great potential American to me.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Well, the, the, the, the alternative point of view, someone would say, I'll play the devil's advocate here, they would say, but there is another American who is qualified to be a dental hygienist, who cannot get a job, who would be getting paid more because they are a citizen and they are legal and documented. This person is undercharging their employer and they are taking a job away from America. And that's what the counterargument would be from some people.

[Eric Swalwell]

So there are two things. One, I agree that if there's someone who is in a position that is undocumented or even on an H1B and they are being underpaid. That's wrong. That's why we need reform so that people are being paid appropriately and aren't being employers aren't abusing the process to drive down market wages. But the argument that they're taking American jobs misses a central point. And that is when you have a immigrant as a worker, yes, you're increasing the labor supply and the supply. If you increase supply, that drives down price or wages. But you're also increasing demand because they're spending a lot of money on things.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

And I've always viewed this to be more of a demand. Part of the equation for growing the US population is you can actually increase the economic growth.

[Jason Calacanis]

So let's put a number on this, you know. So clearly you don't believe these people should be dragged out of the country.

[David Freeberg]

Correct?

[Jason Calacanis]

I think we're in agreement on that. Some people are not MAGA 1.0 on it. Do you believe they should be dragged out?

[Eric Swalwell]

I don't want to put you on the spot.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

No, no, it's not that simple. And I'm really hungover today, so I'm not going to be super articulate about it.

[Jason Calacanis]

What about that dental hygienist who's been here for 20 years, would you give her amnesty? I would. Seems like a great American working hard.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Obviously being empathetic, I think for me would always be a priority. That person should not lose their job, lose their life. That's a very hard circumstance. At the same time, there are a lot of Americans who feel they are getting underpaid that they don't have jobs. And there's empathy that I think is part of the alternative side of that equation.

[Jason Calacanis]

You know, let me, let me ask this question. Whenever we talk about immigration, we never have a number put on it. We never have a point. We don't have a point based system here. So it devolves into this discussion we're having right here, which is, oh, they, they stole our jobs and wages are down in the face of the lowest unemployment of our lifetime, 4% and 7,8 million jobs out there. There's two jobs for every person who's unemployed. If you do that basic math. Now, of course there's some disparity in people having the skills to take certain jobs and geography, putting all that Aside, we have 340 million Americans. Would an easy situation here be to say we will import people based on the need in the country. So if we don't have enough People working in health care. We're going to open up. And if unemployment's under 10%, we'll have 3 million people come in a year. We'll have 2 million people coming a year. And just put a number on it and then have Americans and our representatives debate that number. Why don't you guys do this?

[Eric Swalwell]

Well, I'd say two things. I think my view of why we have lost jobs and stagnation has been the offshoring of so much of our industry and the hollowing out of towns and communities where we just watched as wealth piled up in districts like ours. Not because people in our district stole the wealth from Youngstown or downriver. It's just that the wealth was piling up, industry was being offshored, and there was kind of indifference towards it. And if we want real solutions, we need to have economic revitalization instead of blaming the dental hygienist in my district. Like, that's not why, you know, Johnstown or Warren, Ohio, are suffering. The broader point, though, is we have a number on green cards and legal immigrants around 1.4 million a year. And then we should debate how do we. Where. Which categories do you want to increase it? Why? And how do you get people out of the status where they're being underpaid? I do think that's what's hurting is these. Is whether you're on an H1 and you're there for years and you're being underpaid, or whether you're undocumented and being underpaid, that hurts the American worker far more than when that's such an important point.

[Jason Calacanis]

People don't understand this about the H1BS is they are transferable, but you have 30 days, which makes essentially, as it was explained to me when I was in the IT business, these are indentured servants and they don't have choice. And they have this, you know, threat that they're constantly under. If you don't do what we say as an employer and you don't accept the salary, you're going to be out of the country.

[Eric Swalwell]

Exactly.

[Jason Calacanis]

And you're going to have to take your family with you. Would an easier solution to be to just charge 10% of the salary into a pool as a tax so people don't abuse it. The salaries go up. Have a minimum salary and give them maybe a year to find another job. What do you think of that?

[Eric Swalwell]

I think that type of a solution is reasonable. And have them be paid well, I mean, this idea that they're being abused or, you know, put A floor or have it be the prioritized based on the, the highest wages, because that's a reflective of talent coming in. But you know, you don't want a situation like now where you're on a H1 for three years, then you get it extended because you apply for a green card to six years. And then while your green card applications in process, it keeps getting extended. So these folks are here 10, 12 years and, and, and, and the abuse of it. And my view is, you know, I think the American people are pretty decent and fair. I grew up in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. It was 95, 98% white. It was a few Indian American families. And I grew up with a belief that you could do anything in America.

[Jason Calacanis]

And look at you.

[Eric Swalwell]

And, and you know, the country trusted me to represent a district with $12 trillion of value of the most economically prosperous place perhaps in the history of humanity, perhaps in the world. And I just think that that is America. And people are upset at the extremes. They're upset at the abuses, they're upset that there wasn't a process at the border. But deep down, this country has always been one that embraces immigration. And almost most immigrants tend to be very patriotic.

[Jason Calacanis]

So when you hear Stephen Miller say America is for Americans and American only, you think that flies in the face of the spirit of this country.

[Eric Swalwell]

I would say, what does he mean by Americans? You know what I want to do? I'd love to have lunch with him actually. Me too. You know, maybe have him on all in.

[Jason Calacanis]

Be great. Yeah.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

And you want to join for that?

[Eric Swalwell]

I'd love to. And you know, we should all, instead of just reading every tweet, you know, read Lincoln's.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Because I heard he's a guy that if you sit down with him and have a long form conversation, you get a lot more than what the short form media bites have been about him. So I'd actually be really.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yeah, no, I would love to have him on because I watched his entire speech and the way he speaks seems incredibly xenophobic and a bit racist to me.

[Eric Swalwell]

So what I would, I would argue, what I would ask him about is, is, is without being too pedantic about history, is Lincoln has the speech in 1858 on Independence Day. And the challenge for Lincoln is to say how is a German American or French American American? Because back then to be American, you literally had to trace one great grandparent who fought the Revolutionary War. How could you be American if no one in your family fought the Revolutionary War? And Lincoln has this brilliant formulation that he Says you're flesh of the flesh, blood of the blood of the founders, if you believe in the Constitution, if you believe in the Declaration of Independence. And so I'd say to Stephen, do you still believe that? What? How are you.

[Jason Calacanis]

It's okay if you don't too.

[Eric Swalwell]

Right.

[Jason Calacanis]

I mean, we can have that discussion in America if we're pulling the ladder up now. And we're not a land of immigrants.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

But I agree with you. I'm an immigrant. I think the immigrants are the most patriotic.

[Jason Calacanis]

That's why I believe in it. Because of you, Freeburg.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Everything was. Well, I mean, you should.

[Jason Calacanis]

Because you're doing great things. And look what you're going to do.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

For potatoes from south, you know, South Africa when I was six years old and I'm hanging out in Washington D.C. with a congressman.

[Jason Calacanis]

And how many jobs have you created?

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

The president and the vice president. I get to meet all these people and hang out with them.

[Jason Calacanis]

And you've created thousands of jobs. And you're going to create billions of extra calories with these amazing ohana strawberries.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Ohalo is the name of the company. I think. I think my company might actually be in your district. You cover Santa Cruz County.

[Eric Swalwell]

No, that's Jimmy Panetta.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

I see. Okay.

[Jason Calacanis]

All right. Well, no favors.

[Ro Khanna]

Sorry.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Let me ask you a question. Do you think the United states should spend $200 billion to acquire Greenland from Denmark? Denmark has $150 billion debt.

[Eric Swalwell]

Yeah.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

They could build a public pension plan.

[Eric Swalwell]

Here's what. What are we trying to solve? First of all, I'm a person that believes that we need to respect the self determination of other countries. That's what makes us different than Britain. That makes us different than Rome. America. You know, when my.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Even though we intervene in foreign elections and use military force to overturn foreign governments.

[Eric Swalwell]

Well, those. Nobody's perfect. There you go. There you go. I got to get this guy. He's got my tongue.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

You know, if you ever. If you ever need a hype man or a campaign manager.

[David Freeberg]

Let's go.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

When you do your own. When you do your run for governor.

[Eric Swalwell]

Yeah, exactly.

[Jason Calacanis]

By the way, the show has been brought to you, but not only by Roe, but also roaming. Go to get Roman Row. We got to wrap up. You got to go.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

No, no, hold on. I want to hear the. Greenland.

[Jason Calacanis]

Yeah, Greenland.

[David Freeberg]

Yeah.

[Eric Swalwell]

So no, but. But the question is why? What interest does Greenland have? They have critical minerals. They have a lot of important resources. And basically they want to partner economically with us. They're letting us invest. They're letting Us develop it. So what, what do we gain?

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

You're saying we could achieve our objectives without, without it becoming a terrorist.

[Jason Calacanis]

What about Puerto Rico?

[Eric Swalwell]

Do you really want. Here's, here's my cautionary tale. I think this could be the dispositive argument. Every time Bernie Sanders ran, you know what he talked about? The politics of Denmark. You really want Greenland State?

[Jason Calacanis]

We're going to get to Denmark. They call it getting to Denmark.

[Eric Swalwell]

Greenland is going to, that's going to. Those two senators are going to be democratic.

[Jason Calacanis]

If you're going to have two years.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Of fraternity interviews that have come out on Twitter from the people that live in Greenland, they're sick of the socialist, you know, kind of overseers. I think they do want to have a different way of governing.

[Jason Calacanis]

I don't know, man. I'm going to have more kids if I get two years of paternity. It sounds pretty amazing.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Yeah, but it is. I mean, look, I don't think that you're necessarily getting that, but there's.

[Jason Calacanis]

What about Puerto Rico?

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

It's an important question. Is like, does. Does the United States need territorial dominion to achieve its strategic objectives?

[Jason Calacanis]

I'm open. I'm open minded. What about Puerto Rico?

[Eric Swalwell]

Well, there are two, like, look, every Democrat is like, oh, we want Puerto Rico. Why? Because you're gonna get two Democratic senators and Congress people. But my view is it should be a Puerto Rico self referendum.

[Jason Calacanis]

If 80, 90% want to do it, you'd be down.

[Eric Swalwell]

Yes, if they want to join the United States, because that's a different thing. There we come. You know, we basically took that as a territory. Now let's see what they want to do.

[Jason Calacanis]

I'm all for it.

[David Freeberg]

Let's go straight to 60 states.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Are you, are you running for governor of California?

[Eric Swalwell]

No. Are you?

[Jason Calacanis]

Why not? You've done such a great job.

[Eric Swalwell]

I think there is a. I love being in Congress. I love representing Silicon Valley and I have been focused on how do we get innovation, technology, partnering with communities to have economic revitalization.

[Jason Calacanis]

If you were asked, would you consider.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

Didn't I see a rumor this week that someone said something that you were. Am I wrong?

[Eric Swalwell]

I think someone may have floated a rumor. I'm trying to get asked by your.

[Jason Calacanis]

Party and the citizens of California. Would you consider. Would you consider it?

[Eric Swalwell]

If that's.

[Jason Calacanis]

Just consider it.

[Eric Swalwell]

I consider anything.

[David Freeberg]

Great.

[Eric Swalwell]

You know, there you go.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

All right.

[Jason Calacanis]

He consider campaign manager.

[Eric Swalwell]

I need that. I mean, he's good.

[Jason Calacanis]

Well, I got some good.

[Chamath Palihapitiya]

He's got his moments.

[Jason Calacanis]

That's a wrap from the 47th inauguration of the United States. And we'll see you next time.

[David Freeberg]

Bye.