Jen Psaki (6:35)

I'm so happy to be here. I love your podcast and I learned so much every time. You'd be an amazing professor, by the way, but I learned so much every time I listened to it, so thanks for having me.

Stacey Abrams (6:44)

Okay, coming from you, that is an extraordinarily high compliment that I'm going to clip and play every morning for myself. So there we go.

Jen Psaki (6:50)

Maybe we should teach a class together. That's in our future. We'll do that in the future.

Stacey Abrams (6:53)

There we go.

Jen Psaki (6:53)

There we go.

Stacey Abrams (6:55)

Okay, Well, I want to note for our audience that we are recording this on Wednesday morning, the 5th of March, after nearly 100 minutes of the State of the Union. Beyond the rhetoric and the disinformation, what are your key takeaways that you think we should have from last night's speech?

Jen Psaki (7:19)

First of all, the volume and the length was the point. I watched the whole thing because it's part of my job to watch the whole thing. I actually ended up sitting on the set the entire time and they told us we could walk around, but I thought if I walk around, I'm not going to watch the entire speech and I need to watch the entire speech. There was so much in there that was inaccurate and not factual. And that's a very important part of this. And I know a lot of media organizations, including us, are pulling apart all of those pieces and we can talk about any of that too. But in a 10,000 foot or 50,000 foot takeaway, what struck me is that it was very self indulgent. It was not actually. It was performative at many times. Every State of the Union is a bit performative. But I think unfortunately he also used people who had been victims in a what I found to be a little bit of a gross way at times. I also think there were moments, and this is what I think is one of the important things is now that we're recovering from this, I mean, I was exhausted watching it because it was so long and there were so many things that were wrong. It is that he was telling us things like, I'm going after your Social Security. Right? He didn't say, I'm going after your Social Security. But he laid the predicate. This is what he does, right? He laid the predicate, just like he has in the past. For the election is rigged for going after Social Security and suggesting that it is full of fraud. It's not that people who are dead or getting Social Security, they're not. And he needs to do that because that's the only way for him to cut money, unless he's gonna cut money from the Defense Department. So there was a lot to take away. We can dive into any aspect you want. But the Social Security piece for me was one that I hope Democrats have a real strategy and plan to keep talking about, because that was a very clear signal to me of what he intends to do in the weeks and months ahead.

Stacey Abrams (9:33)

Well, let's stick with Social Security because we know that he intentionally telegraphs his punches, or maybe it's not intentional, but he's like a con man or he is a con man, and he will trick your mind or at least try to distract your eye by giving you X so that he can justify Y. And we know, of course, as you pointed out, that this debunked lie that millions of people over the age of 100 or 200 or 300 are receiving benefits was designed to lay the groundwork to, as you've just pointed out very accurately, to destroy Social Security. And we know they've already started dodge. I refuse to call it anything else. And Elon Musk, they're already closing down Social Security offices across the country, including five right here in the state of Georgia, and that they're doing this just as baby boomers are retiring in massive numbers. And I think that's the other point, that any other time in history, an attack on Social Security would have been deeply problematic. Now it's catastrophic. And so can you talk a bit more about, regardless of partisanship, how people need to understand this moment and what they should be doing in response?

Jen Psaki (10:52)

Well, let me start with the substantive side of it, because we're nerdy, and I love that about you. If my statistics are right, more than 72 million people in the country receive Social Security checks. They're not all old. I mean, people rely on Social Security for a range of reasons. It's also a program that people pay into. It is not free money from the government or something like that. It is a program people pay into. And people rely on for any range of reasons, for their rent, for food, for whatever it may be. You know what struck me last night? I was sitting next, right next to Michelle Norris on the set, and she said near the end of the. It was almost midnight. It was almost like. And she said, before we go, anybody out there who's watching print off your Social Security earnings right now? Which was very specific, but I thought was so instructive because it is like, hey, everyone, we here sitting on this set, you, we can't stop this. But we're telling you what we heard from what he just said. That's the substance of it. I will also add that one of the things that the backdrop of this, which is always important, none of these speeches happen in vacuums, right? I mean, even if he's saying, I'm defending workers and I love farmers, you're like, well, if you love farmers, why are you cutting their subsidies and screwing them over and ending usaid, where they do a lot of their contracts to give food to the world? I mean, you know, childhood cancer. You've cut childhood cancer funding investment in childhood cancer research. Okay, let me get back to Social Security. That's the substance on the politics of it. I think what's one of the challenging things right now, I find, and you and I talked about this on my podcast, is that it can become a whack a mole situation. And this is the thing about like fact checking the speech last night, which is important and everybody should do. And when we came back to coverage after the speech, Rachel Maddow did like this 12 point version of that, but you could do a hundred point version of that. We could just spend all of our time fact checking. And really, in these moments, it's not that you have to, I'm not a believer that you have to just like pick a thing to support. I don't. But you gotta pick a thing to fight on, right? And pick a thing or two to fight on, right? Because otherwise it's too confusing. It's like, wait, you're for USAID and you're for the faa, you're for Fed. People don't have to all pick the same thing. But I think the Social Security front politically is that this is an issue that impacts again, 72 million Americans or more people's grandparents, people's kids, people's futures. If I'm the Democrats right now or Democratic Party, I am investing in making that clear, taking that clip from the speech last night and pushing that out, pushing anyone I'm running against to go on the record on whether they agree with what he just said, reminding people. Martin O'Malley, who was of course the governor of Maryland but was the Social Security administrator, most recently said just a couple of days ago that he thinks the program, which has never missed a payment in 80 years, could have issues doing that, making everybody's payments in the next 30 to 90 days. So in the political space, that's what you focus on. Speaking specificity is your friend in politics, I think. Right. Trump is hurting our democracy, of course he is moving toward authoritarianism. He is trying to gut all sorts. All of those are true. But to me, this moment is this man does not want you to get your Social Security checks you have paid into and you rely on that's what he's telling you. And it's like simplifying and being specific.

Stacey Abrams (14:33)

And I think it's adding to that he's going to take your money to give it to the wealthiest people in human history, that he's not just taking your Social Security, he is handing it to someone who wants to use it to fly to Mars, not to buy insulin, not to buy groceries, but to pay to go to Mars. And that's what he wants us to believe is the right thing to do. Because we should be idolizing these extraordinarily wealthy people who are trying to make us pay for their hobbies and pay for their dreams. But I want to go back to one thing you said on Social Security and just want to emphasize everyone, you can go right now to the Social Security Administration. Just Google Social Security. Look for the Social Security administration. Sign up to pull down your statement and also pull down it gives you a list of what it thinks you should receive when you finally retire. This is incredibly important because as Jen, as you were saying, people need to know what they're about to do. And we know they've already gone into our systems. We know they've already started changing information. We need to know what the information says now. Because one of the ways this kind of scheme works is if you don't know what you're entitled to, you don't know you've been cheated. And so just want to flag for everyone. One of your to dos is make sure that you go to Social Security and download. You've got to go through some things. You've got to sign up for a couple. There are a couple of two party verification systems that they now use. But take the time to do it, get it done because that's going to matter.

Jen Psaki (16:08)

Very important.

Stacey Abrams (16:11)

Assembly required is brought to you by ZBiotics Sugar to fiber Crooked Media listeners have heard great things about ZBiotics pre alcohol probiotic. Now there's an exciting new product to help with everyday challenges. Let's Face it, it is tough to always eat a balanced diet. Extra sugar is found in so many foods and no matter how hard I try, I'm not eating as much fiber as I'd like. Enter Sugar to Fiber probiotic mix the PhD microbiologists over at ZBiotics understand that extra sugar is all but impossible to avoid these days and 95% of Americans don't get enough fiber. So they genetically engineered a probiotic to convert some extra sugar from our everyday diet into a prebiotic fiber called levain. This leads to a more balanced microbiome, the key to a healthy gut. One stick pack of sugar to fiber and you will get a daily dose of fiber from the foods you already eat. Drinking sugar to fiber is an easy way to bring more fiber into your diet without having to make other major additions to what you eat every day. With other issues on my mind, sugar to fiber can help me achieve my goals without going out of my way and it helps me move towards a healthier outcome. Even if I'm not making the perfect choices in 2025, I'm prioritizing my microbiome. Sugar to fiber is a daily insurance that fiber is on the checklist. Go to ZBiotics.com and use assembly at checkout for 15% off any first time orders of ZBiotics probiotics thanks to ZBiotics 100% money back guarantee. If you're unsatisfied for any reason, they will refund your money, no questions asked. Thank you ZBiotics for sponsoring this episode. Every cup of Nespresso coffee is an invitation to transform your morning routine into a ritual you can treasure each and every day using the Vertuo pop, a simple touch of the button, freshly brews, bold aromas and a rich velvety Crema layer for delicious cafe quality coffee at home. Whether you enjoy your coffee hot or over ice, every sip every morning is unforgettable. Nothing tastes like nespresso coffee. Visit nespresso.com or our app to explore our full range of easy to use machines and coffees not found anywhere else. Coming back to the other part of this, when you talk about what Democrats could be doing and how they should be doing it, and the fact that we can't do everything everywhere all at once, we've got to focus on a few things. We know that a lot of people, regardless of partisanship, have been going to town hall meetings and that Republicans have now said don't do these anymore. Recess is coming up. What should folks who want to have this conversation, what should they do if their elected officials are hiding from them.

Jen Psaki (19:09)

Call their office, write letters to their office, use their voice to make clear that, yes, maybe they need to have town hall meetings. Not just maybe they should, they should be having town hall meetings. But everybody has a voice here. Nobody is powerless. You know, I also think peaceful protest is perfectly okay. You know, you want to show up to the office and have a conversation with the member. Obviously, peaceful is the key part there. But I think if you were mad about Elon Musk and what did you call them? Not Doge. Dodge. Dodge. I'm gonna use that dodge because it's impacting. I mean, one of the things that I think everybody doesn't know when you know, is like, 80% of federal workers are not in D.C. they're all around the country. So some of these things that have been painted as federal bureaucratic things, as in, it's just people in Washington who are sitting in fancy rooms, that's inaccurate. And if you're one of those workers, if you know one of them, if you're frustrated because your programs that you rely on are being slowed down or you don't have access to them, your member of Congress is there to represent you. Right? They're not entitled to anything. You vote for them. That's the thing to remember. I also think that this is a moment where. And actually, Tim Walsh sort of offered this, and I don't know how serious he is about it. We actually had him on last night and I asked him this question to kind of go to other places and hold town halls in districts where Republicans won't hold them. Democrats should be doing that. You wanna run against a candidate, Start holding town halls in the district that the person will not hold town halls in. Even if you are in a very red district, you know what that will do? Show you're not afraid and show you'll answer the questions and that you'll stand up for them. So that's the other thing. When there's an absence of leadership and an absence of willingness to engage with your constituents, that's an opportunity for people who are not fearful about filling it. And I think that's something, you know, people are state. We've talked about state rep, state senator, go do them. Go. You hold a town hall. That's the other thing I hope happens out there.

Stacey Abrams (21:27)

Well, the other part you mentioned, and I think it's incredibly important I talked about it at the top of the episode. He also very heavily focused on how he and his administration are attacking basic human rights. He did it by Inviting these guests who spotlighted how he has vilified immigrants and how he has dehumanized the transgender community. You and I, on your podcast the Blueprint, we talked about why I refuse to refer to these attacks as culture wars. Because when you call it a culture war, you make it an issue of preference versus an issue of values. And we also know that he's using a very common tactic of strong men, which is to point to marginalized communities as the reasons that the majority have their ills. And so in his speech, he blamed everyone else for why he can't fix prices. So what does this suggest to you about his long term economic plans or the absence thereof?

Jen Psaki (22:31)

Well, the speech was. I mean, he got elected arguably. One of the reasons, I think, is because people in the country felt disconnected from the Democratic platform on the economy and what, how the Democrats were going to, what they were gonna do to help working people. Not necessarily based on the bad policies or I don't believe that, based on a range of issues of how people were receiving information. But it was a very culture war speech, right? Not to use that term, but it was a, like, it was that kind of a speech. He didn't go out there and really tell truths about. Well, a lot of, he definitely didn't tell a lot of truths, but he didn't lay out some economic plan. I mean, on tariffs. One of the things that was kind of interesting that he didn't do was repeat his lie that they would be paid for by other countries, which of course they won't be. But everybody kind of any economist, the Wall Street Journal editorial board, which lord knows I don't agree with most of the time, has basically said these are bad and they will raise costs. And we can see how they will raise costs. So, you know, the trans rights is such an interesting example here because first of all, on the facts, which I know this is not about the facts, but like, hey, we love facts around here.

Stacey Abrams (23:48)

Exactly.

Jen Psaki (23:49)

The head of the NCAA testified in December and was asked by Senator Durbin how many trans athletes are in the NCAA. There's over 500,000 athletes in the NCAA. What he said was less than 10. Now, I don't know why it's less than 10. What the hell does that mean? But meaning that is what we're talking about here. This is not an actual issue. Now, the human side of it is what I find to be the most devastating, to be honest, because we're talking about kids lives, and by that I mean kids who are trans who are navigating Tremendous mental health issues, rejection from society, Even though it's 2025, not knowing and understanding yet, like, how they're gonna fit into the world always. And when you tell the story of like, the volleyball player who. I don't even wanna repeat the totality of that story. You're missing all of the kids and the stories of the kids who are struggling with suicidal thoughts, who have massive mental health issues. Because it's. When he referenced. I can't remember the way he phrased it. It's like, who you're born to be. Well, what if you're born to be trans, buddy? Like some people are. Okay, so like I. And he's who he is. But when people suggest that, it's like, let's not talk about it. Cause it's like, not politically, but like, at a certain point, you just have to figure out who you are morally and where your heart is. And this is about human beings. So that's the other piece of that issue. But yeah, overall, I just. It was. And when I said self indulgent earlier, what I mean is it was like greatest hits in some ways, but also just like bragging about things that aren't true. Bragging about things that are weird to brag about and pretty self involved. Every president, I guess, on some level is self involved, I mean, I suppose. But like, usually that speech is about how to bridge, right. How to paint an optimistic picture of the country and kind of encourage people to be on the journey of what your vision is to making it a better place. And that means. It doesn't mean reaching across the aisle about everything, but it means trying to build, right? Trying to expand. People watching at home who maybe never pay attention to politics, maybe they're on the other side of the aisle. And certainly people in the chamber, right, who is gonna oppose. Everybody needs bigger, better bridges, right? Who's gonna oppose a lot of things. And that's obviously not how he's wired. But that is also a big departure from historically how Democrats and Republicans have used that speech.

Stacey Abrams (26:41)

When I was in the legislature, when I became leader, I would tell folks, you know, my job as minority leader, my first job was to cooperate, meaning I needed to serve the 80% of the things we agreed on. So how do you help the people who need the help the most? My second job was to compete on that 20%. My job was to offer an alternative vision of the world. And that the most fundamental job that I had was number three, which was accountability. And what we saw last night, I think was a lack of of, as you pointed out, there was no hint of cooperation. There was nothing to compete with because it was mostly vilification and invective. And then there was no accountability from a branch of government that is supposed to provide it. Can you talk a little bit about how you watched and how you read the reaction from the GOP to the speech and to this platforming of hate and this willingness to make targets of the most marginalized in our society?

Jen Psaki (27:43)

Yeah, I mean, lemmings, you know, it's like it didn't surprise me. I mean, I didn't. I'm sure it didn't surprise you. I didn't expect there to be any standing up for marginalized communities or what was morally right or even any consistency in position. I mean, you know, obviously, the not standing up for what's morally right is the big important thing here. But if you look at. And this is a moral issue, too, in a different way, if you just look at the Republicans, kind of reversal of position on Russia and Ukraine. Right. That is. I mean, Marco Rubio, who's now the Secretary of State, was one of the biggest vocal advocates for holding Putin and Russia accountable for years. I mean, when I was working for President Obama, he was incredibly critical of Obama for not doing more. Incredible. Critical of Joe Biden. That is probably one of the core issues he became known on. And now a week ago, he sat on a couch, he looked like he was gonna sink into the pillows, and basically watched his boss berate the president of Ukraine while a Russian media outlet was in the room. That's a separate story. And Republicans in the room, you could say they know better, and maybe they do, but they don't seem to be exhibiting leadership in the moment and standing up for what is hypocritical with their own positions. And certainly if I am an optimist, which I try to be, they know is morally wrong. And that's not just about, like, a difference in viewpoint. I mean, you know, well, you've run successfully for politics. I mean, there are differences of viewpoint that are okay. You know, you can debate policy issues, but there are lines that he crosses that they seem willing to just journey with him on. And that is, you know, and your separation of power thing, which you've referenced, I think you're a lawyer. I'm not. But like I will say, I taught my daughter's Girl Scout class when she was in first grade. The separation of the three branches of power for a Girl Scout badge. It was hard to prepare for that, even though I obviously live this world what we're seeing is, I mean, there was, like, Elon Musk. I can't remember who it was. Elon Musk. Or one of these folks was, like, sitting next to the wife of a Supreme Court justice. Or maybe it was Kash Patel. Tell. It's like, what are we doing here? It feels icky at a minimum. And the legislative branch, they're in the majority. Yes, it's slim. In the House, they have been giving over their power to another branch of government. There are three branches of government. You are the legislative branch. You may be the same party, but that's not how it was designed to work. So the lemmings nature of it, which is kind of like, sad in terms of their leadership, but also means that the way that the country was organized with three branches of government isn't working right now because the other two branches are saying, okay, executive branch, you're superior to us.

Stacey Abrams (31:12)

Yeah. I will say I've been grappling with the lack of political ambition I've seen from Republican congressional members in this way. This guy is termed out, and you're gonna be left with all of the carnage and all of the responsibility. And I'm just surprised that all the people who think that they are gonna be called by whatever deity they believe in to be president in 2028 are being so complicit and not trying to find ways to distinguish themselves from the issues that we're seeing. So one example is that we've got a Secretary of Health and Human Services who is a vaccine skeptic at a moment where we are watching measles kill people. In 2025, Trump mentioned children's health, and it was particularly unnerving because he pointed to the rising rates of autism diagnoses, which shouldn't be conflated with the rising rates of autism. Autism itself. And then he said that, you know, Secretary of Health and Human Services RFK Jr would be addressing the issue. And yet this is the same person who has directly linked vaccines to autism and has been woefully under responsive to the deadly measles outbreak, what does it tell us, not only about what RFK Jr might do, but about the political leaders? In a place like Texas, where your constituents are dying, when you aren't willing to push back on what is clearly not true and is clearly creating harm not only to the very real people, but to your future opportunities.

Jen Psaki (32:58)

I mean, I think it tells us so many things, but one of them is that whether it's conscious or not, political ambition and political survival has taken precedent over the responsibilities of governing and representing the people they represent. And I was talking to one of my colleagues here about this last night, in between, during the speech, maybe in between that the thing about the vaccine. And my sister is a public health expert. So this is like I have pizza with her and she's like measles, you know, and I'm like, ah, what should I know? You know, she's like talking about bird flu and everything. And the thing that point my colleague made is that it doesn't have to just be people who are vaccine opponents. It can be vaccine not caring. Right? Like eh, I mean I don't think vaccines are bad, but it doesn't seem like I need to get my kid vaccinated. And what happens then is it becomes a much larger percentage of people who are not protecting their own kids, but also not protecting other kids. And we've seen that, as you said in Texas. And there's a reason there hasn't been an outbreak of measles in, I mean, you know, in the same way or a lot of these diseases in as long as it has been. And now I think the fear is, you know, my sister sent this note out to our family that was like, you're not fully vaccinated until you're 18 months old. Which again, everybody doesn't know that. And if you're the mother of a baby, wherever you live in the country, that's reason for fear. And I'm saying legitimately it is right and it also prompts that. So I think it says about these leaders, I want to survive politically. I have political ambition. Again, that's not a crime on its own. How far from it may ambition reign. And that to me, because I need to stay in the good eyes of Trump and I don't want to get in his eye shot is more important than standing up for what I know is going to hurt people.

Stacey Abrams (35:09)

I'm representing Assembly Required with Stacey Abrams is brought to you by bookshop.org I am always looking for new ways to fulfill my curiosity. And hosting Assembly Required sometimes means that I need to read up on new subjects or dive deep into areas I thought I understood. My most recent purchase includes a Rome of one's the Forgotten Women of the Roman Empire by Emma Southen. That's why I use bookshop.org whatever I want to know more about is always at my fingertips. And bookshop.org lets me spend my book dollars with local businesses. When you purchase from bookshop.org, you're supporting more than 2,000 local independent bookstores across the country so they can continue to thrive in their communities. Now there's exciting news for those of you who can't survive without your e reader. Bookshop.org has launched an ebook app. You can now support local independent bookstores even when you read digitally. Check it out today and embark on your next great reading adventure. Use Code stacy to get 10% off your next order@bookshop.org that's code Stacy. S T A C y@bookshop.org Wasn't that delicious?

Jen Psaki (36:26)

So good. Your bill, ladies.

Stacey Abrams (36:28)

I got it. No, I got it. Seriously, I insist.

Jen Psaki (36:33)

I insisted first. Don't be silly. You'll be silly.

Stacey Abrams (36:36)

People with The Wells Fargo ActiveCash credit card prefer to pay because they earn unlimited 2% cash back on purchases.

Jen Psaki (36:43)

Okay.

Stacey Abrams (36:43)

Rock, paper, scissors for it.

Jen Psaki (36:45)

Rock, paper, scissors.

Stacey Abrams (36:46)

Shoot. No, the Wells Fargo active cash credit card. Visit Wells Fargo.com ActiveCash terms apply. So he also spent a good deal of time discussing immigration, as we pointed out. And he once again trotted out or tried to sell, I guess he was pitching it to America, his very transparently anti immigrant idea of the gold card, which would allow a path to citizenship for those who are willing to pay $5 million to the American government. What does this say about where we are in terms of immigration policy? And how does this square with the anti immigrant, xenophobic fervor that he's also whipping up in his party?

Jen Psaki (37:39)

Well, I mean. Well, I shouldn't say can't figure it out because nothing surprises me anymore. But how is to the millions of people who are middle class, working class people across the country who are maybe buying what he's selling on immigration and the fear of people flooding over our border does him Selling it for $5 million make you feel better? Like he has a plan, right? It's like, do you think only the people who can pay $5 million aren't gonna pose a risk? It's like, so everything's for sale for him. We know that and it's an example of that. What was also in his speech was kind of a lying about where we are in the border. And border numbers, they've come down also. And people have different feelings about this. But Biden, during the Biden administration, they apprehend, apprehended more people than he has in the last couple of months. And he's not interested in an actual plan because if he was, then he wouldn't have killed the border deal whenever that was a year or a year and a half ago, which was and you've been a part in politics for a long time, as have I, in a very different way, was more conservative than what I thought would ever get through through with as many Democrats were in Congress. It does tell you something about the politics of immigration right now. But he killed that bill by kind of pulling as a puppeteer Mike Johnson and telling him kill the bill, which would have been a more conservative bill in getting more done for border security than probably he's ever even really proposed. He needs to preserve the issue because it promotes fear. He doesn't want to solve it. He's not interested in solving policy. He's interested in having political power. And he sees that as a way to have political power.

Stacey Abrams (39:38)

There's this everything old is new again approach that he's taking. So there's the anti immigrant status and stance that is very reminiscent of we can give a litany of presidents who did it. There's the Panama issue, which was what I think a lot of you, and I wouldn't necessarily remember this, but that's what Reagan ran on when he challenged gerald ford in 76. He literally raised his profile by claiming that taking at that time not giving up the Panama Canal was central to American sovereignty. And now we see Trump pretending like he just discovered the Panama Canal. I don't think he understands how it works, but he is clearly not as a trope. And of course there's the energy policy. He's focusing on supply side and he's rehashing. And if I'm Sarah Palin, I'm suing him for taking my motto. But it's this focus on ramping up the production of fossil fuels and reversing the limited progress we've been able to make in shifting to sustainable energy sources. But it's also again, using these tried and true tropes to mask a lack of vision for what needs to be. And so with people across the partisan spectrum who are seeing the very real impact of the climate crisis, we've got wildfires in South Carolina, in North Carolina, in Georgia. We have tornado warnings in places that have never seen them before. We've got floods. How should we, and I mean Democrats or anyone of goodwill be talking about the real life implications of these retread ideas that have very, very harmful consequences?

Jen Psaki (41:22)

Yeah, I mean, first of all, I mean, I just, every now and then we gotta just inject facts into this conversation.

Stacey Abrams (41:29)

Go for it.

Jen Psaki (41:30)

The United States is drilling, is producing more oil than any other country in the world. Okay? That's not an issue. And when I was in the White House two years ago, and I think this might still be the case, but I don't know. There was more land available to drill on that these oil companies had access to than they were willing to drill on because they didn't want to create more supply in the market, because, guess what? They wanted to keep your gas prices high or justify it. So that's a fact or has been a fact. On climate, it's such an interesting one, because I think that to your point, it is an issue that is when we say it's in crisis, it is about a range of issues. The climate is in crisis. I worry about my kids and what their future looks like. I worry about all sorts of things, including how parts of the world will be uninhabitable at a certain point in time and what kind of a crisis globally that creates. But in terms of how to talk about it politically, I think sometimes not all Democrats, but sometimes people talk about it in a way that feels like we're hugging trees and drinking matcha lattes. And I love a matcha latte, I would hug a tree. But that's not what the issue is about. Right. It is about the health of our kids, access to clean air and clean drinking water and being able to live in free of asthma and free of pollution in our air that's making kids sick in communities across the country. It is about our security and safety here as well. And when parts of the world become uninhabitable, that becomes a global security crisis. And it's also. And I don't even know that's a second thing. It's just a thing. It's also about our economy and jobs and job creation and parts of the country being able to maintain. I mean, you look at the coat, you look at that. We went to the Everglades. I was like six months pregnant and I was so hot. But, like, we went to the Everglades when I worked for President Obama, and that was now 2015, and it was already massive issue economically, the climate crisis there. And you look at the coast of many states and you're seeing shorelines be eaten up. People can't live in certain places. Coastal communities can't live and thrive. Look at what's happening in LA and the economic recovery that's gonna be required there. So sometimes I think it's like a very overused phrase, like, you gotta meet people where they are. But on this issue, I think you gotta meet people where they are. Because I think sometimes in some communities in the country where Democrats have worked in manufacturing or other industries. You hear climate, addressing the climate crisis and you think you're taking away my plant. That's been like the lifeblood of my family for decades. And there just needs to be a better way to figure out how to communicate about it that kind of again meets people where they are. So it doesn't feel like it's a coastal matcha latte drinking.

Stacey Abrams (44:51)

I think it's that. And I would also love your opinion about making it even more granular. Like it's about insurance rates. We've got insurance rates that are going to go up and they're.

Jen Psaki (45:02)

People can't get insured.

Stacey Abrams (45:03)

Exactly. They can't get insured. And this can become an economic contagion. And as I think about ways to engage, you know, I talk a lot about the 75 million who voted for Harris, the 77 million who voted for Trump, but the 90, 90 million who didn't vote. What are ways that we can use what's happening to engage those disinterested voters to get them not only to pay attention, but to think about how these sometimes esoteric and sometimes seemingly elitist conversations really are about them. If we use the language. Right. To tell them.

Jen Psaki (45:39)

Yeah. I mean, one of the things I think this is now years ago, but I bet you it's still the case. We discovered in polling about this when I was working for President Obama is that people respond when you talk about the impact on future generations. And cause everybody has a kid, a niece, a nephew, somebody they're mentoring who's much younger, whatever it may be. And people are generally good and they think about a neighbor, whatever it is. And this is an issue where I think it is, the human way of talking about it is these are industries that are gonna be the jobs of the future. This is where people are going to work in the future is a lot of these clean energy jobs, which is not the way I would talk about it. But these are growing industries economically also in terms of fairness, your grandkids, your kids, your grandkids should be able to know that they're living in a community where they do have access to clean air and clean drinking water and that you can bet on that. And that's not something that has just been accepted by society. And also, I mean, I think it's about making it. And some of that does this, but it's about making it real for people in terms of how it impacts their day to day lives. Like it's not an esoteric academic issue. The climate crisis, it is for all the reasons I just outlined. The economy, health, it is something that people. It impacts people now, but it will only impact people more in generations to come.

Stacey Abrams (47:19)

Absolutely. Okay, so I want to think about what we can do next. So we know leading up to the speech there were a range of tactics that were deployed by, let's just say non Republicans because not everyone would say that they're a Democrat.

Jen Psaki (47:33)

Yeah.

Stacey Abrams (47:34)

So you've got the state of the people 24 hour marathon that was led by black media and activists. You had the in chamber displays, you had the walkouts, you had the T shirts. You also had Senator Slotkin and her rebuttal. But these were all responses to one speech. And this was one day of engagement. What's day two? What's day three? And do the tactics have to be the same and should they be the same?

Jen Psaki (48:05)

I don't think they have to be the same for people who are. And again, everyone has a voice. That's a very Stacey Abrams message. But I believe that very much too. Right. Politics is about the one person in the room who makes a difference. That's what politics is about. But I do think there are different what I see. So let me just start with kind of the national. At the national level, I think there are a lot of tactics and messaging that is being tried out right now. It kind of reminds me of what must be happening in like an SNL pitch meeting where it's like, how about this skit? How about this language? Right. How about these signs? And it feels a little. And this is gonna sound critical, but it's not even meant to be because I think it's hard. Like watching the speech last night, I don't know what Democrats should have done, but I was trying to understand what the signs were. I don't even really know what the pink people were trying to have their voices heard. And I fully support that. But it's like they're trying things out, is not quite there yet. And people walked out of the speech, which they have every right to do. I know why they walked out of the speech because I looked up like, why did they walk out of the speech? And looked up what. But I don't know if you're watching at home, if you understand why. Right. So I say that because I think at maybe the national level, there needs to be kind of a picking of some fights to have. And it doesn't mean you have to support as a group anything. But I think there's strength in volume. Right. And so that's one thing I think one of the things that Alyssa Slotkin said in her speech that I. Well, I liked, I thought her speech was great, but that I really liked was just pick a thing. Right. It feels overwhelming right now. And I get that. And I think it still feels overwhelming. What is the thing you're passionate about? Maybe it is Social Security. Right. Maybe it is the Department of Education. Maybe you're a veteran. Pick that and find like minded people who care about that thing too. I mean, you know better than almost anyone. Successful organizing can sometimes be. The things that are most successful can sometimes be organic. Right. You don't always know. Right. You don't always know what's going to be successful. And so for people who feel powerless, I think make it smaller for yourself. My mother always says, like bite the elephant, one bite at a time. It's very on the nose, the elephant analogy, but it's a bigger analogy than that. Meaning don't feel like you have to change the course of history yourself and get Donald Trump out of the White House. Right. Okay. Like think about what is the thing that you find moves. You find a group that moves them too. Get active on a local level. Connect more broadly as you can figure out how much time. It doesn't have to be 80 hours a week, it can be two hours a week. You know, so that's what I would say. Because we're still kind of in the SNL pitching phase of this whole thing of like what the right messaging is. I do think I'll just say that one of the interesting shifts that I think I've seen that I think is a good one, is before the election, leading up to the election. I mean, I am a person who deeply cares about abortion rights and also our democracy. So this is not to minimize. Those are massively important issues. But there was a loss of connection on the economic issues and working people, which is an overly used phrase, and the tens of millions of people, as you said, who just didn't vote. Right. And I do think there's been a constructive shift to talk about economic issues or figure out how to talk about them by Alissa Slotkin, by a lot of Democratic leaders, by governors, by others. Is there a unified message right now? Not exactly. That I see. And that's okay. I think it just needs to kind of work itself out. But that to me is, I think, a good shift.

Stacey Abrams (52:01)

I think that's excellent. Last two questions. We're gonna talk about the press because you know a little bit of something about it.

Jen Psaki (52:08)

Amen.

Stacey Abrams (52:09)

You were a Press Secretary from 2020.

Jen Psaki (52:10)

There'S a lot going on.

Stacey Abrams (52:11)

Exactly. And we have watched a White House that has been tightening control over the press pool. Just last month, they booted the Associated Press for refusing to use the wrong name for the Gulf of Mexico. And now Trump and his folks are starting to hand pick the press pool. So for listeners who aren't as familiar with what the White House press pool does and why it's important, can you put this into context for us?

Jen Psaki (52:41)

Sure, I can try. So the White House press pool dates back to Eisenhower. And the reason it's in place is they're called a protective pool to essentially be there to go wherever the President goes. And that means when they're on vacation, which believe me, annoys presidents to no end. It also means when they travel, and it means for any moment they're having a meeting in the Oval Office. You do a pool spray where you let in a smaller group of press, because there isn't space in the Oval Office or in some of these spaces to have the larger goof of press. So they represent the press. Now, for all of those years, this press pool has been made up of a group of the three wire services, ap, Reuters and Bloomberg, who are straight news services. They write the apple fell off the tree and it has hit the ground. Right. They're not writing like that's how they write things. And from different. They all have different specialties. Reuters, a little more international. Bloomberg's a little more economic. That's important because that information helps take news events big and small and deliver them to the public. And I don't just mean by the wire reports. I mean, that is what people can use for local television networks and often in local newspapers that can't afford, unfortunately, all of the reporters they once had. It's so vital that they're there. These reporters are still tough. They ask really hard questions. They're also there to do that. Believe me, I've spent years answering the questions of all these reporters in the State Department and the White House. There's also a rotating print outlet that is a part of the pool. So it's a different print outlet each day that needs to be approved by the White House Correspondent association, typically. Why? Because it needs to be credentialed media, not just a person who has kind of a blog in their underwear in their basement. You know what I mean? It's like I'm all for all sorts of digital media, but it needs to be a person who has the means and understanding to report and observe what they're Seeing, and by that I even mean, well, Trump disappeared for seven minutes and he went through a door to the Chief of staff's office. Right. Things that are details that you have to know and you include in a pool report. They do a pool report that goes out to all of the reporters. There's also a TV network and a radio pooler and photographers. What the White House has done is say, we're not doing that. Even though it's been around for everything from 911 to the attempted Reagan assassination to many moments in history, we're going to pick who gets to be in it and what's the impact of that? There may be no better example than in the Oval Office meeting last Friday, the abhorrent one where Donald Trump berated the President of Ukraine. One of the questions that was shouted was from a quote, unquote reporter who is also the boyfriend of Marjorie Taylor Greene, by the way, I don't even remember the name of his outlet where he asked Zelensky, why aren't you wearing a suit? Now, there's lots of questions to ask. Is that the one to ask when you have the president has just berated him? When you have Marco Rubio awkwardly sitting on the couch, when J.D. vance is also berating, when Russia has invaded a country and tens of thousands of people have died? That's your question. But that's what happens when they are picking who is going to be the prism through which the American people get to consume information. And the last thing I'll just say on this is that this is a tactic used in authoritarian societies, including Russia. It's a very Russian thing to do. And I have spent a lot of time working in the international space. I worked at the State Department for a couple years. When you have meetings with Russian leaders, they have a quote, unquote press pool which is made up of a bevy of Russian ladies mainly, who are working for the Kremlin. They are told what to say and ask and report on by the Kremlin. That's what Trump's goal is, but that's what they're trying to do. So that's what the protective pool is.

Stacey Abrams (56:55)

I appreciate that because I want people to hear what you've just said and I wanna pull all of this together. In authoritarian regimes, when democracy dies and an oligarch, meaning a rich person, a monarch, meaning someone who is king, or in our case, a strong man who wants to be king, what they do, there are three big pieces. You, you take over the media, so you take over what people know. You Take over. So it's four. You take over the media, you take over the judiciary so they can't tell you no. You create a complicit, compliant legislative body that tells you exactly what you told them to tell you. And then you train all of that fire on marginalized communities because you make them responsible for the grievances of the majority because they're not big enough to fight back. This has happened over and over and over again. It is a playbook that works, and we are watching it happen in real life. And so my last question to you, you already answered, I think, extraordinarily well what people can do, and I love your call to action, but I'm gonna have you talk to a party, to the Democratic Party. You served during a time when the GOP was in our shoes, at least tangentially. We've never been, or at least not in our lifetime. We have not been in this place, but we have been in a place where one party held the majority in all three branches in their. Or at least two and a half. What did Republicans do right that Democrats are doing wrong or not doing at all?

Jen Psaki (58:36)

That's such a good question. I would say one, they were relentless and fearless. And it doesn't mean I obviously don't agree with their policies and didn't always agree with their tactics, but I think sometimes what they do better is they're willing to color outside of the lines and rip up how things have always been done in the past. And there are one thing that I think is exciting, a very exciting thing in the Democratic Party right now is there's no clear current leader of the Democratic Party. And that may sound scary to people. I actually would see it very differently. I think it's incredibly exciting because I don't get to decide who's leading the Democratic Party. You don't get to decide. The country gets to decide. People get to decide who is going to propel themselves to be seen in that way. And what I think, I hope through that process is there's a recognition that being more real about how you talk, more fearless about what you talk about, saying what you actually think and not worrying so much about whether everything fits into a certain box of things. Because guess what? Like, I live in a normal people don't think that way. You know, it's like people. There's grays. There's grays and stuff. You know that. And I also think tactically, our playbook is old. And some people are old, too. I'm not an ageist, but our playbook is old. And that's why I think it's kind of this idea of going and doing town halls in other people's districts. It's not that it's never been done before, but I love that idea because it feels different. Right. But it feels different in a way that is serving the good and connecting with people. So that's a lot of different things. But I think right now I would say it's the time to be fearless and to try lots of things. Yes, you have to pick what your fights are going to be about. But in terms of tactics, the old playbook does not work. So new tactics and talk like a human is, I think, another lesson I would give people.

Stacey Abrams (61:14)

Well, thank you so much. Human talking, fearless and relentless Jen Psaki for joining us here today on Assembly Required.

Jen Psaki (61:22)

Thank you so much. I love talking to you.

Stacey Abrams (61:24)

Likewise. Okay, that was a lot. But as always, we like to leave you with a toolkit at the end of the episode for how to be curious, solve problems, and do good. Although Jen gave us a lot of great ideas, let's start with being curious. Last night, the State of the Union was filled with misinformation and untruths, including several dangerous lies about the work being done by our investments as taxpayers. To understand what's true and what's not, visit politifact.com to get the truth for yourself. Next, let's solve some problems. It's imperative that we not let Donald Trump and Republicans push false narratives without pushing back. If you're being negatively impacted by one of his policies, make your voice heard. Tell your story. The more that's out there, the more pressure will be put on the administration and members of Congress to reverse course. Indivisible has a great toolkit for the week of the Congressional recess, so visit indivisible.org musk or us and third, let's do some good. Rising prices mean the cost of food is going up for millions, especially for children. So consider visiting your local food bank or shelter and volunteering or making a donation. We can't stop what they're doing all by ourselves, but we can remember that mutual aid has helped us survive even in the darkest times. Here's a reminder. We can be found wherever you get your podcast, including on YouTube. If you want to tell us what you've learned or show us what you've solved, send us an email@assemblyrequiredrookket.com or leave us a voicemail and you and your questions and comments might be featured on the pod. Our number is 213-293-9509. Well, that wraps this episode of Assembly Required with Stacey Abrams. I'll meet you here next week. Assembly Required with Stacey Abrams is a crooked media production. Our lead show producer is Ilona Minkowski and our associate producer is Paulina Velasco. Kiril Palaviv is our video producer. This episode was recorded and mixed by Charlotte Landis. Our theme song is by Vasilis V. Thank you to Matt De Groat, Kyle Seglin, Tyler Boozer and Samantha Slosberg for production support. Our executive producers are Katie Long, Madeline Herringer and me, Stacey Abrams. Our production staff is proudly unionized with the Writers Guild of America East.

Jen Psaki (64:24)

TaxAct can think of a million things more fun than filing taxes. TaxAct is going to name some now. Sitting in traffic, folding a fitted bedsheet, listening to your co worker talk about his fantasy team digging a hole. Digging an even larger hole next to that original hole. Unfortunately, TaxAct's filing software can't make taxes fun, but TaxAct can help you get them done. TaxAct, let's get them over with. Substance use disorder and addiction is so isolating. And so, as a black woman in recovery, hope must be loud. It grows louder when you ask for help and you're vulnerable. It is the thread that lets you know that no matter what happens, you will be okay. When we learn the power of hope, recovery is possible, find out how at startwithhope. Com. Brought to you by the National Council for Mental Wellbeing, Shatterproof and the AD Council.